politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov CON member ratings of the three still in the race raise questions over Gove
In its recent party membership polling YouGov has introduced a ratings question with a simple format “Generally speaking, do you have a positive or negative opinion of the following people?”
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
The next vote is an MP vote. I think Mr Clarke labelling Mr Gove a warmonger will have a bigger impact there. No-one wants another pointless foreign military adventure.
Also in Gove vs Leadsom, Gove is reportedly keeping Osborne on-side. Among the Leave MPs they're competing for I would have thought that would push them towards Ms Leadsom.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
Among members it will. Remember the public at large aren't the electorate, it's party members many of whom are political anoraks.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
Phone your sister back and tell her that is unacceptable. She must try harder!
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
The next vote is an MP vote. I think Mr Clarke labelling Mr Gove a warmonger will have a bigger impact there. No-one wants another pointless foreign military adventure.
Also in Gove vs Leadsom, Gove is reportedly keeping Osborne on-side. Among the Leave MPs they're competing for I would have thought that would push them towards Ms Leadsom.
I think most people already know that Gove is a neo-con.
On Chilcott, on the last thread Cyclefree observed that StopTheWar has already made its mind up. But hasn't everyone? The enquiry will be interesting for its wealth of previously unpublished detail. But Chilcott's conclusions will be judged by 99% of people according to the extent that he agrees with one of the three conclusions that people have drawn - that the war and its aftermath were more difficult than expected but right, that they were a mistake but an honest one, or that they were a mistake into which Blair and Bush cynically manipulated people.
That's the trouble with long enquiries on well-known issues. It's one thing to investigate why a plane crashed or whether flood defences need to be rethought - nobody really knows in advance. But on something like this people form opinions and stick to them. Has there ever been an enquiry that radically changed minds?
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
It's Gove trying to push himself into the members ballot.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
Phone your sister back and tell her that is unacceptable. She must try harder!
Can your sister in law speak to other pupils there at the same time and get the dirt?
Nothing new here, which is why we've been discussing coronation. Gove has long been unloved by the public (pace the pb Tories) and the way he went about defenestrating Boris with maximum public humiliation ensured a pyrrhic victory. Has the man not seen Yes Minister?
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
If Gove is eliminated tomorrow then who does Murdoch turn to?
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
Well the Sun isn't backing Gove so much as it is saying he should be in the final two. They know that he has no chance of beating May.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
JG Forsyth said there were going to be 10-ish hustings between the final two. So there should be plenty of opportunity to contrast the two.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
No doubt her career is being thoroughly investigated right now.
One curious thing is that she doesn't seem to have graduated until the age of 24, presumably meaning she had 3 "gap years" or equivalent. As I remember, even one gap year would have been fairly unusual at that time.
@DPJHodges: One of the most enjoyable spectacles of the next 48 hours will be Michael Gove claiming Andrea Leadsom has insufficient expertise to be PM.
@IsabelOakeshott: Gove/supporters going round telling MPs 'we can't have Andrea in final, she's crazy'; asking them to help get Gove into final two
On Murdoch/Dacre isn't it fair to say that the former likes wars and the latter doesn't. Presumably Murdoch would be more keen on Gove for that reason.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
Lol - because Dacre and Murdoch are notorious for doing what politicians tell them. Look, you won the referendum - congratulations - maybe time you moved on.
@DPJHodges: One of the most enjoyable spectacles of the next 48 hours will be Michael Gove claiming Andrea Leadsom has insufficient expertise to be PM.
@IsabelOakeshott: Gove/supporters going round telling MPs 'we can't have Andrea in final, she's crazy'; asking them to help get Gove into final two
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
Please post your sister's CV so we can check the credibility of her allegations in re QuietGirlGate.
Would May be prepared to have TV debate(s) against Leadsom?
May says she doesn't visit TV studios. Is that because her TV interview performances are not a strength?
Anyone not prepared to have debates is surely incapable for the job in this age. There is no way now debates won't happen next General Election.
