There's some quite remarkable footage coming out of the US of one of the shooters.
After watching the police murder those two black guys yesterday and now seeing the incredible footage of a man able to legally and openly carry a huge automatic assault rifle down a busy sidewalk, I have no sympathy.
Guns need to be banned.
Personally someone walking around line that would scare me, and of course since guys are plentiful the police by instinct aren't going to take chances, but the USA seems to have decided the freedom to own and carry guns is worth any potential price people will point to.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
"Firstly I would like to make clear that I fully support the lifelong commitment that is made between any loving couple and that I believe the legal basis of a same sex marriage should be no different to that of a heterosexual couple.
I have been considering for a while the impact that same sex marriage would have on the definition of marriage; if the structure of marriage is changed, I have been worrying that this risks undermining the religious institution of marriage."
So no provision for homosexual couples who wish to have the full fat religious marriage in a church or other place of worship willing to marry them? In what way is that an equal society?
Does Leadsome really have a 28% chance of becoming next PM o_O ?!
Better than that. May has negatives and coukd slip up, leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
No it definitely wasn't!
I'm an atheist and my wife and I had a civil ceremony for our marriage. There was definitely no religion involved. In fact for a civil ceremony marriage it is illegal to have religious references, or hymns involved. Even the tune for walking down the aisle can't have religious references.
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
There's some quite remarkable footage coming out of the US of one of the shooters.
After watching the police murder those two black guys yesterday and now seeing the incredible footage of a man able to legally and openly carry a huge automatic assault rifle down a busy sidewalk, I have no sympathy.
Guns need to be banned.
It's not that simple though, is it? In some parts of the US having a gun is utterly reasonable especially if you live in the country. They are a tool.
I've yet to see a realistic reason why people needs semi-automatic guns, or most handguns. Ban the former; heavily restrict the latter.
But it'd never get through the courts. Yet the current situation is unsustainable as well.
I used to shoot at school, and have a sister who is a very keen shooter to this day. I'm not anti-gun, but I am for reasonable gun controls. IMO we've gone slightly past 'reasonable' in this country.
An acquaintance of mine got a suspended sentence for possessing a WWII pistol that was left to him by a soldier who'd fought at Monte Casino. . Of course, he should have deactivated it, but it just never occurred to him that it was necessary. He looked upon it as an antique, rather than an offensive weapon.
Hmmm. In that case I might argue that a suspended sentence might be justified.
I was thinking more of other situations. It'd be good to know if the following is an urban legend: if you found a bullet on the ground outside a school, and you picked it up and took it to a policeman or police station (.e. a safe place), you will get arrested for possession of it?
As an aside, many years ago one of my dad's workmen took his young grandson to India on holiday. Whilst there, they (he admits stupidly) brought his grandson a cheap machine-gun toy that was rather realistic. Then when it was time to come home, they realised they couldn't take it on the plane and the child was very upset.
When they arrived at the airport they put their bags through the scanners and were immediately arrested at gunpoint as the boy had sneaked the toy into one of the bags.
After many hours of questioning they were put on another flight.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
So you'd abolish registry office marriages?
Rename it, sure.
Civil marriages have been possible since 1836. i don't think you'll find many takers for turning back the clock nearly 200 years.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
So you'd abolish registry office marriages?
Rename it, sure.
Civil marriages have been possible since 1836. i don't think you'll find many takers for turning back the clock nearly 200 years.
One of them is standing for leader with your inexplicable support.
"Sajid Javid will also meet the Indian government in Delhi as part of a wider trade mission to drum up business with India, post Brexit.
He will discuss how the trading relationship with India might work with the UK outside the European Union, he will also visit the US, China, Japan and South Korea in the coming months. India is the third biggest foreign investor in the UK, according to UK Trade and Investment.
Total trade between the two countries was £16.55bn last year, the government body said.
Brexit supporters argue the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with fast-growing economies such as India than it currently has as an EU member.
To help redraw those trade relationships, the UK government this week announced plans for a new team of up to 300 specialist staff, including trade negotiators, by the end of the year."
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
Except marriage has always had a civil legal aspect to it as well.
Maybe it would be more convenient if marriage referred to a religious partnership and civil partnership for mere legal partnership, but it doesn't and it didn't, politicians have for centuries and centuries decided what constitutes a proper marriage, and you don't even need religion involved. Changing the terminology to what some people wish it meant but didn't is, besides anything else, simply unfair.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
No it definitely wasn't!
I'm an atheist and my wife and I had a civil ceremony for our marriage. There was definitely no religion involved. In fact for a civil ceremony marriage it is illegal to have religious references, or hymns involved. Even the tune for walking down the aisle can't have religious references.
It was the law for same sex marriage. Civil partnership?
If you read Ms Leadsom's parliament speech during this bill it is the religious angle that she has trouble with.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
So you'd abolish registry office marriages?
Rename it, sure.
