This article is only about 6/10 right. Boris was never ever the favourite, neither amongst MPs nor the membership. He was only ever favourite beyond the party, which has zilch say.
Theresa May is the favourite and that's her biggest problem.
Her second biggest problem is that she doesn't really support Brexit, or at least she was flakey. The membership may love her but they also wanted to Leave the EU. Once Leadsom attacks May over this and all the other Leavers, including Gove and Boris, join in then Theresa May could have problems.
Whatever David has written here, the next four years will be the Brexit Government. That is what will define it for all time.
Andrea Leadsom, tipped here a while back, is beginning to look like a very very good bet.
I think you are overestimating her. She is still very junior and to misquote a man with whom I almost never agreed, this is not the time for a political novice. Managing the parliamentary party and timing the election are going to take a great deal of skill and there is insufficient evidence that she has it. I suspect her real goal is Lord Privy Seal (or CDL, or Lord President) and Minister for Brexit, which I think she would be very good at. Gove won't get through because he's a knob. Fox won't because he's a much bigger knob.
I do not see that there will be a problem with two lukewarm remainers in the final round, as long as they are clear they are going to follow through on out.
The big unknown is whether there will be another migration crisis this summer dominating the airwaves when members are voting. If there is - and I'd say it's evens there will be - that could really hurt May. It will shine an unforgiving spotlight on her record and remind remainers that they lost because of migration and leavers that she failed to control it.
Therefore there is still value in Crabb. Yes, he's a remainer. Yes, he's young and he's only been in Cabinet two years. Yes, he's not well known. But he is also the candidate most likely to get to the final two after May, and least likely to run into 'events'. As David notes, very often these elections are decided negatively. He's the one with the fewest potential negatives.
Also ask yourself this - when was the last time the second favourite won a Tory leadership contest? With the arguable exception of Major, it would be 1957. Boris' elimination might just leave May as the Hailsham candidate.
Hailsham was stitched up by Macmillian, though, and there isn't anyone in a comparable position who could knife May.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
Carswell is getting a load of hate in my timeline - all along the lines of *he was never one of us/he came here to wreck us/go back to the Tories you git*
Post-Brexit, hardcore Nigel fans have no need for Carswell - not something I can pretend to understand, but then again who does know WTF is going on right now?
If he gets dumped by UKIP, I expect him to stay as in Indy for a while.
If Ukip dump Carswell I go with him. There is a sector of the party that is completely bonkers.
How much of the "short money", does Carswell allow UKIP HQ to spend? Also if he is kicked out of UKIP does that money end?
I was under the impression that Carswell wanted to accept 50% of Short Money, Farage was annoyed so said he didn't want any of it.
What eventually happened is unclear to me. If Carswell is expelled - does he get any? I presume not as he's not representative of enough national voters.
Farage did say he didn't want any Short Money but was overruled by UKIP's NEC.
Carswell cannot get any Short money on his own account. It is for registered political parties which have two MPs or one MP and more than 150,000 votes. Even if Carswell formed his own political party and got it registered he would not qualify under either heading.
Incidentally although I have been stressing Crabb's chances, I would actually love to see May get it, if only to see the consternation it would cause the following:
1) Labour, who have had to manufacture roles for women to try to pretend that they're not a bunch of misogynists;
2) The 'right on' left, who will have to deal with the fact that both Britain's first female Prime Ministers were right-wing Tories;
3) Conservative Home, who wanted a Brexiteer;
4) George Osborne, who sent May to the Home Office to make sure she would never be his rival for the leadership;
5) The BBC, who having spent years attacking her in interviews are now going to have to grovel to her for information on the government.
Somebody who has seriously pissed off so many deeply unpleasant people can't be all bad, and watching their anger would be absolutely hilarious!
I think you've got the BBC wrong - they're cheerleading her right now. She's a Remainer.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
Carswell is getting a load of hate in my timeline - all along the lines of *he was never one of us/he came here to wreck us/go back to the Tories you git*
Post-Brexit, hardcore Nigel fans have no need for Carswell - not something I can pretend to understand, but then again who does know WTF is going on right now?
If he gets dumped by UKIP, I expect him to stay as in Indy for a while.
If Ukip dump Carswell I go with him. There is a sector of the party that is completely bonkers.
How much of the "short money", does Carswell allow UKIP HQ to spend? Also if he is kicked out of UKIP does that money end?
I left UKIP for reason of it's lack of professionalism and internal order, although I still support most of it's stated aims: one of which has been fulfilled.
Carswell however, has been a thorn in the side of the party since he joined, and deserves to be expelled.. Farage should never have brought him in, then boast about it, a great mistake to add to those he has made.
This article is only about 6/10 right. Boris was never ever the favourite, neither amongst MPs nor the membership. He was only ever favourite beyond the party, which has zilch say.
Theresa May is the favourite and that's her biggest problem.
Her second biggest problem is that she doesn't really support Brexit, or at least she was flakey. The membership may love her but they also wanted to Leave the EU. Once Leadsom attacks May over this and all the other Leavers, including Gove and Boris, join in then Theresa May could have problems.
Whatever David has written here, the next four years will be the Brexit Government. That is what will define it for all time.
Andrea Leadsom, tipped here a while back, is beginning to look like a very very good bet.
I think you are overestimating her. She is still very junior and to misquote a man with whom I almost never agreed, this is not the time for a political novice. Managing the parliamentary party and timing the election are going to take a great deal of skill and there is insufficient evidence that she has it. I suspect her real goal is Lord Privy Seal (or CDL, or Lord President) and Minister for Brexit, which I think she would be very good at. Gove won't get through because he's a knob. Fox won't because he's a much bigger knob.
I do not see that there will be a problem with two lukewarm remainers in the final round, as long as they are clear they are going to follow through on out.
The big unknown is whether there will be another migration crisis this summer dominating the airwaves when members are voting. If there is - and I'd say it's evens there will be - that could really hurt May. It will shine an unforgiving spotlight on her record and remind remainers that they lost because of migration and leavers that she failed to control it.
Therefore there is still value in Crabb. Yes, he's a remainer. Yes, he's young and he's only been in Cabinet two years. Yes, he's not well known. But he is also the candidate most likely to get to the final two after May, and least likely to run into 'events'. As David notes, very often these elections are decided negatively. He's the one with the fewest potential negatives.
Also ask yourself this - when was the last time the second favourite won a Tory leadership contest? With the arguable exception of Major, it would be 1957. Boris' elimination might just leave May as the Hailsham candidate.
Crabb doesn't have a prayer. The party is eurosceptic.