For all the talk of experience, it was Leadsom's successful experience in the BBC and ITV debates that has made her a candidate. If May can't replicate that in the General Election then she should not be a candidate.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It will eventually... like if she makes it to any debates/interview.
it clearly wont have a big impact. the fact she has had a proper job will put her in a good position in the eyes of the public. She will however struggle with Dacre backing May and Murdoch backing Gove but clearly the Tory machine must be worried about her chances to set the press against her.
If Gove is eliminated tomorrow then who does Murdoch turn to?
its an interesting question. I would imagine he would have to back May if he expects her to win.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
The current front runner went awol in the referendum and seems to lack conviction or energy. Though it's no longer Leave vs Remain, which was last week's issue, the question now is leadership of the party and the country, and conviction and energy are crucial. 'For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?' It should be Gove. He has shown he has convictions and also ruthlessness in their pursuit, which is no bad thing.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
Since the referendum result we've had lots of talk about ignoring the result, having a 2nd referendum, or overturning it with a House of Commons vote.
That I think will have an effect on the membership vote.
On Chilcott, on the last thread Cyclefree observed that StopTheWar has already made its mind up. But hasn't everyone? The enquiry will be interesting for its wealth of previously unpublished detail. But Chilcott's conclusions will be judged by 99% of people according to the extent that he agrees with one of the three conclusions that people have drawn - that the war and its aftermath were more difficult than expected but right, that they were a mistake but an honest one, or that they were a mistake into which Blair and Bush cynically manipulated people.
That's the trouble with long enquiries on well-known issues. It's one thing to investigate why a plane crashed or whether flood defences need to be rethought - nobody really knows in advance. But on something like this people form opinions and stick to them. Has there ever been an enquiry that radically changed minds?
Tony Blair might welcome your third option -- superficially the least favourable -- apart from the word mistake. 4) Saddam was a monster so the visionary TB had to cynically manipulate parliament into doing the right thing. And it is probably not within Chilcot's remit to evaluate the first part.
Regarding Leadsom's progress at Barclays, it is not necessarily the best people who progress within organisations.
Banks in the 1990s and beyond were promoting managers who sold most products to customers regardless of customer needs. Managers who tried to promote long term customer relationships with good advice were overlooked or even sacked.
Leadsom seems to have been head of the the team dealing with Barclays financial service customers in the 1990's. As a standalone business it would make it into the FTSE 250. The only question is whether she achieved the position by ignoring customer needs or did not progress futher because she did take account of customer needs.
Are we going to get an executive summary from Chilcot, or are some poor intern journos going to have to speed read several million words before the lunchtime news bulletins?
The current front runner went awol in the referendum and seems to lack conviction or energy. Though it's no longer Leave vs Remain, which was last week's issue, the question now is leadership of the party and the country, and conviction and energy are crucial. 'For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?' It should be Gove. He has shown he has convictions and also ruthlessness in their pursuit, which is no bad thing.
Gove is unelectable. I think he'd lose to Angela Eagle and above, which is a very very low bar. It's not his policies but his appearance, cabinet history and delivery. A shame really.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
I doubt ir Stark. Leadsom is in big trouble over taxes and her supposed career as a banker.
Javid has a plan. Good man. Any plan is better than no plan. Off to hobble around with the dogs. Play nicely .
The Economist makes the point that Germany, France, Holland and possibly Italy are going to be having domestic elections in 2017. Be interesting to see how that affects the UK-EU negotiation.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It's not the public who matter at this point but Tory MPs and I expect they are well aware or will be made so.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
Regarding Leadsom's progress at Barclays, it is not necessarily the best people who progress within organisations.
Banks in the 1990s and beyond were promoting managers who sold most products to customers regardless of customer needs. Managers who tried to promote long term customer relationships with good advice were overlooked or even sacked.
Leadsom seems to have been head of the the team dealing with Barclays financial service customers in the 1990's. As a standalone business it would make it into the FTSE 250. The only question is whether she achieved the position by ignoring customer needs or did not progress futher because she did take account of customer needs.
We may need Pravda analysts to discover the facts, of the facts, behind the facts.
The current front runner went awol in the referendum and seems to lack conviction or energy.