Civil marriages have been possible since 1836. i don't think you'll find many takers for turning back the clock nearly 200 years.
One of them is standing for leader with your inexplicable support.
We have to put up with short term pain for long term gain.
I got the concept from Brexiteers' enthusiasm for an optional recession.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
So you'd abolish registry office marriages?
Rename it, sure.
Civil marriages have been possible since 1836. i don't think you'll find many takers for turning back the clock nearly 200 years.
“I believe that the love of same-sex couples is every bit as valuable as that of opposite-sex couples,” she told ITV. “But nevertheless, my own view is that marriage in the biblical sense is very clearly, from the many, many Christians who wrote to me on this subject, in their opinion, can only be between a man and a woman. I don’t agree with them, to be specific.
“But what I do think is that I would have preferred civil partnership to be available to heterosexual and gay couples and for marriage to have remained as a Christian service for men and women who wanted to commit in the eyes of God.
“Civil partnerships are called marriage as well. The concern I had was the potential compulsion for the Church of England. I don’t think the Anglican church should be forced down a route when many Christians aren’t comfortable about it.”
She said there was “very clear hurt” caused by the legislation to many Christians and claimed the UK had “muddled the terms of marriage, civil partnership, registry office, church”.
“I didn’t really like the legislation, that was the problem, but I absolutely support gay marriage,” she said.
I think what Brown did is a mild form of Tourettes. I have suffered from the same thing since I was in my early teens. No vocal outbursts but an uncontrollable urge to stress muscles or tendons in the way Brown does with his jaw. In the past I have torn tendons? in my neck from doing it. It has eased somewhat as I get older but if I am stressed I still do it and can go through phases of several weeks where I can't stop.
Mr. Chestnut, the problem with India seems to be the overweening bureaucracy.
One of the reasons F1 stopped going there (huzzah, the track was atrocious) was because the state government wanted to charge the teams income tax. The teams were not amused.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
Those are both legal and not going to be reversed. Do we take a punt on an unknown quantity or go for a known authoritarian?
I don't know.
Leadsom would be more authoritarian than May in my view, May voted for gay marriage in the end
May was an early proponent of equal marriage. There was no reluctance as intimated by your phrasing, her support was full throated from the off.
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
The LDs might be going for the blue liberals.
Though as someone who wanted the coalition to continue, I'd not have wanted Boris in the top job. Perhaps he would have surprised me, but he just didn't seem up to it. I probably won't like things may does, but she seems up to it. Could be wrong, admittedly.
I'm on Team Leadsom. If the country is to move in a positive direction we need the scales to fall from the eyes of the more casual Leavers. Appointing a manifest inadequate as Prime Minister should discredit the headbangers, and then we can move on.
Nope - she'd become a 'sell out' for TBA reasons and would fail for not sticking to the righteous headbanging path
"Sajid Javid will also meet the Indian government in Delhi as part of a wider trade mission to drum up business with India, post Brexit.
He will discuss how the trading relationship with India might work with the UK outside the European Union, he will also visit the US, China, Japan and South Korea in the coming months. India is the third biggest foreign investor in the UK, according to UK Trade and Investment.
Total trade between the two countries was £16.55bn last year, the government body said.
Brexit supporters argue the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with fast-growing economies such as India than it currently has as an EU member.
To help redraw those trade relationships, the UK government this week announced plans for a new team of up to 300 specialist staff, including trade negotiators, by the end of the year."
Long ago, I worked on major bids and this sort of news tickles me in all the right places. Prospecting for new business on a national scale - I feel rather envious of them!
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
"Firstly I would like to make clear that I fully support the lifelong commitment that is made between any loving couple and that I believe the legal basis of a same sex marriage should be no different to that of a heterosexual couple.
I have been considering for a while the impact that same sex marriage would have on the definition of marriage; if the structure of marriage is changed, I have been worrying that this risks undermining the religious institution of marriage."
So no provision for homosexual couples who wish to have the full fat religious marriage in a church or other place of worship willing to marry them? In what way is that an equal society?
She probably take the view that what happens in a place of worship is up to the church not the state, not an unreasonable view.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
So you'd abolish registry office marriages?
Rename it, sure.
Civil marriages have been possible since 1836. i don't think you'll find many takers for turning back the clock nearly 200 years.
One of them is standing for leader with your inexplicable support.
We have to put up with short term pain for long term gain.
I got the concept from Brexiteers' enthusiasm for an optional recession.
You've become a very strange person, I'm glad you don't have a vote.
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
Is May more right wing? We've already heard Osborne talk about reducing corporation tax to 15%. In her initial pitch May talked about the economy working for everyone. Now that may have been Camborne's intentions - reduce corporation tax, red tape, public spending (particularly in poor areas to stop the private sector being crowded out) - I'm not sure I would regard that as a very centrist agenda. Now they might have since changed their approach, easing off on the deficit, the 'northern powerhouse', maintaining tax credits but if you look at the referendum result it was probably too little too late.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
"Firstly I would like to make clear that I fully support the lifelong commitment that is made between any loving couple and that I believe the legal basis of a same sex marriage should be no different to that of a heterosexual couple.