The second favourite, or below, always wins: IDS, Howard, Cameron, Thatcher. The favourite rarely does. May is clear favourite. As I mentioned, Boris never was: he had neither the support of MPs nor the members.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
Carswell is getting a load of hate in my timeline - all along the lines of *he was never one of us/he came here to wreck us/go back to the Tories you git*
Post-Brexit, hardcore Nigel fans have no need for Carswell - not something I can pretend to understand, but then again who does know WTF is going on right now?
If he gets dumped by UKIP, I expect him to stay as in Indy for a while.
If Ukip dump Carswell I go with him. There is a sector of the party that is completely bonkers.
How much of the "short money", does Carswell allow UKIP HQ to spend? Also if he is kicked out of UKIP does that money end?
I left UKIP for reason of it's lack of professionalism and internal order, although I still support most of it's stated aims: one of which has been fulfilled.
Carswell however, has been a thorn in the side of the party since he joined, and deserves to be expelled.. Farage should never have brought him in, then boast about it, a great mistake to add to those he has made.
What's got up their noses so much? I've never understood what caused all the rancour.
Having chatted to colleagues I think May would prefer to have Gove in the final two than anyone else. His behaviour means that right now the membership would rather nail him to the Tory tree rather than elevate him to the top of it.
The MPs ballots will be interesting, first will give a big hint of where things are heading. Suspect it will be Fox last, Leadsom ahead of him and Gove and Crabb broadly the same needing binoculars to see May who will be way out in front. Fox will be eliminated and Leadsom may have to drop out if the addition of Fox votes don't give her a realistic chance of overhauling person 3. Otherwise second ballot is where she ends. Outside chance that if May gets over 200 on first ballot contest ends there and then. Historical irony would be 204.
Suspect MPs section will be over on Thursday. Then I suspect the members ballot will be May/Gove or May/Crabb.
May will win in either scenario but the margins will be very different. It will probably be in the region of 75/25 against Gove but nearer 60/40 against Crabb.
It is very very difficult to imagine a plausible scenario where May doesn't dominate this contest now from start to finish.
I could see May vs Gove being the final two, I think May vs Crabb is moonbeams. At least one of the final two will be a Leave MP.
At the risk of being very reductive, what is Crabb's appeal? He was a complete no name before IDS resigned three months ago, has some unfortunate baggage re gay rights and voted Remain. He's pretty and okay on the telly.
His background before politics isn't much of anything either - nice chap, quite religious, charitable.
There is a tendency in Britain to overhype some previously unknown person who gives a good speech or interview. The same thing is happening to Leadsom. Sure, she was good in one debate. She was not so good in other interviews and a City AM article she wrote was, frankly, full of waffle. Her experience is good but limited and her political experience is even more limited.
This is about choosing a PM and the exit negotiations will only be one of the very many things the PM will need to deal with. I simply don't think Leadsom has the experience or has demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job. It is very much bigger than simply being part of a team and saying some good lines in a TV debate. She has potential. Let Leadsom contribute as part of the team. But the top job?
At a time like this we need a serious, proven, experienced politician who has the experience and proven ability to do the patient detailed hard negotiating work with a range of allies on a range of matters, as well as all the other events which assail Prime Ministers.
This is not about rewarding the most effective Leave campaigner.
It's about electing a PM and that PM has to govern in the interests of the whole country and start to do something about starting to heal the divisions in the country which the referendum result has so painfully exposed.
I agree with your hype point. But I don't see that Ms May has "demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job" any more than Gove/Leadsom.
The negotiation will be a team effort. The Conservatives are not picking a warrior-king.
The work May did on getting Abu Qatada out of the country is an example: patient, persistent, involving diplomatic negotiations with allies, manoeuvring around legal and security issues etc. That is what is needed now. Not someone who may be more worried about being attacked by her supporters (IDS, FFS!) for not being purist enough. Political purity is for the Labour Party.
There is a tendency in Britain to overhype some previously unknown person who gives a good speech or interview. The same thing is happening to Leadsom. Sure, she was good in one debate. She was not so good in other interviews and a City AM article she wrote was, frankly, full of waffle. Her experience is good but limited and her political experience is even more limited.
This is about choosing a PM and the exit negotiations will only be one of the very many things the PM will need to deal with. I simply don't think Leadsom has the experience or has demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job. It is very much bigger than simply being part of a team and saying some good lines in a TV debate. She has potential. Let Leadsom contribute as part of the team. But the top job?
At a time like this we need a serious, proven, experienced politician who has the experience and proven ability to do the patient detailed hard negotiating work with a range of allies on a range of matters, as well as all the other events which assail Prime Ministers.
This is not about rewarding the most effective Leave campaigner.
It's about electing a PM and that PM has to govern in the interests of the whole country and start to do something about starting to heal the divisions in the country which the referendum result has so painfully exposed.
Precisely
YES WE MAY
You are all forgetting that Cameron, himself, was completely unknown to the mass of party members and the general public before he was elected leader. True, he made a mess of it in the end.
There is a tendency in Britain to overhype some previously unknown person who gives a good speech or interview. The same thing is happening to Leadsom. Sure, she was good in one debate. She was not so good in other interviews and a City AM article she wrote was, frankly, full of waffle. Her experience is good but limited and her political experience is even more limited.
This is about choosing a PM and the exit negotiations will only be one of the very many things the PM will need to deal with. I simply don't think Leadsom has the experience or has demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job. It is very much bigger than simply being part of a team and saying some good lines in a TV debate. She has potential. Let Leadsom contribute as part of the team. But the top job?
At a time like this we need a serious, proven, experienced politician who has the experience and proven ability to do the patient detailed hard negotiating work with a range of allies on a range of matters, as well as all the other events which assail Prime Ministers.
This is not about rewarding the most effective Leave campaigner.
It's about electing a PM and that PM has to govern in the interests of the whole country and start to do something about starting to heal the divisions in the country which the referendum result has so painfully exposed.
I agree with your hype point. But I don't see that Ms May has "demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job" any more than Gove/Leadsom.
The negotiation will be a team effort. The Conservatives are not picking a warrior-king.
Anyone who's been Home Secretary for 6 years has done enough by definition
Osborne would be a good nomination to head up the Brexit department.
No, no, no! He can't negotiate to save his life. He needs another job, one more in line with his special talents.
Is the post of ambassador to Outer Mongolia vacant (the Khrushchev/Molotov solution)?
A very good friend of mine once stopped a dinner party stone dead when she announced her dad had been a spy. And clearly not a very good one since he'd subsequently become the first Ambassador in Ulan Bator/she'd grown up there.
