Another stellar effort from mr herdson, acknowledging how Leadsom can win but seeing the path to that out one as very unlikely. We shall see. May starts from a strong position but is not inspiring so could go backwards if Leadson gets her act together.
With the derision we pour, not without cause, on our political leaders, it will be interesting to see if Mays vast experience at the top does indeed show up an amateurish operation from Leadsom, and how out of depth someone can be. Also interesting to see how fast Leadsom can pick things up - even Corbyn has learned to modulate himself a bit, or just keep quiet every now and the, he's learned a few things.
Speaking of moaning about politicians, we get the ones we deserve.
The Times has killed off Crabb over tittle-tattle about his private life. I don't give a fig what he does - it's between him and his family.
Leadsom is criticised for saying she's influenced by having kids.
May did a whole Mail spread that led with not having kids.
I can't put into words how much I don't care. I want to hear and see them talking about what they'll do, not whether their necklace isn't straight, or wore Blackwatch tartan et al.
That Leadsom was very bruised by the media assault and fessed up to it, was rather refreshing. I don't see it as a some fatal flaw. Who wouldn't be personally effected by it?
Some may prefer May's icy manner. Fair enough. I don't. I'm going to wait until the very last minute to decide how I'll vote. Both candidates have drawbacks - big ones.
While I agree we get the politicians we deserve, I don't think the examples you give on May and Leadsom are comparable. I would have to recheck, but Mays piece was about her opening up, giving people an insight into her as a person not just a candidate. Leadsoms was directly saying she would be better as a PM because she has kids and may doesn't. My biggest issue with Leadsom so far is her outrage and weak defence that she wasn't making a comparison use just because she said she wasn't despite doing so. Saying you aren't doesn't erase the act of doing so.
But it's early days - and Leadsom may well surprise. May can only go backwards or hold steady, not inspire more.
It's the misrepresentation that Ms Leadsom objects to:
"The Times are now admitting that on unreleased audio, @AndreaLeadsom says that motherhood has no bearing on Tory leadership contest."
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Workers on company boards (as in Germany?) and surely this is a return to one-nation Toryism:
"If you're black, you're treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you're white. If you're a white, working-class boy, you're less likely than anybody else to go to university. If you're at a state school, you're less likely to reach the top professions than if you're educated privately.
"If you're a woman, you still earn less than a man. If you suffer from mental health problems, there's too often not enough help to hand. If you're young, you'll find it harder than ever before to own your own home."
She will say that "fighting these injustices is not enough", and add: "If you're from a working-class family, life is just much harder than many people in politics realise." Mrs May will say: "These are the reasons why, under my leadership, the Conservative Party will put itself - completely, absolutely, unequivocally - at the service of working people."
Inequality due to race etc was a section in camerons last conference speech that he got the most passionate about wanting to address, he was more fired up fan when attacking Corbyn.
But, much of what is currently exercising the Home Office, and Ministry of Justice, eg terrorism, FGM, modern slavery, child sexual exploitation, has a racial/religious angle. That is, cracking down on these things will disproportionately affect some ethnic groups more than others. Which leads back to the fact that these issues don't have obvious bureaucratic solutions.
I wasn't commenting on whether she has specific plans and there are a good idea - just noting the similarity to camerons go was very passionate I what has proved his last conference speech as leader, on this topic.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
Labour have proven that the membership is moving farther away from the electorate.
The Tories are probably about to do the same.
Yes, following the ideological median of your membership is a fool's errand. Government for Plato and Big John Owls wouldn't win much favour in the country.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
Labour have proven that the membership is moving farther away from the electorate.
The Tories are probably about to do the same.
No we aren't. The polls and the anecdotes are all in favour of May. The IDS loving members have mostly left for UKIP already. Without entryism I don't think there are enough of them left in the party to get Leadsom into Number 10. There are also people who voted for IDS that will now vote for May, I came across a couple of them yesterday.
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I was really cross at those Tories that voted for Jez, they'd have been screaming blue murder if Labour supporters had interfered with a Tory leadership contest.
Indeed. It was a grossly uncivic act of unmitigated dishonour. Those that did do should hang their heads in shame.
Mr. Bob, but whether he 'should' have a right to automatically be on the ballot is a moral question. What matters is whether he actually does have that right, according to the rules.
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I made a similar point yesterday regarding the Feldman Review within the Tory Party. It positioned itself as helping associations to share expertise/resources et al. I thought this was a good idea and filled in his various surveys.
His final report actually looked an awful lot like CCHQ trying to power grab instead. My CCP is actively asking members not to use the CCHQ system, but renew directly with them. I obliged. It may not be as efficient or whatever, but it does mean they retain their independence. I'm very happy to share - but being merged with others is a no no.