I have been considering for a while the impact that same sex marriage would have on the definition of marriage; if the structure of marriage is changed, I have been worrying that this risks undermining the religious institution of marriage."
So no provision for homosexual couples who wish to have the full fat religious marriage in a church or other place of worship willing to marry them? In what way is that an equal society?
She probably take the view that what happens in a place of worship is up to the church not the state, not an unreasonable view.
So why not vote for the government's bill? That applied to civil registry marriages it did not compel religious institutions.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
No it definitely wasn't!
I'm an atheist and my wife and I had a civil ceremony for our marriage. There was definitely no religion involved. In fact for a civil ceremony marriage it is illegal to have religious references, or hymns involved. Even the tune for walking down the aisle can't have religious references.
It was the law for same sex marriage. Civil partnership?
If you read Ms Leadsom's parliament speech during this bill it is the religious angle that she has trouble with.
IIRC - she voted in both lobbies as a proper abstention, rather than a DNV. I can't criticise her for it. I'm an atheist so have no dog in this fight, but do respect those who feel it was a step too far.
Crabb voted against it for religious reasons if memory serves.
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
No it definitely wasn't!
I'm an atheist and my wife and I had a civil ceremony for our marriage. There was definitely no religion involved. In fact for a civil ceremony marriage it is illegal to have religious references, or hymns involved. Even the tune for walking down the aisle can't have religious references.
It was the law for same sex marriage. Civil partnership?
If you read Ms Leadsom's parliament speech during this bill it is the religious angle that she has trouble with.
Digging into Family History, several of my Non-conformist ancestors had their marriages recorded at the local Registrars Office. That was 1830 ish onwards. The subsequent children were baptised in Congregationist or similar chapels. Getting married in “Church” was unusual.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
"Firstly I would like to make clear that I fully support the lifelong commitment that is made between any loving couple and that I believe the legal basis of a same sex marriage should be no different to that of a heterosexual couple.
I have been considering for a while the impact that same sex marriage would have on the definition of marriage; if the structure of marriage is changed, I have been worrying that this risks undermining the religious institution of marriage."
So no provision for homosexual couples who wish to have the full fat religious marriage in a church or other place of worship willing to marry them? In what way is that an equal society?
She probably take the view that what happens in a place of worship is up to the church not the state, not an unreasonable view.
Governments have always interfered in religion. And since marriage is not owned by religion, the state can set rules about it. How much they should is debatable, but governments are not obliged to give a free pass to things just because they take place in a church. There's a line of reasonableness which can be hard to judge though.
Governments have always interfered in religion. And since marriage is not owned by religion, the state can set rules about it. How much they should is debatable, but governments are not obliged to give a free pass to things just because they take place in a church. There's a line of reasonableness which can be hard to judge though.
It is certainly reasonable to that the view that the civil and religious aspects of marriage could be separate. For non-established churches they in effect are, if you marry in a catholic church you still need to make a notification in advance at the registry office and take the Registrar's Certificate to the church.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
Those are both legal and not going to be reversed. Do we take a punt on an unknown quantity or go for a known authoritarian?
I don't know.
Leadsom would be more authoritarian than May in my view, May voted for gay marriage in the end
May was an early proponent of equal marriage. There was no reluctance as intimated by your phrasing, her support was full throated from the off.
Exactly, it would never have happened had she not been willing to back Featherstone in the first place
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
My mother's view:
Leadsom is a Leaver, May will not implement the referendum result properly.
Leadsom has experience of both the City and of European negotiations.
Leadsom is not a career politician and has experience of the real world outside politics.
What experience of European negotiations does Leadsom have? Precisely?
Just paraphrasing grandma Fox, who is the only Fox with a vote!
I have a pretty low opinion of May as one of the least talented frontbenchers, but in my mind she is less bad than Leadsom. May will sign up to an EEA which is close enough to the EU in all but name to keep me happy, her non-EU policicies will be pretty unpleasantly authoritarian though.
It's not possible to be a Home Secretary and remain liberal...
Both @rcs1000 and I have been saying this for a while, unfortunately it is worse than the TTIP as it the latter doesn't have secret ISDS provisions as in the TPP. I'd rather stick with what we have in terms of our US trading relationship which I would describe as WTO+ than sign up to the one sided TPP which the US has bullied Pacific nations into signing up to.
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
Many people believe that but it's nonsense. I say that as a leaver. Much of 'the establishment' was indeed pushing remain, but senior figures in politics and business, members of 'the establishment' were for leave. Leadsome is establishment as they come, she just happens to be leave, and that she has not yet received much support does not make her ant establishment. She's just new and unknown going up against a known quantity, if she shows the skill she'll pick up supporters elsewhere.