It is absolutely crucial in the national interest that Jeremy Corbyn is Leader of The Opposition for the publication of Chilcot.I hope non-Corbyn supporters will agree,he is the right man,in the right place,at the right time to take truth to power.The country needs Jeremy Corbyn.
Crabb doesn't have a prayer. The party is eurosceptic.
The second favourite, or below, always wins: IDS, Howard, Cameron, Thatcher. The favourite rarely does. May is clear favourite. As I mentioned, Boris never was: he had neither the support of MPs nor the members.
Second favourites in leadership contests;
1963: Hailsham to Butler. Winner: Home
1965: Difficult to be sure but probably Heath, so there's one.
1975: Heath to Whitelaw. Winner; Thatcher.
1990: probably Major to Heseltine although there might be a case for Hurd. Winner: Major
1997: Howard, to Clarke. Winner: Hague.
2001: Clarke, to Portillo. Winner: IDS.
2005: Fox, to Davis. Winner: Cameron.
Not too many second favourites there, although your second part is accurate. May was the second favourite (although I immediately said Boris had no chance against her). She is now favourite and Gove second favourite. May could win. But if she doesn't it's hard to see a Leaver winning. That leaves Crabb, a blank canvas onto which the membership might project their hopes and dreams, as still with the potential to win. That may not be a good thing, as has been noted, but I'm looking at possibilities and odds here.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
I think the limitations of the current crowd are unavoidable - virtually any profession now offers means of earning far more money than politics without any of the hassle...
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
There is a tendency in Britain to overhype some previously unknown person who gives a good speech or interview. The same thing is happening to Leadsom. Sure, she was good in one debate. She was not so good in other interviews and a City AM article she wrote was, frankly, full of waffle. Her experience is good but limited and her political experience is even more limited.
This is about choosing a PM and the exit negotiations will only be one of the very many things the PM will need to deal with. I simply don't think Leadsom has the experience or has demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job. It is very much bigger than simply being part of a team and saying some good lines in a TV debate. She has potential. Let Leadsom contribute as part of the team. But the top job?
At a time like this we need a serious, proven, experienced politician who has the experience and proven ability to do the patient detailed hard negotiating work with a range of allies on a range of matters, as well as all the other events which assail Prime Ministers.
This is not about rewarding the most effective Leave campaigner.
It's about electing a PM and that PM has to govern in the interests of the whole country and start to do something about starting to heal the divisions in the country which the referendum result has so painfully exposed.
I agree with your hype point. But I don't see that Ms May has "demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job" any more than Gove/Leadsom.
The negotiation will be a team effort. The Conservatives are not picking a warrior-king.
The work May did on getting Abu Qatada out of the country is an example: patient, persistent, involving diplomatic negotiations with allies, manoeuvring around legal and security issues etc. That is what is needed now. Not someone who may be more worried about being attacked by her supporters (IDS, FFS!) for not being purist enough. Political purity is for the Labour Party.
As I recall he left of his own volition. The Home Office failed to deport him. In my eyes that makes Ms May/HMG look pathetically ineffective.
But again, the Brexit negotiations will be a team effort. The PM is not expected to be a superhero, doing everything themselves.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
Carswell is getting a load of hate in my timeline - all along the lines of *he was never one of us/he came here to wreck us/go back to the Tories you git*
Post-Brexit, hardcore Nigel fans have no need for Carswell - not something I can pretend to understand, but then again who does know WTF is going on right now?
If he gets dumped by UKIP, I expect him to stay as in Indy for a while.
If Ukip dump Carswell I go with him. There is a sector of the party that is completely bonkers.
How much of the "short money", does Carswell allow UKIP HQ to spend? Also if he is kicked out of UKIP does that money end?
I left UKIP for reason of it's lack of professionalism and internal order, although I still support most of it's stated aims: one of which has been fulfilled.
Carswell however, has been a thorn in the side of the party since he joined, and deserves to be expelled.. Farage should never have brought him in, then boast about it, a great mistake to add to those he has made.
What's got up their noses so much? I've never understood what caused all the rancour.
Mainly that Carswell has a whole different outlook from the main UKIP line, and he takes pride in going against NEC rules and takes personal digs at members. Apart from that everything is hunkydory.
There is a tendency in Britain to overhype some previously unknown person who gives a good speech or interview. The same thing is happening to Leadsom. Sure, she was good in one debate. She was not so good in other interviews and a City AM article she wrote was, frankly, full of waffle. Her experience is good but limited and her political experience is even more limited.
This is about choosing a PM and the exit negotiations will only be one of the very many things the PM will need to deal with. I simply don't think Leadsom has the experience or has demonstrated the steel or the judgment yet to show that she is up to this job. It is very much bigger than simply being part of a team and saying some good lines in a TV debate. She has potential. Let Leadsom contribute as part of the team. But the top job?
At a time like this we need a serious, proven, experienced politician who has the experience and proven ability to do the patient detailed hard negotiating work with a range of allies on a range of matters, as well as all the other events which assail Prime Ministers.
This is not about rewarding the most effective Leave campaigner.
It's about electing a PM and that PM has to govern in the interests of the whole country and start to do something about starting to heal the divisions in the country which the referendum result has so painfully exposed.
Precisely
YES WE MAY
You are all forgetting that Cameron, himself, was completely unknown to the mass of party members and the general public before he was elected leader. True, he made a mess of it in the end.
1. He was standing for LOTO not PM. 2. Howard gave everyone several months run in to allow exposure
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
As you can imagine loads of people have been asking the "I've been here forever and a day" seniors about her time at BZW. So far the answer is solid but not memorable.
Agreed about the money. If she takes it then she loses.
This article is only about 6/10 right. Boris was never ever the favourite, neither amongst MPs nor the membership. He was only ever favourite beyond the party, which has zilch say.
Theresa May is the favourite and that's her biggest problem.
Her second biggest problem is that she doesn't really support Brexit, or at least she was flakey. The membership may love her but they also wanted to Leave the EU. Once Leadsom attacks May over this and all the other Leavers, including Gove and Boris, join in then Theresa May could have problems.
Whatever David has written here, the next four years will be the Brexit Government. That is what will define it for all time.
Andrea Leadsom, tipped here a while back, is beginning to look like a very very good bet.
I think you are overestimating her. She is still very junior and to misquote a man with whom I almost never agreed, this is not the time for a political novice. Managing the parliamentary party and timing the election are going to take a great deal of skill and there is insufficient evidence that she has it. I suspect her real goal is Lord Privy Seal (or CDL, or Lord President) and Minister for Brexit, which I think she would be very good at. Gove won't get through because he's a knob. Fox won't because he's a much bigger knob.