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I was really cross at those Tories that voted for Jez, they'd have been screaming blue murder if Labour supporters had interfered with a Tory leadership contest.
Indeed. It was a grossly uncivic act of unmitigated dishonour. Those that did do should hang their heads in shame.
Agreed. I said it was stupid at the time and still think it is stupid. I do know a Tory who signed up, but then bottled it and voted for Liz then Yvette.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Jack W. She probably didn't want to get drawn into May's invitation to sign up to her "clean campaign pledge".
Whilst I would prefer May to Leadsom, I'd be wary of taking polling too seriously given recent performances from the pollsters. I don't envy them their task, but they've not been quite as accurate as they might like recently.
True, and it's also the case that a snapshot two months out is not a prediction for the final result. All the same, pollsters have rarely done worse than be more than about five or six points out for any one party or preference. At worst, that would bring a 2:1 lead for May down to 3:2 - still a very comfortable margin.
Just in case PBers missed it, Keiren's thread yesterday on the rights and wrongs of Corbyn gaining an automatic right to be on the ballot trumps pretty much anything you'll read in the MSM.
Keiren - rightly in my view - makes a cogent case that Corbyn should have no such right. Worth adding that if Corbyn was subject to Tory rules, he'd be out on his ear, without even a chance to get the requisite nominations.
So he can have few complaints of the NEC rules that the Kinnock Precedent stands and he will be asked to find 51 MPs to support his candidacy.
All eyes on the NEC tomorrow...
I agree that Corbyn can have no complaint morally and I think it's well worth making that point. There's nothing onerous about requiring the incumbent to be nominated in the same way as a challenger. After all, for an even slightly competent incumbent it would be no problem.
Leadsom is unfit to become PM because she sent a text to somebody.
Fuck me, this is what the conservative party and its supporters have sunk to.
Risible.
What is risible is your post.
It's part of a pattern of behaviour that the Conservative electorate will take into account among many other factors in determining their choice.
I'm flattered that you think the Conservative electorate will consider my views before choosing, its far more important than what either candidate will actually DO when elected. I couldn't care less who wins, I consider neither to be suitable for entirely different reasons.
Beyond a few tribal saddos on here the nation is looking on and shaking its head at the choice we face and what criteria is being used.
Womb efficiency and text messaging seem of paramount importance.
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
So you've finally come out as a Leadsom supporter? Or are you still crying over the referendum result like a 2 year old.
For my money I see little value in the odds. May is the steady hand option with more ' politics experience' but Leadsom being the brexit candidate from outside the political spectrum with more 'business experience' means she is worth a second look. Leadsom is the better TV debate performer so I expect her stock to rise at least some point during the campaign if she can swerve gaffes. May's weak point in the Tory members eyes is that on a subject that caused such polarisation of opinions and was the political talking point of the year why did May not have any strong convictions? This is a weakness that I'm sure Leadsom camp can exploit. I'd probably agree with Mike and say we are around the 75/25 chance as things stand.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
Labour have proven that the membership is moving farther away from the electorate.
The Tories are probably about to do the same.
No we aren't. The polls and the anecdotes are all in favour of May. The IDS loving members have mostly left for UKIP already. Without entryism I don't think there are enough of them left in the party to get Leadsom into Number 10. There are also people who voted for IDS that will now vote for May, I came across a couple of them yesterday.
Considering some IDS backers obviously voted for Cameron that is not too surprising
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I made a similar point yesterday regarding the Feldman Review within the Tory Party. It positioned itself as helping associations to share expertise/resources et al. I thought this was a good idea and filled in his various surveys.
His final report actually looked an awful lot like CCHQ trying to power grab instead. My CCP is actively asking members not to use the CCHQ system, but renew directly with them. I obliged. It may not be as efficient or whatever, but it does mean they retain their independence. I'm very happy to share - but being merged with others is a no no.
One of the items on Ms Leadsom's campaign leak (photo from train passenger) was decentralisation of power within the Conservative Party. Be interesting to see if that has legs.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Perhaps it also just indicates a fear of confrontation - people who do important things by text have basically bottled fronting up and speaking directly - it's easier for them. As the days go by it just seems to me more and more cruel that Leadsom's MP supporters are allowing her to carry on to try and secure a role that she is clearly not suited for either temperamentally or intellectually.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible. It makes her sound like somebody who attended a course on negotiation and didn't understand it. That alone should disqualify her in the eyes of the membership
Whilst I would prefer May to Leadsom, I'd be wary of taking polling too seriously given recent performances from the pollsters. I don't envy them their task, but they've not been quite as accurate as they might like recently.