May is clearly the correct choice for now and temperamentally would actually be a much better negotiator for Brexit than Gove or Leadsom, although I wonder how long she would want to be PM for - will she last up until the 2020 election and if she does how long after that would she want to stay for.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
Since the referendum result we've had lots of talk about ignoring the result, having a 2nd referendum, or overturning it with a House of Commons vote.
That I think will have an effect on the membership vote.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
What she did and what she said about it matter for two reasons:-
1. She is claiming - or allowing her supporters to claim - that her vast City experience ("managing funds and large teams") is one reason why despite her very limited political experience she is fit to be PM at this critical time. So the nature of what she did matters to see if it really does give her the sort of experience that would be worth considering. And bear in mind that successful business people don't necessarily make successful politicians (cf: Archie Norman).
2. If what she said about herself is untrue / exxaggerated / a lie (take your pick depending on how charitable you feel) then that raises serious questions about her probity and judgment, both key qualities I would have thought for a potential PM.
Being able to string a few coherent sentences together in a debate or TV interview is a pretty low bar frankly.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
The comparison is that Leadson represents who the members want, not who is best placed to win a general election. In addition she is backed, and to a certain degree represents the non-centre electorate.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
Between 1977 and 1983 May worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997 as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.
So May's record in finance is far less distibguished than Leadsom's.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It's not the public who matter at this point but Tory MPs and I expect they are well aware or will be made so.
Exactly, those that actually have a say in the leadership contest, be they MPs or Members will be following the stories avidly. – It may change some voting intention, but not many IMO, they’ve already decided.
How has Leadsom's CV changed since she applied to be a Conservative candidate?
Chief investment officer turned into senior investment officer. That's a massive difference. Managing director at De Putron has turned into marketing director, another huge difference.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
Since the referendum result we've had lots of talk about ignoring the result, having a 2nd referendum, or overturning it with a House of Commons vote.
That I think will have an effect on the membership vote.
Javid has a plan. Good man. Any plan is better than no plan. Off to hobble around with the dogs. Play nicely .
The Economist makes the point that Germany, France, Holland and possibly Italy are going to be having domestic elections in 2017. Be interesting to see how that affects the UK-EU negotiation.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
The comparison is that Leadson represents who the members want, not who is best placed to win a general election. In addition she is backed, and to a certain degree represents the non-centre electorate.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
Most Conservative and Labour constituencies voted for Leave in the referendum. Having a Leave advocate as leader of the Conservative Party at the next election would be an asset.
Between 1977 and 1983 May worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997 as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.
So May's record in finance is far less distibguished than Leadsom's.
Less? I would say far more since it has transpired that Leadsom had no funds under management and was essentially working in HR for Invesco Perpetual.
On Chilcott, on the last thread Cyclefree observed that StopTheWar has already made its mind up. But hasn't everyone? The enquiry will be interesting for its wealth of previously unpublished detail. But Chilcott's conclusions will be judged by 99% of people according to the extent that he agrees with one of the three conclusions that people have drawn - that the war and its aftermath were more difficult than expected but right, that they were a mistake but an honest one, or that they were a mistake into which Blair and Bush cynically manipulated people.
That's the trouble with long enquiries on well-known issues. It's one thing to investigate why a plane crashed or whether flood defences need to be rethought - nobody really knows in advance. But on something like this people form opinions and stick to them. Has there ever been an enquiry that radically changed minds?
Tony Blair might welcome your third option -- superficially the least favourable -- apart from the word mistake. 4) Saddam was a monster so the visionary TB had to cynically manipulate parliament into doing the right thing. And it is probably not within Chilcot's remit to evaluate the first part.
Surely the place where it originally went wrong was when Saddam wasn’t toppled when the Iraqi forces were thrown of Kuwait. Even prior to Saddam taking over Iraq couldn’t be considered any sort of functioning democracy but it was a secular, reasonably socially liberal state. After he took over clearly he behaved as a classical tyrant, with a nasty cruel streak which was refined and developed in his sons. However, he was treated reasonably kindly by the West, especially when he embarked on war against Iran.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
They are comparable to this extent: a lot of people are projecting their views and desires onto her in the same way that they did with Corbyn. And part of that is because they think that she would be more principled and purer as a Brexiter than anyone else (ignoring that she became one relatively recently). They would be looking back rather than looking forward to the best person out of the choices available to lead the country for the next few years.