I do not see that there will be a problem with two lukewarm remainers in the final round, as long as they are clear they are going to follow through on out.
The big unknown is whether there will be another migration crisis this summer dominating the airwaves when members are voting. If there is - and I'd say it's evens there will be - that could really hurt May. It will shine an unforgiving spotlight on her record and remind remainers that they lost because of migration and leavers that she failed to control it.
Therefore there is still value in Crabb. Yes, he's a remainer. Yes, he's young and he's only been in Cabinet two years. Yes, he's not well known. But he is also the candidate most likely to get to the final two after May, and least likely to run into 'events'. As David notes, very often these elections are decided negatively. He's the one with the fewest potential negatives.
Also ask yourself this - when was the last time the second favourite won a Tory leadership contest? With the arguable exception of Major, it would be 1957. Boris' elimination might just leave May as the Hailsham candidate.
Crabb doesn't have a prayer. The party is eurosceptic.
The second favourite, or below, always wins: IDS, Howard, Cameron, Thatcher. The favourite rarely does. May is clear favourite. As I mentioned, Boris never was: he had neither the support of MPs nor the members.
This is a betting site. 'Favourite' has a specific meaning.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
Carswell is getting a load of hate in my timeline - all along the lines of *he was never one of us/he came here to wreck us/go back to the Tories you git*
Post-Brexit, hardcore Nigel fans have no need for Carswell - not something I can pretend to understand, but then again who does know WTF is going on right now?
If he gets dumped by UKIP, I expect him to stay as in Indy for a while.
If Ukip dump Carswell I go with him. There is a sector of the party that is completely bonkers.
How much of the "short money", does Carswell allow UKIP HQ to spend? Also if he is kicked out of UKIP does that money end?
I left UKIP for reason of it's lack of professionalism and internal order, although I still support most of it's stated aims: one of which has been fulfilled.
Carswell however, has been a thorn in the side of the party since he joined, and deserves to be expelled.. Farage should never have brought him in, then boast about it, a great mistake to add to those he has made.
What's got up their noses so much? I've never understood what caused all the rancour.
He doesn't support restrictions on free movement. He is a libertarian UKIPer, not a social conservative.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
1. Who is Mrs Bone supporting? 2. Has Gove drawn breath yet from his launch speech? 3. What is Crabb's latest gay cure wheeze? 4. Is Charlie Falconer resigned to staying with Elvis on the moon B52? 5. Has Cameron yet to stop laughing at the plight of Boris and Brutus? 6. What's the point of Liam Fox? 7. Is Andrea Leadsom more charismatic than a tin of gloss white paint? 8. When is OGH on holiday? .... Nothing to see here .... NOT. 9. Where's my bloody breakfast ?!?!?!?!?!?
Eden (previously Foreign Secretary) Macmillan (previously Chancellor) Home (previously Foreign Secretary) Callaghan (previously Chancellor, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary) Major (previously Foreign Secretary and Chancellor) Brown (previously Chancellor)
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
@SamCoatesTimes: 3 reasons Tory MPs considering coronation 1. Months of uncertainty / division bad for UK. 2. ..And Tory party 3. And can uncancel holidays!
@SamCoatesTimes: 3 reasons Tory MPs considering coronation 1. Months of uncertainty / division bad for UK. 2. ..And Tory party 3. And can uncancel holidays!
There won't be a coronation. We are talking about becoming Prime Minister. They're an ambitious bunch these MP's.
I am no longer a member of the Tory party, but if its got any sense it will be Mrs May. Anyone who has done six yrs as Home Sec, with barely a scratch on them , is blood good at their job. She has a winning smile too which should not be underestimated.
Eden (previously Foreign Secretary) Macmillan (previously Chancellor) Home (previously Foreign Secretary) Callaghan (previously Chancellor, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary) Major (previously Foreign Secretary and Chancellor) Brown (previously Chancellor)
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
A successful barrister was merely a 'housewife'?! Good grief, my thus far blameless life has left me with a very wrong impression of our legal system. I thought they had to speak and argue and understand complex points of law and evidence and all that kind of thing.
Eden (previously Foreign Secretary) Macmillan (previously Chancellor) Home (previously Foreign Secretary) Callaghan (previously Chancellor, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary) Major (previously Foreign Secretary and Chancellor) Brown (previously Chancellor)
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Macmillan also served briefly as Foreign Secretary.
Hailsham was stitched up by Macmillian, though, and there isn't anyone in a comparable position who could knife May.
Hailsham was blocked by MPs, not Macmillan. It was Butler Macmillan was trying to stitch up.
Macmillian promised Hailsham his full support 2 days before - and then persuaded Douglas Hume he should go for it (while simultaneously asking him to manage the sounding process)
If @OwenSmith_MP wins the Labour Leadership - that is a massive problem for the Conservatives.
Which is why we need to unite behind Theresa. Forget the vanity of electing some politically pure Brexit candidate, Labour might get their arse in gear and we may have a real fight on our hands for the next election.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
A successful barrister was merely a 'housewife'?! Good grief, my thus far blameless life has left me with a very wrong impression of our legal system. I thought they had to speak and argue and understand complex points of law and evidence and all that kind of thing.
Yeah but my point was that she paraded herself initially as someone competent with running a household purse and therefore capable of sorting out the country's fiscal mess.
Andrea Leadsom has all the credentials, as do all five candidates in their different ways.
Eden (previously Foreign Secretary) Macmillan (previously Chancellor) Home (previously Foreign Secretary) Callaghan (previously Chancellor, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary) Major (previously Foreign Secretary and Chancellor) Brown (previously Chancellor)
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
To be fair, Gove probably arguably just about passes the experience test. Don't forget that Home Secretary isn't quite as crisis certain as it used to be since it was split from the Ministry of Justice. Although the distinction is that his experience is somewhat more 'chequered'.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
I'm a member of no party. Though in the last week I've probably moved from ABL to ABC.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
Not without four years training as Leader of the Opposition and another four before that in the cabinet. Had Thatcher become PM in 1970, she'd have made a right mess of it.
Also; interesting to see Carswell in parliament and then the later comments by Farage....will he return to the Tories now?
would they want him back...he is an odd one
I don't see why not. They can keep Reckless and Hamilton.
Carswell may be wrong on a number of policies but he came out of the MPs expenses scandal untouched and opposed Farage's idea of ripping us off over Short money. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32707357
We don't need a GE. The country voted Brexit and it will now be the job of the administration to deliver it. There is no requirement or merit in a GE except if the Tories think they can rout Labour.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
If @OwenSmith_MP wins the Labour Leadership - that is a massive problem for the Conservatives.