True, and it's also the case that a snapshot two months out is not a prediction for the final result. All the same, pollsters have rarely done worse than be more than about five or six points out for any one party or preference. At worst, that would bring a 2:1 lead for May down to 3:2 - still a very comfortable margin.
I suspect, as with most PBers commenting on the subject, I have no particular insight into the minds of the Tory members who will be choosing their next party leader. IIRC, the polling shows a greater support for Theresa May amongst this group? - that could change over the course of the hustings, however, based on Leadsom’s less than inspiring start so far, I do not expect to see much change.
More polling by reputable BPC companies is needed imho, I hope there are plenty to come.
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
But if what you are doing is trying to minimise the chances of a Leadsom PM, calling those you are seeking to persuade 'terminally stupid' is counter-productive - as pretty much the whole Remain campaign demonstrated. Engagement, charm and persuasion can change minds; abuse does not.
I was really cross at those Tories that voted for Jez, they'd have been screaming blue murder if Labour supporters had interfered with a Tory leadership contest.
Rightly so and I wholly agree with you.
This though is the problem - the rule change was an attempt to re-create a mass party movement. I mean, £3 isn't a huge amount and I suspect those of us who are members of parties are and have paid a great deal more.
Getting 100,000 people to pay £3 each and you can claim you are a mass party but if 30 people give £10,000 each it's seen in very different terms. Political parties aren't like the National Trust or a charity - it's not an unreasonable premise to expect new members to share the core beliefs of the party yet I assume there's no vetting process.
And yet, when Parties are bankrolled by a very few - whether they be Unions or hedge funds or whatever, it drives the disconnection between the leadership who know they have to stay on good terms with the money and the members who don't see it that way.
I spent too much time delivering leaflets, knocking on doors and attending business meetings when all I wanted was a good old political discussion. It became a chore and it was my free time so I stepped back. PB in a sense is the political discussion I never had as an activist and in its early days was an incredibly good place where there was room for compromise and people were prepared to consider ideas beyond their comfort zones.
I think 2007-8 changed that - I'm not quite sure how or why. I think people got frightened and defensive and retreated back to what they knew and understood.
Whilst I would prefer May to Leadsom, I'd be wary of taking polling too seriously given recent performances from the pollsters. I don't envy them their task, but they've not been quite as accurate as they might like recently.
True, and it's also the case that a snapshot two months out is not a prediction for the final result. All the same, pollsters have rarely done worse than be more than about five or six points out for any one party or preference. At worst, that would bring a 2:1 lead for May down to 3:2 - still a very comfortable margin.
YouGov's record with this type of election is pretty damned excellent too. I would like to see a new poll however, conducted after the final two were known.
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I made a similar point yesterday regarding the Feldman Review within the Tory Party. It positioned itself as helping associations to share expertise/resources et al. I thought this was a good idea and filled in his various surveys.
His final report actually looked an awful lot like CCHQ trying to power grab instead. My CCP is actively asking members not to use the CCHQ system, but renew directly with them. I obliged. It may not be as efficient or whatever, but it does mean they retain their independence. I'm very happy to share - but being merged with others is a no no.
One of the items on Ms Leadsom's campaign leak (photo from train passenger) was decentralisation of power within the Conservative Party. Be interesting to see if that has legs.
Leadsom is unfit to become PM because she sent a text to somebody.
Fuck me, this is what the conservative party and its supporters have sunk to.
Risible.
What is risible is your post.
It's part of a pattern of behaviour that the Conservative electorate will take into account among many other factors in determining their choice.
I'm flattered that you think the Conservative electorate will consider my views before choosing, its far more important than what either candidate will actually DO when elected. I couldn't care less who wins, I consider neither to be suitable for entirely different reasons.
Beyond a few tribal saddos on here the nation is looking on and shaking its head at the choice we face and what criteria is being used.
Womb efficiency and text messaging seem of paramount importance.
The Tory Party has taken leave of its senses again (and as far as Labour is concerned...)
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I made a similar point yesterday regarding the Feldman Review within the Tory Party. It positioned itself as helping associations to share expertise/resources et al. I thought this was a good idea and filled in his various surveys.
His final report actually looked an awful lot like CCHQ trying to power grab instead. My CCP is actively asking members not to use the CCHQ system, but renew directly with them. I obliged. It may not be as efficient or whatever, but it does mean they retain their independence. I'm very happy to share - but being merged with others is a no no.
One of the items on Ms Leadsom's campaign leak (photo from train passenger) was decentralisation of power within the Conservative Party. Be interesting to see if that has legs.
How interesting, I missed that.
This is my point, lets hear what these people would DO, is it really too much to ask?
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I was really cross at those Tories that voted for Jez, they'd have been screaming blue murder if Labour supporters had interfered with a Tory leadership contest.