Brexit - and all its ramifications - will only be a part of what the PM will have to deal with (though a very big part) and true believers are rarely the best people to implement pragmatically and sensibly and efficiently a decision such as Brexit, which - depending on how it is handled from now on - could have catastrophic / disastrous / so-so / good / good enough consequences in the short and medium-terms.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
The comparison is that Leadson represents who the members want, not who is best placed to win a general election. In addition she is backed, and to a certain degree represents the non-centre electorate.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
The comparison is fatuitous.
Leadsom may win a General Election, she recently fronted a winning campaign in the two biggest televised debates during the campaign. Corbyn has never in his life come close to doing anything like that.
Leadsome is centrist enough to have made ministerial level within six years of entering Parliament. That is not comparable to someone who couldn't become Minister for picking up dog turds after three decades.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
The comparison is that Leadson represents who the members want, not who is best placed to win a general election. In addition she is backed, and to a certain degree represents the non-centre electorate.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
Most Conservative and Labour constituencies voted for Leave in the referendum. Having a Leave advocate as leader of the Conservative Party at the next election would be an asset.
If the new PM can successfully negotiate the exit from the EU and minimise the economic damage caused by Brexit she will win the next election irrespective of stance at the referendum. IF
Between 1977 and 1983 May worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997 as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.
So May's record in finance is far less distibguished than Leadsom's.
To be fair, May's not standing on her record in finance, as much as she's standing on her quite considerable record in politics and government.
Her six years as Home Secretary is unprecedented since WWII, the vast majority of her predecessors in that role being forced out by a major scandal or policy failing.
Leadsom seems to have been head of the the team dealing with Barclays financial service customers in the 1990's. As a standalone business it would make it into the FTSE 250.
The fieldwork was pre-CVgate too. Just crown May now, as much as the members should have a say it's a foregone conclusion and we need certainty & to get out asap.
I'm not seeing anything about Leadsom's CV on the BBC News page, even on the BBC New Politics page it doesn't feature. It's wall to wall Chilcott.
So will it have that big an impact?
It's not the public who matter at this point but Tory MPs and I expect they are well aware or will be made so.
Exactly, those that actually have a say in the leadership contest, be they MPs or Members will be following the stories avidly. – It may change some voting intention, but not many IMO, they’ve already decided.
Whether it's Leadsom or Gove - I'll vote for either in preference to May. She's a known quantity and I'm not impressed by her track record of hiding, sending out human shields and flip-flopping.
I'm not too bothered about tittle-tattle that she's a pain to work for or a micro manager or whatever. It's all partisan sniping between factions. The same applies to CV nitpicking or tax returns or who banks with Coutts et al. May was invisible during the Remain campaign - there was no bigger debate to be involved in. She hedged her bets and been slippery - I don't admire that sort of behaviour.
Javid has a plan. Good man. Any plan is better than no plan. Off to hobble around with the dogs. Play nicely .
The Economist makes the point that Germany, France, Holland and possibly Italy are going to be having domestic elections in 2017. Be interesting to see how that affects the UK-EU negotiation.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
Since the referendum result we've had lots of talk about ignoring the result, having a 2nd referendum, or overturning it with a House of Commons vote.
That I think will have an effect on the membership vote.
Which way though?
I think it will favour Leadsom/Gove. May will have to swear a blood oath to honour the referendum, and be clear about who will be put in charge of her Brexit department. Possibly lay out a rough timetable too.
But they'll want to see a winner too. The hustings will be important to see the two candidates side-by-side. It think this is what is rattling the May supporters most. They appear convinced that Ms Leadsom is good at retail politics.
The next five years could be brutal. And yet they're thinking about parachuting a rookie into the job? Some are even talking about the parliament after next.