It would be funny to reflect though that if he won and Crabb did get the Tory nod, that would be the first time ever that two Welsh MPs have led the major parties.
I think there was briefly a moment when Lloyd George was PM and the Labour chairman sat for seat in the Valleys, but Lloyd George wasn't party leader so my point would stand.
Not that either is likely although I have noted potential value.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
Not without four years training as Leader of the Opposition and another four before that in the cabinet. Had Thatcher become PM in 1970, she'd have made a right mess of it.
No sorry David I think that's an ill-judged remark.
You either have 'it' or you don't. She had it in abundance and could have run the country better than anyone in the current Labour party whilst she was still at grammar school.
You are all forgetting that Cameron, himself, was completely unknown to the mass of party members and the general public before he was elected leader. True, he made a mess of it in the end.
Cameron was elected LotO. This is for PM.
Leadsom - the UKIP, Banks, MikeK and Daily Express favoured candidate. Four black spots !! ..
Politically any Tory leader has to commit whole heartedly to leave. While I can envisage an unlikely scenario by which through some remarkable events the people in general show bremorse and there are louder whispers of stopping this, I find it very hard to envisage any Tory doing so unless they're out of power. Labour could conceivably risk it even though it could cost them big in some areas. But unlike them it isn't just voters who back leave it is Tory members and half the MPs. Any rollback on that, even if the situation is so extremely altered it would be a good idea, would destroy the party immediately. So it doesn't matter if the leader was remain or leave, they will be committed to leave.
The thing that might matter is how much the new leader adopts the platform vote leave adopted, no FOM and that sort of thing. We may be about to see how much Tory members are willing to accept to retain or reject it. The answer will determine both ukips relevance and how many Tory rebels there will be.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
As a non-Tory resigned to a pretty awful next few years politically, I can find nothing to enthuse about any of these five.
May always seemed to be a fairly unpleasant authoritarian plodder, with a nasty streak a foot wide. I am not at all convinced at her competence. She only stayed so long at the Home office because the Coalition fossilised reshuffles.
She will win it, natch. Just because the favourite lost out before doesn't mean it will happen again. Circumstances are different and that sort of information gets priced in.
Hailsham was stitched up by Macmillian, though, and there isn't anyone in a comparable position who could knife May.
Hailsham was blocked by MPs, not Macmillan. It was Butler Macmillan was trying to stitch up.
Macmillian promised Hailsham his full support 2 days before - and then persuaded Douglas Hume he should go for it (while simultaneously asking him to manage the sounding process)
Because in the interim it had become evident to Macmillan that Hailsham would be unable to form a cabinet. Home found it difficult enough. Not that either would have been in the running had Macmillan endorsed Butler. The whole charade was designed to keep Butler out of No. 10.
Osborne would be a good nomination to head up the Brexit department.
No, no, no! He can't negotiate to save his life. He needs another job, one more in line with his special talents.
Is the post of ambassador to Outer Mongolia vacant (the Khrushchev/Molotov solution)?
A very good friend of mine once stopped a dinner party stone dead when she announced her dad had been a spy. And clearly not a very good one since he'd subsequently become the first Ambassador in Ulan Bator/she'd grown up there.
I'd imagine he was a very good spy if he was sent to Ulan Bator. After all that would be his primary job.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
Not without four years training as Leader of the Opposition and another four before that in the cabinet. Had Thatcher become PM in 1970, she'd have made a right mess of it.
No sorry David I think that's an ill-judged remark.
You either have 'it' or you don't. She had it in abundance and could have run the country better than anyone in the current Labour party whilst she was still at grammar school.
Well if David's comment was "ill-judged" i'm not sure how to define your's? Not that the two comments are mutually incompatible!
It would be funny to reflect though that if he won and Crabb did get the Tory nod, that would be the first time ever that two Welsh MPs have led the major parties.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
I think the limitations of the current crowd are unavoidable - virtually any profession now offers means of earning far more money than politics without any of the hassle...
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
Disagree totally , they are overpaid donkeys. They can stick their wages in the bank , gold plated pension and benefits and live high on the hog on expenses, great job with free/subsidised bars where they spend most of their time. Sounds like an easy gig to me.
Thatcher was never a housewife and had decades of experience before being elected Leader of the Opposition.
BZW was not some sort of paragon of City virtue when Leadsom was there. Quite the opposite.
Qatada left the UK because May's work left him no option.
Of course a PM does not do all the work themselves but they set the direction and need to do enough of the work and know enough of the detail to make sure that the government does not trip up. And this will be needed more than ever.
It would be funny to reflect though that if he won and Crabb did get the Tory nod, that would be the first time ever that two Welsh MPs have led the major parties.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
I think the limitations of the current crowd are unavoidable - virtually any profession now offers means of earning far more money than politics without any of the hassle...
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
Disagree totally , they are overpaid donkeys. They can stick their wages in the bank , gold plated pension and benefits and live high on the hog on expenses, great job with free/subsidised bars where they spend most of their time. Sounds like an easy gig to me.
If @OwenSmith_MP wins the Labour Leadership - that is a massive problem for the Conservatives.
Which is why we need to unite behind Theresa. Forget the vanity of electing some politically pure Brexit candidate, Labour might get their arse in gear and we may have a real fight on our hands for the next election.
It just shows how low this country has reached when May is the answer.
Have to agree with those who think there's too much hype on leadsom. It is possible she really could go straight in as PM. But a leader in opposition even if unknown at time of election gets time to it over the potential leadership quality was real, to their party and the public. Having just taken an enormous gamble on Brexit, now is hardly the time for another big gamble. Is crabb also a gamble too far? Not sure, but there's no risk to leave, only voteLeave by going safe, and as voteLeave said its up to the government to plan Brexit. If they play safe, pick may, and she goes with an option suitable to many leavers and acceptable at least to many remainers that had to be the choice, surely?
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
I think the limitations of the current crowd are unavoidable - virtually any profession now offers means of earning far more money than politics without any of the hassle...
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
That's exactly the reason why my family has largely withdrawn from public life after a couple of centuries of doing our bit.
Thank you (as always) for the piece, David, which is, I realise, created to provoke argument and comment which is fine. It's written from within the sanctuary of the Conservative bubble so I take it on those terms.
Those of us not in the bubble have a somewhat different perspective.
Perhaps it's time to stop calling a spade a garden implement and reflect on the second defenestration of a successful Conservative Prime Minister in the past 25 years or so. Let's be honest - Conservative members, MPs and activists were complicit in forcing out their leader and this time, unlike 1990, there's plenty more blame to spread around.