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
May appeals more to LDs and Leadsom to UKIP
Mrs Snooper Charter appeals to LibDems? I don't recall that.
Leadsome appeals to Kippers because she fought for Leave. If that'd been May, they'd be backing her instead.
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
May appeals more to LDs and Leadsom to UKIP
Mrs Snooper Charter appeals to LibDems? I don't recall that.
It's been a long time since the Lib Dems were either Liberal or Democratic.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
My mother's view:
Leadsom is a Leaver, May will not implement the referendum result properly.
Leadsom has experience of both the City and of European negotiations.
Leadsom is not a career politician and has experience of the real world outside politics.
What experience of European negotiations does Leadsom have? Precisely?
Just paraphrasing grandma Fox, who is the only Fox with a vote!
I have a pretty low opinion of May as one of the least talented frontbenchers, but in my mind she is less bad than Leadsom. May will sign up to an EEA which is close enough to the EU in all but name to keep me happy, her non-EU policicies will be pretty unpleasantly authoritarian though.
It's not possible to be a Home Secretary and remain liberal...
"Sajid Javid will also meet the Indian government in Delhi as part of a wider trade mission to drum up business with India, post Brexit.
He will discuss how the trading relationship with India might work with the UK outside the European Union, he will also visit the US, China, Japan and South Korea in the coming months. India is the third biggest foreign investor in the UK, according to UK Trade and Investment.
Total trade between the two countries was £16.55bn last year, the government body said.
Brexit supporters argue the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with fast-growing economies such as India than it currently has as an EU member.
To help redraw those trade relationships, the UK government this week announced plans for a new team of up to 300 specialist staff, including trade negotiators, by the end of the year."
Long ago, I worked on major bids and this sort of news tickles me in all the right places. Prospecting for new business on a national scale - I feel rather envious of them!
This is a bit depressing to be honest. Neither of these candidates is close to Cameron or Osborne for that matter. Both are more right wing, way more authoritarian and less likely to appeal to the Lib Dems and ex Lib Dems that gave Cameron his majority. They may of course pick up some UKIP supporters but they are less likely to be useful in terms of seats.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
May appeals more to LDs and Leadsom to UKIP
Mrs Snooper Charter appeals to LibDems? I don't recall that.
Leadsome appeals to Kippers because she fought for Leave. If that'd been May, they'd be backing her instead.
This is the phoniest proxy war I've ever seen.
May is less unappealing to LD’s that Leadsome. On a scale of 1-10......
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
I'm struck by the contrast between the YouGov poll of Conservative members and the virulently negative views of Leadsom being expressed by Conservative supporters here. YouGov found that only 16% had a negative opinion of here, only May having a lower negative figure of 12%, out of the nine people on whom opinions were sought.
The five men that were killed yesterday in Birmingham were Gambians on Spanish passports.
Did they ever recover the bodies of those buried in the power station demolition accident?
I can't get over how quickly the news moves on - yet on other subjects, they twaddle on about fluff for days.
Chilcot has barely a mention now - and it's just two days ago.
I was thinking much the same. For all the fuss and fanfare about the Chilcot report it got one day's worth of headlines and now has been quietly forgotten.
Surely the correct thing for a politician to say about this is: "it is in the interests of the UK and its citizens resident in the EU and of the EU countries and their citizens resident in the UK that agreement is quickly reached to maintain the rights of these citizens to maintain their right to live where they do, and so I expect that this will be agreed as one of the first points in the exit negotiations".
In other words, yes a deal needs to be done but it should be easy and blame them if it doesn't happen...
Bit like this:
“I want to be able to guarantee the legal status of EU nationals who are living in the UK, and I am confident we will be able to do that,” she said.
“But we must also win the same rights for British nationals living in European countries, and it will be an early negotiating objective for the Government to achieve those things together.”
It's on the way, but not quite there. For one, it talks about "winning" rights rather than maintaining them; for another it doesn't quite carry enough overtones of "well, duh".
Steve Hawkes For three years everyone was expecting Osborne vs Boris for No10. That was the narrative. Now it's May vs Leadsom. Politics eh?
Who expected it to be Osborne? Surely he ruled himself out years ago.
He ruled himself out after a couple of spectacularly bad announcements which he appeared to have a tin ear. National Living Wage a great idea, phased in over five years. Tax credit cuts, a great idea, but no phasing in. FFS. No idea. Phase the NLW in to help employers cope with the change, but cut tax credits off all at once..
No idea. Then he made an equally daft decision by scrapping the tax credit cuts altogether. The cuts were totally justified, you just had to phase them in so they run parallel with the NLW increases. Shifting the burden of employing someone onto the employer and away from the tax payer.
He just couldnt see that and then over steered in his eventual climbdown. Utter muppet showing he has the same touch for understanding people's lives as Brown.