Utterly bizarre. A politician at the top of his/her game will do well to survive this roller coaster ride.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
How bizarre that so many years later, that seems to be the same observation as being made now by previous colleagues and employers.
Between 1977 and 1983 May worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997 as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.
So May's record in finance is far less distibguished than Leadsom's.
Not so. In fact Leadsom was only a registered rep- I.e. Undertaking market business for a few months.
Leadsom will pull off an amazing victory with the membership. For months now they've had it rammed down their throats that all Remainers are liars, careerists, idiots or all three and that only a true Leaver is fit to carry the Brexit flame. That sort of mindset can't be dispelled overnight. Leadsom will be seen as a Joan of Arc figure, leading the piratical crew of Brexiteers towards the glorious sunrise of their post-EU destiny. It's written in the stars...
That's what worries me. it's like labour electing Corbyn, and that happened.
Corbyn has been on the loony fringes of Labour's backbenches for three decades, never once serving as minister or shadow minister and having no real career either inside or outside politics and rebelling hundreds of times against the whip.
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
The comparison is that Leadson represents who the members want, not who is best placed to win a general election. In addition she is backed, and to a certain degree represents the non-centre electorate.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
The comparison is fatuitous.
Leadsom may win a General Election, she recently fronted a winning campaign in the two biggest televised debates during the campaign. Corbyn has never in his life come close to doing anything like that.
Leadsome is centrist enough to have made ministerial level within six years of entering Parliament. That is not comparable to someone who couldn't become Minister for picking up dog turds after three decades.
She was 'part' of the team which about 5m people watched. Gove, Johnson and Farage were all more high profile and influential than her.
To pretend she 'fronted' this campaign is shameless re-writing history. Much as it seems her CV was.
Javid has a plan. Good man. Any plan is better than no plan. Off to hobble around with the dogs. Play nicely .
The Economist makes the point that Germany, France, Holland and possibly Italy are going to be having domestic elections in 2017. Be interesting to see how that affects the UK-EU negotiation.
The next five years could be brutal. And yet they're thinking about parachuting a rookie into the job? Some are even talking about the parliament after next.
Utterly bizarre. A politician at the top of his/her game will do well to survive this roller coaster ride.
The most recent poll had Tory members voting for May 2:1 vs Leadsom. We're not that far gone, and since then there have been damaging revelations about Leadsom's past career.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
What she did and what she said about it matter for two reasons:-
1. She is claiming - or allowing her supporters to claim - that her vast City experience ("managing funds and large teams") is one reason why despite her very limited political experience she is fit to be PM at this critical time. So the nature of what she did matters to see if it really does give her the sort of experience that would be worth considering. And bear in mind that successful business people don't necessarily make successful politicians (cf: Archie Norman).
2. If what she said about herself is untrue / exxaggerated / a lie (take your pick depending on how charitable you feel) then that raises serious questions about her probity and judgment, both key qualities I would have thought for a potential PM.
Being able to string a few coherent sentences together in a debate or TV interview is a pretty low bar frankly.
I think trying to explain to the public the nuances of the difference between Senior Investment Officer and Chief Investment Officer might take long enough a) for them to lose interest, it is an investment officer, after all, right?*; and b) for her to have won the ballot.
I am with @Stark_Dawning on this. She is the anti-candidate. Anti-candidates are doing quite well atm.
*And yes I do know the difference and the egregious nature of her miswriting. But then we are a rarefied bunch on PB.
Leadsom seems to have been head of the the team dealing with Barclays financial service customers in the 1990's. As a standalone business it would make it into the FTSE 250.
The Guardian doesn't have the best contacts in Banking.
Leadsom says when Barings collapsed because of the Nick Leeson fraud, it was one of her customers and consequently she attended emergency meeting(s) with Eddie George, Governor of the BofE. Surely not a claim to make if not true.
I'm actually much less interested in the precise nature of what Andrea Leadsom did in her past career than in how well she performed those roles whatever they were. Her performances on Newsnight etc and in the first EU debate were fairly creditable even though I strongly disagreed with her but to be frank I'd just be happy if she keeps the dangerous Gove off the Tory members ballot paper for the reasons Ken Clarke perfectly enunciated yesterday.