Cameron himself has to take a pretty big share - his stupidity, arrogance and hubris brought him to destruction, not that I think he cared anymore. He brought this on himself and those Conservatives stupid enough to believe he would stay on if No.10 if LEAVE won deserve all the nonsense they have and will get.
Did people vote LEAVE just to get rid of Cameron ? Undoubtedly, some did. Did Conservatives vote LEAVE believing they could have their cake and eat it ? Undoubtedly, some did.
As in 1990, when buyers' remorse meant choosing John Major, arguably the least impressive of the three leadership candidates, we have the same desperate desire to rally around Theresa May and try to forget the last three months have happened at all. Almost as a way of apologising to Cameron, the question of whether May has the credentials for the job go out the window.
The Conservative Party doesn't have to listen to the likes of me, I've never voted Conservative and probably never will. However, the reverberations of 1990 plagued the party for years afterward and I'm certain the events of 2015 will have long-term ramifications. We now see the old trick of the Conservatives trying to be everything to everyone - we are for leaving the EU except we aren't. We'll get on with invoking Article 50 except we won't, we'll get the public finances back into surplus except we can't.
The odd thing for me is the Referendum was mean to clear the air, lance the boil so to speak and provide clarity. It has done none of these things - the Conservative Party is still "banging on about Europe" and it remains a major fault line for those of us on the outside. For all the time, effort, money, illwill and the sacrifice of David Cameron, was it really worth it ?
One thing that the Leave MPs will be acutely aware of is that the battle for Leave has been won but the war is not yet over. The form that Leave takes is still up for grabs. EEA or not, free movement or not, associate membership or not? There are a number of possible outcomes which will make some wonder if it was worth all the effort.
Of course that might be a good thing. It recognises that 48% of the country voted to remain and that we are pretty evenly divided on this. It may do the least economic damage. It keeps business as usual as much as that is possible.
I just think that those who think the referendum is not going to play a very big part in this are understating the issue. This government not only has to deliver Leave, it has to give it shape and substance in a way that the campaign itself did not. Given the importance of this to the country it will surely be the determining factor in many of the MPs and most of the members' choices. Not having a prominent Leaver on the list would be unacceptable.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
Though in the last week I've probably moved from ABL to ABC.
Yes, I don't think the Tories realise the mess they have got themselves into once Labour appoint a new leader. Instead they are too busy playing fantasy cabinet and imagining what great negotiators they would make.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
As a non-Tory resigned to a pretty awful next few years politically, I can find nothing to enthuse about any of these five.
May always seemed to be a fairly unpleasant authoritarian plodder, with a nasty streak a foot wide. I am not at all convinced at her competence. She only stayed so long at the Home office because the Coalition fossilised reshuffles.
She will win it, natch. Just because the favourite lost out before doesn't mean it will happen again. Circumstances are different and that sort of information gets priced in.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
As you can imagine loads of people have been asking the "I've been here forever and a day" seniors about her time at BZW. So far the answer is solid but not memorable.
Agreed about the money. If she takes it then she loses.
That's consistent with what I'm hearing (from her time at Invesco)
It is absolutely crucial in the national interest that Jeremy Corbyn is Leader of The Opposition for the publication of Chilcot.I hope non-Corbyn supporters will agree,he is the right man,in the right place,at the right time to take truth to power.The country needs Jeremy Corbyn.
I have been convinced for some time Jez is going to do a spectacular at the despatch box. The recent pressure on him would make someone without such a mission throw in the towel long before now.
It's my thought that on publication of Chilcott he will stand at the despatch box and name Blair and call for his arrest. jeze's own life and being has been anti war and he is not Rooney and miss the absolutely massive opportunity of this open goal. He can also destroy the remaining Blairites by association. The party will spilt and you will have the extreme left and rump Labour.
Meanwhile, May will be elected as Tory leader and the second Female PM for the Tories who will then appoint Leadsom to the COTE position the first female chancellor. Gove will get the home office which will be ideal to deal with the various Brext issues.
We don't need a GE. The country voted Brexit and it will now be the job of the administration to deliver it. There is no requirement or merit in a GE except if the Tories think they can rout Labour.
They will be forced into it, a PM chosen by a few blue rinse Tories will not go down well. People are most unhappy with politicians and having some nonentity foisted on them will not go down well. Given how perfidious the Tories are though, they may well brass neck it and wait till turfed out in 2020.
One thing that the Leave MPs will be acutely aware of is that the battle for Leave has been won but the war is not yet over. The form that Leave takes is still up for grabs. EEA or not, free movement or not, associate membership or not? There are a number of possible outcomes which will make some wonder if it was worth all the effort.
Of course that might be a good thing. It recognises that 48% of the country voted to remain and that we are pretty evenly divided on this. It may do the least economic damage. It keeps business as usual as much as that is possible.
I just think that those who think the referendum is not going to play a very big part in this are understating the issue. This government not only has to deliver Leave, it has to give it shape and substance in a way that the campaign itself did not. Given the importance of this to the country it will surely be the determining factor in many of the MPs and most of the members' choices. Not having a prominent Leaver on the list would be unacceptable.
It's a damage limitation exercise and one where we may well have been better off avoiding.
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
Exactly the point I made yesterday. Corporate governance is a back room job which does not require dealing with difficult people or issues and does not require the sort of difficult judgment calls a PM has to make. Her City experience is limited, not front line and in a relatively genteel part of it. She may have potential but a PM is being chosen here not an intern.
She sparkled in the debates.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
Thatcher was never a housewife. She was a professional politician.
Europe's two biggest economies Germany and UK would be run by preacher's daughters.
Theresa May was a preacher's daughter.....
The only one who could ever reach me, Was the daughter of a preacher man, The only woman who could ever teach me, Was the daughter of a preacher man, Yes she was, she was, ooh, yes she was.
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
Total rubbish. All five would be perfectly capable of doing the job. They are a thousand times more competent than all but a handful in your shambolic party. I suggest you turn your attention on getting your mess sorted out
As a non-Tory resigned to a pretty awful next few years politically, I can find nothing to enthuse about any of these five.
May always seemed to be a fairly unpleasant authoritarian plodder, with a nasty streak a foot wide. I am not at all convinced at her competence. She only stayed so long at the Home office because the Coalition fossilised reshuffles.
She will win it, natch. Just because the favourite lost out before doesn't mean it will happen again. Circumstances are different and that sort of information gets priced in.
She's been competent enough to avoid being turfed out by high profile failure. Given the department and length of service, even though camerons dislike for reshuffles and the coalition played a part, I think she must have some competence. Agreed on the authoritarianism, but least worst option overall?