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
I'm struck by the contrast between the YouGov poll of Conservative members and the virulently negative views of Leadsom being expressed by Conservative supporters here. YouGov found that only 16% had a negative opinion of here, only May having a lower negative figure of 12%, out of the nine people on whom opinions were sought.
Most PB Tories are a bit one-nation not true Maggie'ish. I think what also the likes of Meeks fear most is that she is: 1. Going to win 2. Be successful as PM 3. Be a bit like Maggie - reform what needs reforming 4. Build a prosperous confident independent sovereign trading nation (and in so doing sink the EU forever) 5. Win a GE and turn out to be quite popular 6. Move the centre ground (political and cultural) a bit to the right
Steve Hawkes For three years everyone was expecting Osborne vs Boris for No10. That was the narrative. Now it's May vs Leadsom. Politics eh?
Who expected it to be Osborne? Surely he ruled himself out years ago.
He ruled himself out after a couple of spectacularly bad announcements which he appeared to have a tin ear. National Living Wage a great idea, phased in over five years. Tax credit cuts, a great idea, but no phasing in. FFS. No idea. Phase the NLW in to help employers cope with the change, but cut tax credits off all at once..
No idea. Then he made an equally daft decision by scrapping the tax credit cuts altogether. The cuts were totally justified, you just had to phase them in so they run parallel with the NLW increases. Shifting the burden of employing someone onto the employer and away from the tax payer.
He just couldnt see that and then over steered in his eventual climbdown. Utter muppet showing he has the same touch for understanding people's lives as Brown.
GO had all of Cameron's weaknesses and none of his strengths.
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
a) She's transparently not up to it. b) With a majority of 12 and the support of only a quarter of her MPs, she wouldn't be capable of being a success if she were the lovechild of Julius Caesar and Elizabeth I.
Steve Hawkes For three years everyone was expecting Osborne vs Boris for No10. That was the narrative. Now it's May vs Leadsom. Politics eh?
Who expected it to be Osborne? Surely he ruled himself out years ago.
He ruled himself out after a couple of spectacularly bad announcements which he appeared to have a tin ear. National Living Wage a great idea, phased in over five years. Tax credit cuts, a great idea, but no phasing in. FFS. No idea. Phase the NLW in to help employers cope with the change, but cut tax credits off all at once..
No idea. Then he made an equally daft decision by scrapping the tax credit cuts altogether. The cuts were totally justified, you just had to phase them in so they run parallel with the NLW increases. Shifting the burden of employing someone onto the employer and away from the tax payer.
He just couldnt see that and then over steered in his eventual climbdown. Utter muppet showing he has the same touch for understanding people's lives as Brown.
GO had all of Cameron's weaknesses and none of his strengths.
George has the weirdest form of political nous bi-polarity. He's either pulling off a clever submarine manoeuvre or screwing up horribly in public. It's either or.
I don't see him as an asset - he's done some good stuff, and some crap stuff. If he wasn't Cameron's BFF, he wouldn't still be in office.
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
There once was a Tory called Leadsom Whom sensible liberals found dreadsome She hated Ms May & anyone gay & her CV overstated her cred some.
One morning while stretching his chode Young Eagles cried "Well I'll be blowed! Brookes poems Ive wrote em Down here on my scrotum That;s Alan not Rupert" he crowed
Mr. Jim, sometimes Nelson has a very odd view of things. I remember him criticising Osborne because the deficit fell less than Darling's fabled 'deficit reduction plan' would have reduced it, yet the 'plan' included not a scintilla of detail and the eurozone sovereign debt crisis made waters choppier. Nelson treated the theoretical (or fictional) as hard fact, whilst disregarding the hard fact of the sovereign debt crisis.
Not that Osborne is unworthy of criticism, but that particular one was peculiar.
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
I'm struck by the contrast between the YouGov poll of Conservative members and the virulently negative views of Leadsom being expressed by Conservative supporters here. YouGov found that only 16% had a negative opinion of here, only May having a lower negative figure of 12%, out of the nine people on whom opinions were sought.
Most PB Tories are a bit one-nation not true Maggie'ish. I think what also the likes of Meeks fear most is that she is: 1. Going to win 2. Be successful as PM 3. Be a bit like Maggie - reform what needs reforming 4. Build a prosperous confident independent sovereign trading nation (and in so doing sink the EU forever) 5. Win a GE and turn out to be quite popular 6. Move the centre ground (political and cultural) a bit to the right
Can you imagine the horror!
Leadsom was one of the least known. If you filter out the DKs, a much higher proportion expressed a negative opinion.
"Leadsom is a true leaver, a fresh face and may well preposterously try for the anti establishment vote." The weight of comments against Leadsome on pb this morning seems to suggest being a leaver is anti-establishment.
I'm struck by the contrast between the YouGov poll of Conservative members and the virulently negative views of Leadsom being expressed by Conservative supporters here. YouGov found that only 16% had a negative opinion of here, only May having a lower negative figure of 12%, out of the nine people on whom opinions were sought.