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
What she did and what she said about it matter for two reasons:-
1. She is claiming - or allowing her supporters to claim - that her vast City experience ("managing funds and large teams") is one reason why despite her very limited political experience she is fit to be PM at this critical time. So the nature of what she did matters to see if it really does give her the sort of experience that would be worth considering. And bear in mind that successful business people don't necessarily make successful politicians (cf: Archie Norman).
2. If what she said about herself is untrue / exxaggerated / a lie (take your pick depending on how charitable you feel) then that raises serious questions about her probity and judgment, both key qualities I would have thought for a potential PM.
Being able to string a few coherent sentences together in a debate or TV interview is a pretty low bar frankly.
I think trying to explain to the public the nuances of the difference between Senior Investment Officer and Chief Investment Officer might take long enough a) for them to lose interest, it is an investment officer, after all, right?*; and b) for her to have won the ballot.
I am with @Stark_Dawning on this. She is the anti-candidate. Anti-candidates are doing quite well atm.
*And yes I do know the difference and the egregious nature of her miswriting. But then we are a rarefied bunch on PB.
Again, we're not talking about the public, we're talking about 150,000 political types.
I'm going to put my straw poll out again on Friday to see if there has been any movement towards Leadsom. I don't expect anything.
Comments
So will it have that big an impact?
I have however discovered my sister in law went to the same grammar school and was in the same year as Leadsom. Unfortunately I can't add to the sum of public knowledge as she can only remember her as being a quiet girl.
Also in Gove vs Leadsom, Gove is reportedly keeping Osborne on-side. Among the Leave MPs they're competing for I would have thought that would push them towards Ms Leadsom.
May says she doesn't visit TV studios. Is that because her TV interview performances are not a strength?
That's the trouble with long enquiries on well-known issues. It's one thing to investigate why a plane crashed or whether flood defences need to be rethought - nobody really knows in advance. But on something like this people form opinions and stick to them. Has there ever been an enquiry that radically changed minds?
The launch of House of Lords 1660-1715 vols last night: longer and cheaper than Chilcot! https://t.co/g3XJIwiju3 https://t.co/oUYAjZ9Ge2
twitter.com/JGForsyth/status/750067438004436992
One curious thing is that she doesn't seem to have graduated until the age of 24, presumably meaning she had 3 "gap years" or equivalent. As I remember, even one gap year would have been fairly unusual at that time.
@IsabelOakeshott: Gove/supporters going round telling MPs 'we can't have Andrea in final, she's crazy'; asking them to help get Gove into final two
MikeK Posts: 8,405
10:33AM
david_herdson said:
TheScreamingEagles said:
I hear Andrea Leadsom was only 45 minutes away from becoming Chief Executive of Barclays or have I got my stories mixed up?
Probably. She was too busy getting Apollo 13 back to earth.
You pretty gruesomely sarcastic today Mr Herdson. Whats the matter, lost a few £'s on the Brexit?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3676271/Does-Angela-Leadsom-s-CV-stack-Leadership-contender-s-backers-accused-making-claims-City-career-not-stand-up.html
I suppose it takes one to know one.
Javid has a plan. Good man. Any plan is better than no plan. Off to hobble around with the dogs. Play nicely .
For all the talk of experience, it was Leadsom's successful experience in the BBC and ITV debates that has made her a candidate. If May can't replicate that in the General Election then she should not be a candidate.
That I think will have an effect on the membership vote.
Banks in the 1990s and beyond were promoting managers who sold most products to customers regardless of customer needs. Managers who tried to promote long term customer relationships with good advice were overlooked or even sacked.
Leadsom seems to have been head of the the team dealing with Barclays financial service customers in the 1990's. As a standalone business it would make it into the FTSE 250. The only question is whether she achieved the position by ignoring customer needs or did not progress futher because she did take account of customer needs.
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21701695-despite-claims-some-lawyers-act-parliament-not-needed-invoke-article-50-who
Leadsom had a career before politics, joined Parliament recently and is a currently serving minister.