Personally Europe aside Cameron was the best they had, and it's a shame politically him going was necessary.
If @OwenSmith_MP wins the Labour Leadership - that is a massive problem for the Conservatives.
As one would expect from an ex BBC talking head - he very good on the TV. If I didn't know which Party he was from, I'd never guess. He seems sensible, smart and friendly. Does he have anything below the surface?
If Theresa May polls extremely strongly in the early rounds – on the current count, she has more backers than the rest put together, albeit with more than half the MPs still to declare – some may take the opportunity to try to lever an easier rival onto the members’ ballot paper.
Guido says he's hearing May supporters are anti-Gove, so pro-Leadsom.
"Rumours are doing the rounds that several as yet undeclared Theresa May supporters are considering endorsing Andrea Leadsom in order to keep Michael Gove off the ballot."
Makes sense - Leadsom has a big following on social media. I don't expect that to influence too many Tory members, but it will have an impact on the MPs. IIRC Aaron Banks has offered to fund her campaign as a Brexiteer.
The stand-off between May vs Leadsom would be a cracking fight.
She should turn down Aaron Banks's money
It will gain her precisely zero (and possibly negative) credit in
FWIW I chatted yesterday to someone who knew her quite well when she was in the City. Verdict was that she was perfect competent but didn't sparkle. He feels that she only stands out because of the limitations of the current crowd - he didn't think that, in the abstract, she would have the capabilities to be PM.
He also noted that her roles in the City were one's that didn't really require her to make difficult judgement calls: they were process orientated.
I think the limitations of the current crowd are unavoidable - virtually any profession now offers means of earning far more money than politics without any of the hassle...
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
Disagree totally , they are overpaid donkeys. They can stick their wages in the bank , gold plated pension and benefits and live high on the hog on expenses, great job with free/subsidised bars where they spend most of their time. Sounds like an easy gig to me.
What's stopping you?
I would have to spend my time in London and I would find it hard to lie and cheat and sleep at night knowing I was ruining people's lives whilst living high on the hog. Simply put I have some principles.
p.s. further to the 1970 point, Thatcher wouldn't have bottled it with the miners like that wimp Ted Heath did.
Or likethat wimp Thatcher did in 1981? You don't really know your history do you?
The legend of thatcher is all there is.
Ps Tories and labourites, except for really apt comparisons please stop talking about what thatcher woukd do.about things. Difficult I know, but we can do it gang! This message to pundits everywhere.
If @OwenSmith_MP wins the Labour Leadership - that is a massive problem for the Conservatives.
Which is why we need to unite behind Theresa. Forget the vanity of electing some politically pure Brexit candidate, Labour might get their arse in gear and we may have a real fight on our hands for the next election.
Nonsense - you're happy with May because you're happy being out of the EU - but want to stick with FoM et al because it personally suits you. That's fine for you - it doesn't work for a very large % of the population who believed they were voting for Out, not a subsection of it.
Thatcher was never a housewife and had decades of experience before being elected Leader of the Opposition.
BZW was not some sort of paragon of City virtue when Leadsom was there. Quite the opposite.
Qatada left the UK because May's work left him no option.
Of course a PM does not do all the work themselves but they set the direction and need to do enough of the work and know enough of the detail to make sure that the government does not trip up. And this will be needed more than ever.
I'm not sure anyone would call us a paragon of city virtue today either. Also remember she worked for an offshore fund after Barclay's. This new clamour for Leadsom confuses me, I think she could be a good leader but we have no idea of her capabilities in government. With May we know what we are getting. Solid, dependable, detail oriented.
People talking about Leadsom's real world experience as if it is amazing to work in the City, well lets remember that May worked for the Bank of England and had a very distinguished career in the City as well, plus has had bags of local and national government experience as well as Cabinet experience and she's only 6 years older.
Comments
Carswell cannot get any Short money on his own account. It is for registered political parties which have two MPs or one MP and more than 150,000 votes. Even if Carswell formed his own political party and got it registered he would not qualify under either heading.
Carswell however, has been a thorn in the side of the party since he joined, and deserves to be expelled.. Farage should never have brought him in, then boast about it, a great mistake to add to those he has made.
Is the post of ambassador to Outer Mongolia vacant (the Khrushchev/Molotov solution)?
The second favourite, or below, always wins: IDS, Howard, Cameron, Thatcher. The favourite rarely does. May is clear favourite. As I mentioned, Boris never was: he had neither the support of MPs nor the members.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnT7pT6zCcA
Not a member [or an MP, for that matter], but I'd almost entirely agree. Probably swap Leadsom and Gove, though. I think the latter's now tainted.
That said, I do think 21 was value for Gove to finish last (and he's now 5, which suggests that is the case).
How many other MPs are having open meetings, to tell us what she knows, and maybe even to listen to different views?
1963: Hailsham to Butler. Winner: Home
1965: Difficult to be sure but probably Heath, so there's one.
1975: Heath to Whitelaw. Winner; Thatcher.
1990: probably Major to Heseltine although there might be a case for Hurd. Winner: Major
1997: Howard, to Clarke. Winner: Hague.
2001: Clarke, to Portillo. Winner: IDS.
2005: Fox, to Davis. Winner: Cameron.
Not too many second favourites there, although your second part is accurate. May was the second favourite (although I immediately said Boris had no chance against her). She is now favourite and Gove second favourite. May could win. But if she doesn't it's hard to see a Leaver winning. That leaves Crabb, a blank canvas onto which the membership might project their hopes and dreams, as still with the potential to win. That may not be a good thing, as has been noted, but I'm looking at possibilities and odds here.
Given the attacks on politicians over the past 10 years (albeit granted some of the expenses scandals were self inflicted) you really would have to be a masochist to put yourself (and your family) through the hassle....
But again, the Brexit negotiations will be a team effort. The PM is not expected to be a superhero, doing everything themselves.
2. Howard gave everyone several months run in to allow exposure
Ducked the whole referendum. Maycavity.
Doesn't want a mandate.
Micromanager and details orientated
Agreed about the money. If she takes it then she loses.
And actually a back room 'housewife' became this country's greatest prime minister since Winston Churchill, regardless of what you consider about her politics.