Most PB Tories are a bit one-nation not true Maggie'ish. I think what also the likes of Meeks fear most is that she is: 1. Going to win 2. Be successful as PM 3. Be a bit like Maggie - reform what needs reforming 4. Build a prosperous confident independent sovereign trading nation (and in so doing sink the EU forever) 5. Win a GE and turn out to be quite popular 6. Move the centre ground (political and cultural) a bit to the right
There once was a Tory called Leadsom Whom sensible liberals found dreadsome She hated Ms May & anyone gay & her CV overstated her cred some.
One morning while stretching his chode Young Eagles cried "Well I'll be blowed! Brookes poems Ive wrote em Down here on my scrotum That;s Alan not Rupert" he crowed
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
Frankly I'm surprised at all this 'pulling up the drawbridge' on Brits abroad.....you'd have thought the Telegraph would have a modicum of concern.....
There once was a Tory called Leadsom Whom sensible liberals found dreadsome She hated Ms May & anyone gay & her CV overstated her cred some.
One morning while stretching his chode Young Eagles cried "Well I'll be blowed! Brookes poems Ive wrote em Down here on my scrotum That;s Alan not Rupert" he crowed
a) She's transparently not up to it. b) With a majority of 12 and the support of only a quarter of her MPs, she wouldn't be capable of being a success if she were the lovechild of Julius Caesar and Elizabeth I.
Morning all,
Item B is v important here. The country needs another Corbyn-style situation in the governing party like a hole in the head.
There once was a Tory called Leadsom Whom sensible liberals found dreadsome She hated Ms May & anyone gay & her CV overstated her cred some.
One morning while stretching his chode Young Eagles cried "Well I'll be blowed! Brookes poems Ive wrote em Down here on my scrotum That;s Alan not Rupert" he crowed
Good Lord. Have you got any mind bleach?
This site has standards to live down to :-)
Well I'm writing a thread as we speak and the opening sentence contains 'Andrea Leadsom' and 'orgies'
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
To Leadsom's supporters: in 50 words, why would you pick her over May?
Simples:
May has proven that she trends towards authoritarianism; no liberal would support her candidacy. Leadsom has no track record (except outwith the Westminster-bubble) so I will give her my vote.
Leadsom is a social conservative too, sceptical about gay marriage and casual sex
I think her objection there was the marriage angle, civil partnerships should be the legal side, marriage should be left as a religious ceremony. That was the law under Blair.
Except marriage has always had a civil legal aspect to it as well.
Maybe it would be more convenient if marriage referred to a religious partnership and civil partnership for mere legal partnership, but it doesn't and it didn't, politicians have for centuries and centuries decided what constitutes a proper marriage, and you don't even need religion involved. Changing the terminology to what some people wish it meant but didn't is, besides anything else, simply unfair.
Also very tedious and boring , who cares about splitting hairs etc. Time people got a life and stopped whining.
Steve Hawkes For three years everyone was expecting Osborne vs Boris for No10. That was the narrative. Now it's May vs Leadsom. Politics eh?
Who expected it to be Osborne? Surely he ruled himself out years ago.
He ruled himself out after a couple of spectacularly bad announcements which he appeared to have a tin ear. National Living Wage a great idea, phased in over five years. Tax credit cuts, a great idea, but no phasing in. FFS. No idea. Phase the NLW in to help employers cope with the change, but cut tax credits off all at once..
No idea. Then he made an equally daft decision by scrapping the tax credit cuts altogether. The cuts were totally justified, you just had to phase them in so they run parallel with the NLW increases. Shifting the burden of employing someone onto the employer and away from the tax payer.
He just couldnt see that and then over steered in his eventual climbdown. Utter muppet showing he has the same touch for understanding people's lives as Brown.
I suspect actually he didn't rule himself out until about 5am on 24th June, when it was finally all and over and clear that Cameron was going to go, and that MPs would not support an out-and-out Remainer who led the charge.
Mr. Jim, sometimes Nelson has a very odd view of things. I remember him criticising Osborne because the deficit fell less than Darling's fabled 'deficit reduction plan' would have reduced it, yet the 'plan' included not a scintilla of detail and the eurozone sovereign debt crisis made waters choppier. Nelson treated the theoretical (or fictional) as hard fact, whilst disregarding the hard fact of the sovereign debt crisis.
Not that Osborne is unworthy of criticism, but that particular one was peculiar.
Mr Dancer - Nelson is an absolutist in a nuanced world. Sadly
When Andrea Leadsome is pictured in glasses, I've noted a similarity between her appearance and that of the comedian Jenny Eclair. One is a noted Grumpy Old Woman and Pointless Celebrity, the other. .... (write your own punchline.)
How many billions is she going to set aside for the large army of bureaucrats necessary to check every website on the internet? She's even more technologically illiterate than Cameron.