The two are not remotely comparable. The worst that can be said about Leadsom is that this may be too early for her, that she's not served in the cabinet yet. There seems to be no suggestion that she would never reach cabinet level otherwise.
1. She is claiming - or allowing her supporters to claim - that her vast City experience ("managing funds and large teams") is one reason why despite her very limited political experience she is fit to be PM at this critical time. So the nature of what she did matters to see if it really does give her the sort of experience that would be worth considering. And bear in mind that successful business people don't necessarily make successful politicians (cf: Archie Norman).
2. If what she said about herself is untrue / exxaggerated / a lie (take your pick depending on how charitable you feel) then that raises serious questions about her probity and judgment, both key qualities I would have thought for a potential PM.
Being able to string a few coherent sentences together in a debate or TV interview is a pretty low bar frankly.
Is she Corbyn, no, but it could be a similar error. More so if she's going to PM rather than just LoO
Between 1977 and 1983 May worked at the Bank of England, and from 1985 to 1997 as a financial consultant and senior advisor in International Affairs at the Association for Payment Clearing Services.
So May's record in finance is far less distibguished than Leadsom's.
https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/most-labour-mps-represent-a-constituency-that-voted-leave-36f13210f5c6
Brexit - and all its ramifications - will only be a part of what the PM will have to deal with (though a very big part) and true believers are rarely the best people to implement pragmatically and sensibly and efficiently a decision such as Brexit, which - depending on how it is handled from now on - could have catastrophic / disastrous / so-so / good / good enough consequences in the short and medium-terms.
Leadsom may win a General Election, she recently fronted a winning campaign in the two biggest televised debates during the campaign. Corbyn has never in his life come close to doing anything like that.
Leadsome is centrist enough to have made ministerial level within six years of entering Parliament. That is not comparable to someone who couldn't become Minister for picking up dog turds after three decades.
Her six years as Home Secretary is unprecedented since WWII, the vast majority of her predecessors in that role being forced out by a major scandal or policy failing.
"The Guardian contacted several senior City sources who worked at BZW and Barclays at the same time as Leadsom, but could find none who could recall her spell at the bank, which concluded 19 years ago."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/04/andrea-leadsoms-the-city-high-profile-roles-under-radar-barclays-brexit-negotiations
I'm not too bothered about tittle-tattle that she's a pain to work for or a micro manager or whatever. It's all partisan sniping between factions. The same applies to CV nitpicking or tax returns or who banks with Coutts et al. May was invisible during the Remain campaign - there was no bigger debate to be involved in. She hedged her bets and been slippery - I don't admire that sort of behaviour.
'When Edmund Hillary reached the summit of Everest, Andrea Leadsom popped her head out of her tent and offered him a biscuit.'
And how we laughed.
But they'll want to see a winner too. The hustings will be important to see the two candidates side-by-side. It think this is what is rattling the May supporters most. They appear convinced that Ms Leadsom is good at retail politics.
The next five years could be brutal. And yet they're thinking about parachuting a rookie into the job? Some are even talking about the parliament after next.
Utterly bizarre. A politician at the top of his/her game will do well to survive this roller coaster ride.
@vb2b: "I was running the investment team at Barclays" Leadsom at July 2010 Treasury cttee hearing https://t.co/w2HhZ6Z2oY https://t.co/lWWjIn1Tr8
To pretend she 'fronted' this campaign is shameless re-writing history. Much as it seems her CV was.
Anyone want to guess how far in front Andrea is?
I am with @Stark_Dawning on this. She is the anti-candidate. Anti-candidates are doing quite well atm.
*And yes I do know the difference and the egregious nature of her miswriting. But then we are a rarefied bunch on PB.
Leadsom says when Barings collapsed because of the Nick Leeson fraud, it was one of her customers and consequently she attended emergency meeting(s) with Eddie George, Governor of the BofE. Surely not a claim to make if not true.
I'm going to put my straw poll out again on Friday to see if there has been any movement towards Leadsom. I don't expect anything.