1. Who is Mrs Bone supporting?
2. Has Gove drawn breath yet from his launch speech?
3. What is Crabb's latest gay cure wheeze?
4. Is Charlie Falconer resigned to staying with Elvis on the moon B52?
5. Has Cameron yet to stop laughing at the plight of Boris and Brutus?
6. What's the point of Liam Fox?
7. Is Andrea Leadsom more charismatic than a tin of gloss white paint?
8. When is OGH on holiday? .... Nothing to see here .... NOT.
9. Where's my bloody breakfast ?!?!?!?!?!?
Eden (previously Foreign Secretary)
Macmillan (previously Chancellor)
Home (previously Foreign Secretary)
Callaghan (previously Chancellor, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary)
Major (previously Foreign Secretary and Chancellor)
Brown (previously Chancellor)
All the candidates other than Theresa May are woefully lacking in the necessary top level experience to take over the top job. The Conservatives are going to need a truly exceptional reason to pick anyone else. I can't see one.
1. Months of uncertainty / division bad for UK.
2. ..And Tory party
3. And can uncancel holidays!
Andrea Leadsom has all the credentials, as do all five candidates in their different ways.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32707357
We don't need a GE. The country voted Brexit and it will now be the job of the administration to deliver it. There is no requirement or merit in a GE except if the Tories think they can rout Labour.
I think there was briefly a moment when Lloyd George was PM and the Labour chairman sat for seat in the Valleys, but Lloyd George wasn't party leader so my point would stand.
Not that either is likely although I have noted potential value.
You either have 'it' or you don't. She had it in abundance and could have run the country better than anyone in the current Labour party whilst she was still at grammar school.
Leadsom - the UKIP, Banks, MikeK and Daily Express favoured candidate. Four black spots !! ..
The thing that might matter is how much the new leader adopts the platform vote leave adopted, no FOM and that sort of thing. We may be about to see how much Tory members are willing to accept to retain or reject it. The answer will determine both ukips relevance and how many Tory rebels there will be.
May always seemed to be a fairly unpleasant authoritarian plodder, with a nasty streak a foot wide. I am not at all convinced at her competence. She only stayed so long at the Home office because the Coalition fossilised reshuffles.
She will win it, natch. Just because the favourite lost out before doesn't mean it will happen again. Circumstances are different and that sort of information gets priced in.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/01/andrea-leadsom-emerges-as-pro-brexit-choice-for-tory-leadership/
https://twitter.com/ladpolitics/status/748903357226610688
BZW was not some sort of paragon of City virtue when Leadsom was there. Quite the opposite.
Qatada left the UK because May's work left him no option.
Of course a PM does not do all the work themselves but they set the direction and need to do enough of the work and know enough of the detail to make sure that the government does not trip up. And this will be needed more than ever.
One down, two to go!
Please god not fox or Gove.
Thank you (as always) for the piece, David, which is, I realise, created to provoke argument and comment which is fine. It's written from within the sanctuary of the Conservative bubble so I take it on those terms.
Those of us not in the bubble have a somewhat different perspective.
Perhaps it's time to stop calling a spade a garden implement and reflect on the second defenestration of a successful Conservative Prime Minister in the past 25 years or so. Let's be honest - Conservative members, MPs and activists were complicit in forcing out their leader and this time, unlike 1990, there's plenty more blame to spread around.
Cameron himself has to take a pretty big share - his stupidity, arrogance and hubris brought him to destruction, not that I think he cared anymore. He brought this on himself and those Conservatives stupid enough to believe he would stay on if No.10 if LEAVE won deserve all the nonsense they have and will get.
Did people vote LEAVE just to get rid of Cameron ? Undoubtedly, some did. Did Conservatives vote LEAVE believing they could have their cake and eat it ? Undoubtedly, some did.
As in 1990, when buyers' remorse meant choosing John Major, arguably the least impressive of the three leadership candidates, we have the same desperate desire to rally around Theresa May and try to forget the last three months have happened at all. Almost as a way of apologising to Cameron, the question of whether May has the credentials for the job go out the window.
The Conservative Party doesn't have to listen to the likes of me, I've never voted Conservative and probably never will. However, the reverberations of 1990 plagued the party for years afterward and I'm certain the events of 2015 will have long-term ramifications. We now see the old trick of the Conservatives trying to be everything to everyone - we are for leaving the EU except we aren't. We'll get on with invoking Article 50 except we won't, we'll get the public finances back into surplus except we can't.
The odd thing for me is the Referendum was mean to clear the air, lance the boil so to speak and provide clarity. It has done none of these things - the Conservative Party is still "banging on about Europe" and it remains a major fault line for those of us on the outside. For all the time, effort, money, illwill and the sacrifice of David Cameron, was it really worth it ?
Of course that might be a good thing. It recognises that 48% of the country voted to remain and that we are pretty evenly divided on this. It may do the least economic damage. It keeps business as usual as much as that is possible.
I just think that those who think the referendum is not going to play a very big part in this are understating the issue. This government not only has to deliver Leave, it has to give it shape and substance in a way that the campaign itself did not. Given the importance of this to the country it will surely be the determining factor in many of the MPs and most of the members' choices. Not having a prominent Leaver on the list would be unacceptable.
This referendum has certainly exposed some illiterates.
It's my thought that on publication of Chilcott he will stand at the despatch box and name Blair and call for his arrest. jeze's own life and being has been anti war and he is not Rooney and miss the absolutely massive opportunity of this open goal. He can also destroy the remaining Blairites by association. The party will spilt and you will have the extreme left and rump Labour.
Meanwhile, May will be elected as Tory leader and the second Female PM for the Tories who will then appoint Leadsom to the COTE position the first female chancellor. Gove will get the home office which will be ideal to deal with the various Brext issues.
However, what to do about a problem called Boris?
It's started already....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3670751/MPs-say-ll-use-ancient-law-impeach-Tony-Blair-misleading-Parliament-Iraq-war-wake-Chilcot-report.html
.........maybe? In today's political turmoil who knows what might happen today let alone next week.
The only one who could ever reach me,
Was the daughter of a preacher man,
The only woman who could ever teach me,
Was the daughter of a preacher man,
Yes she was, she was, ooh, yes she was.
Personally Europe aside Cameron was the best they had, and it's a shame politically him going was necessary.
Germany now has 4.1 million EU migrants, UK 3.1 and France 2.2. The issue isnt going away.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/europaeische-union/zuwanderung-so-viele-eu-auslaender-wie-nie-ziehen-nach-deutschland-14320208.html
Ps Tories and labourites, except for really apt comparisons please stop talking about what thatcher woukd do.about things. Difficult I know, but we can do it gang! This message to pundits everywhere.
People talking about Leadsom's real world experience as if it is amazing to work in the City, well lets remember that May worked for the Bank of England and had a very distinguished career in the City as well, plus has had bags of local and national government experience as well as Cabinet experience and she's only 6 years older.