It's baffling. I'm not even a technophile myself but the flaws are so massive and obvious it's beyond me how a human being with a functioning brain can't see them.
But mandatory rating would be a) impossible and b) the act of an idiot, rather like Cameron's ideas of banning crypto, I wonder if the liberal Mrs May is going to continue with that bit of stupidity.
How many billions is she going to set aside for the large army of bureaucrats necessary to check every website on the internet? She's even more technologically illiterate than Cameron.
It's baffling. I'm not even a technophile myself but the flaws are so massive and obvious it's beyond me how a human being with a functioning brain can't see them.
Day 1 of the campaign. The great unravelling starts. What have the Tory MPs done to us?
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
"Sajid Javid will also meet the Indian government in Delhi as part of a wider trade mission to drum up business with India, post Brexit.
He will discuss how the trading relationship with India might work with the UK outside the European Union, he will also visit the US, China, Japan and South Korea in the coming months. India is the third biggest foreign investor in the UK, according to UK Trade and Investment.
Total trade between the two countries was £16.55bn last year, the government body said.
Brexit supporters argue the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with fast-growing economies such as India than it currently has as an EU member.
To help redraw those trade relationships, the UK government this week announced plans for a new team of up to 300 specialist staff, including trade negotiators, by the end of the year."
Long ago, I worked on major bids and this sort of news tickles me in all the right places. Prospecting for new business on a national scale - I feel rather envious of them!
Do you mean you did, or is that just what your cv says?
That would in any other case be an unbelievably rude question to ask, but given your stated position on Leadsom's veracity you are absolutely debarred from taking offence at it. Think about that.
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
So Leadsom wants to do something that's funded by the EU.....?
Colour me confused.....
Don't look at me! Sounds like she wants to make it mandatory as well, bizarre! The current Tory party badly needs some technical nous, its full of complete illiterates at the moment. Cameron's crypto idea was even worse, that would have put the City out of business far quicker and more surely than any BrExit choice we could make.
Does anyone know what would be the last date for Leadsom to pull out from this contest? My guess would be a date in line with the next Conservative Party Board meeting (which is ...?)
Just read Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph, he says May needs to come clean about deporting EU citizens, I agree. If that is her stance I hope Leadsom wins.
Fraser Nelson is pursuing a journalistic line that is based on wilfully mishearing what has been said. It is not a mechanism I can respect as it is basically synthetic outrage to generate readership/Internet traffic.
No Leadsom has 'refused to back Brits in the EU' - if we apply the same logic to her statements that is being applied to May's
Well she's just as bad then, what a situation we find ourselves in.
Actually - if it was true - and it isn't of either ladies - a case could be made that its marginally worse for ignoring Brits abroad, than solely being concerned about EU nationals in the UK.
However, as others have observed, this is a manufactured 'crisis' of synthetic virtue signalling.
We have tough negotiations ahead of us - no one is going to get everything they want - and giving away positions before we start is amateurism of the highest order....
Comments
I'm an atheist and my wife and I had a civil ceremony for our marriage. There was definitely no religion involved. In fact for a civil ceremony marriage it is illegal to have religious references, or hymns involved. Even the tune for walking down the aisle can't have religious references.
I would have had a Boris/Gove partnership over either of these two in a heartbeat. Gove's moves seem ever more inexplicable and unfortunate.
I was thinking more of other situations. It'd be good to know if the following is an urban legend: if you found a bullet on the ground outside a school, and you picked it up and took it to a policeman or police station (.e. a safe place), you will get arrested for possession of it?
As an aside, many years ago one of my dad's workmen took his young grandson to India on holiday. Whilst there, they (he admits stupidly) brought his grandson a cheap machine-gun toy that was rather realistic. Then when it was time to come home, they realised they couldn't take it on the plane and the child was very upset.
When they arrived at the airport they put their bags through the scanners and were immediately arrested at gunpoint as the boy had sneaked the toy into one of the bags.
After many hours of questioning they were put on another flight.
"Sajid Javid will also meet the Indian government in Delhi as part of a wider trade mission to drum up business with India, post Brexit.
He will discuss how the trading relationship with India might work with the UK outside the European Union, he will also visit the US, China, Japan and South Korea in the coming months.
India is the third biggest foreign investor in the UK, according to UK Trade and Investment.
Total trade between the two countries was £16.55bn last year, the government body said.
Brexit supporters argue the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with fast-growing economies such as India than it currently has as an EU member.
To help redraw those trade relationships, the UK government this week announced plans for a new team of up to 300 specialist staff, including trade negotiators, by the end of the year."
Maybe it would be more convenient if marriage referred to a religious partnership and civil partnership for mere legal partnership, but it doesn't and it didn't, politicians have for centuries and centuries decided what constitutes a proper marriage, and you don't even need religion involved. Changing the terminology to what some people wish it meant but didn't is, besides anything else, simply unfair.
If you read Ms Leadsom's parliament speech during this bill it is the religious angle that she has trouble with.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2013-02-05b.125.0#g221.0
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2012/05/the-folly-of-camerons-gay-marriage-culture-war/
I got the concept from Brexiteers' enthusiasm for an optional recession.
I can't get over how quickly the news moves on - yet on other subjects, they twaddle on about fluff for days.
Chilcot has barely a mention now - and it's just two days ago.
“But what I do think is that I would have preferred civil partnership to be available to heterosexual and gay couples and for marriage to have remained as a Christian service for men and women who wanted to commit in the eyes of God.
“Civil partnerships are called marriage as well. The concern I had was the potential compulsion for the Church of England. I don’t think the Anglican church should be forced down a route when many Christians aren’t comfortable about it.”
She said there was “very clear hurt” caused by the legislation to many Christians and claimed the UK had “muddled the terms of marriage, civil partnership, registry office, church”.
“I didn’t really like the legislation, that was the problem, but I absolutely support gay marriage,” she said.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/07/tory-leadership-andrea-leadsom-promises-prosperity-not-austerity
Clear now? You have to love the slide from "my own view" to "in their opinion" in the second sentence.
One of the reasons F1 stopped going there (huzzah, the track was atrocious) was because the state government wanted to charge the teams income tax. The teams were not amused.
Though as someone who wanted the coalition to continue, I'd not have wanted Boris in the top job. Perhaps he would have surprised me, but he just didn't seem up to it. I probably won't like things may does, but she seems up to it. Could be wrong, admittedly.
Crabb voted against it for religious reasons if memory serves.
Leadsome appeals to Kippers because she fought for Leave. If that'd been May, they'd be backing her instead.
This is the phoniest proxy war I've ever seen.
For three years everyone was expecting Osborne vs Boris for No10. That was the narrative. Now it's May vs Leadsom. Politics eh?
That gives each member 16 seconds with each candidate - more than enough to make their mind up.
The least radical or reforming government since Gordon Brown.
No idea. Then he made an equally daft decision by scrapping the tax credit cuts altogether. The cuts were totally justified, you just had to phase them in so they run parallel with the NLW increases. Shifting the burden of employing someone onto the employer and away from the tax payer.
He just couldnt see that and then over steered in his eventual climbdown. Utter muppet showing he has the same touch for understanding people's lives as Brown.
1. Going to win
2. Be successful as PM
3. Be a bit like Maggie - reform what needs reforming
4. Build a prosperous confident independent sovereign trading nation (and in so doing sink the EU forever)
5. Win a GE and turn out to be quite popular
6. Move the centre ground (political and cultural) a bit to the right
Can you imagine the horror!
a) She's transparently not up to it.
b) With a majority of 12 and the support of only a quarter of her MPs, she wouldn't be capable of being a success if she were the lovechild of Julius Caesar and Elizabeth I.
@hatmandu
There once was a Tory called Leadsom
Whom sensible liberals found dreadsome
She hated Ms May
& anyone gay
& her CV overstated her cred some.
I don't see him as an asset - he's done some good stuff, and some crap stuff. If he wasn't Cameron's BFF, he wouldn't still be in office.
Young Eagles cried "Well I'll be blowed!
Brookes poems Ive wrote em
Down here on my scrotum
That;s Alan not Rupert" he crowed
Not that Osborne is unworthy of criticism, but that particular one was peculiar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
If Leadsom had said that there would be riots
Item B is v important here. The country needs another Corbyn-style situation in the governing party like a hole in the head.
Maybe God told her to do it
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/08/leadsom_thinks_websites_should_be_rated/
I wonder how pb.com would be rated....?
How many billions is she going to set aside for the large army of bureaucrats necessary to check every website on the internet? She's even more technologically illiterate than Cameron.
It's baffling. I'm not even a technophile myself but the flaws are so massive and obvious it's beyond me how a human being with a functioning brain can't see them.
Mr. Eagles, lucky you don't post photos of your wardrobe, or the site would have an epilepsy warning too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Content_Rating_Association
The alternative now would be the soon to be replaced* EU funded Quatro approach
https://www.w3.org/2005/Security/usability-ws/papers/04-quatro-trust/
(* by QuatroPlus!)
But mandatory rating would be a) impossible and b) the act of an idiot, rather like Cameron's ideas of banning crypto, I wonder if the liberal Mrs May is going to continue with that bit of stupidity.
Please elect May.
Colour me confused.....
That would in any other case be an unbelievably rude question to ask, but given your stated position on Leadsom's veracity you are absolutely debarred from taking offence at it. Think about that.
Great. I like Kimi.
My guess would be a date in line with the next Conservative Party Board meeting (which is ...?)
However, as others have observed, this is a manufactured 'crisis' of synthetic virtue signalling.
We have tough negotiations ahead of us - no one is going to get everything they want - and giving away positions before we start is amateurism of the highest order....