Indeed. It was a grossly uncivic act of unmitigated dishonour. Those that did do should hang their heads in shame.
Wouldn't voting in the Labour leadership election as a Conservative (Or any other) party member be grounds for dismissal from the party ?
Of course if one is a member of no political party then I think they are free (As I was at the time) to vote how they like ! (1. Kendall 2. Jezza) for me ! Or do we want laws on windows into people's souls...
I won't be voting this time, as I am a member of another political party now.
Jack W. She probably didn't want to get drawn into May's invitation to sign up to her "clean campaign pledge".
Perhaps so.
Presently the Tory contest is a huge mismatch. It's almost as if Team Leadsom were completely unprepared to run a full time, hands on campaign. Maybe there were?
The result is that May is streets ahead without drawing breath while Team Leadsom is floundering about explaining and apologizing.
May will win, it is really a question of her margin of victory. However then her problems start, wealthy financier Aaron Banks who bankrolled Leave.EU had an interview in the Sunday Times yesterday in which he said he was backing Leadsom and if she won UKIP would effectively fold and most of its support switch to the Tories. However he warned he saw May as a Europhile and if she won UKIP would be back ' on steroids' and he would be prepared to invest significant further sums from his £250 million fortune into its campaign
Though as UKIP's best strategy at the moment is attacking in Labour heartlands against a disconnected and fractured local establishment, that should not necessarily be seen as a negative among Conservatives.
But if what you are doing is trying to minimise the chances of a Leadsom PM, calling those you are seeking to persuade 'terminally stupid' is counter-productive - as pretty much the whole Remain campaign demonstrated. Engagement, charm and persuasion can change minds; abuse does not.
Pointing out that Leadbangers are terminally stupid will make more of them vote for her...
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with David, only the terminally stupid or those who don't have the best interests of the party at heart will vote Leadsom.
That's an intriguing comment. Ignoring the pathetic jibe, we come down to "those don't have the best interests of the Party at heart" and that is worthy of some comment.
Did Labour supporters think that when they voted for Corbyn or was Corbyn more reflective of the Party they wanted to be in and the policies they wanted to follow. If, for a Conservative, it's only about power and office, what's the point ?
There are usually two sorts of people in political parties - those who want to get into power to do things but aren't really sure what and those who want to debate and argue and for whom the electoral process is a trifle.
It's not, I think, about anger or populism but a re-defining of politics away from the simple acquisition and maintenance of power. It's a response, I think, to increasingly centralised and authoritarian structures in which the average member doesn't have a lot of say.
May is the better qualified candidate but Leadsom may be closer to the heartbeat of the membership in terms of the EU and possibly other issues. Labour have paid for the disconnection between those in power and the membership and so have the LDs. It could be the turn of the Conservatives.
I was really cross at those Tories that voted for Jez, they'd have been screaming blue murder if Labour supporters had interfered with a Tory leadership contest.
Indeed. It was a grossly uncivic act of unmitigated dishonour. Those that did do should hang their heads in shame.
Wouldn't voting in the Labour leadership election as a Conservative (Or any other) party member be grounds for dismissal from the party ?
Of course if one is a member of no political party then I think they are free (As I was at the time) to vote how they like ! (1. Kendall 2. Jezza) for me !
I won't be voting this time, as I am a member of another political party now.
You're a LD now?
It may be my imagination, but PB seems to have many more posters who've joined/rejoined a political party in the last year. And quite a few as a result of the referendum.
Another stellar effort from mr herdson, acknowledging how Leadsom can win but seeing the path to that out one as very unlikely. We shall see. May starts from a strong position but is not inspiring so could go backwards if Leadson gets her act together.
With the derision we pour, not without cause, on our political leaders, it will be interesting to see if Mays vast experience at the top does indeed show up an amateurish operation from Leadsom, and how out of depth someone can be. Also interesting to see how fast Leadsom can pick things up - even Corbyn has learned to modulate himself a bit, or just keep quiet every now and the, he's learned a few things.
That Leadsom was very bruised by the media assault and fessed up to it, was rather refreshing.
After she called them liars, then apologised for something 'she didn't say'?
A. Yes. I know Teresa doesn't have X and that must make her sad. I don't want this to be about Andrea has X and Teresa doesn't because that would be really horrible. BUT I DO HAVE X AND SHE DOESN'T which gives me a (greater) stake in the future.
Spot on - in my view it was a mixture of 70% strategy and 30% stupidity but so badly executed as to fall down badly on both sides.
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
I think Mr Gove had been planning that for a long time.
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
Pfft. A few months ago people who didn't like Dave were "terminally stupid", then it moved on to people who wanted to Leave were "terminally stupid", and now anyone who doesn't think Mrs May is the second coming is "terminally stupid" with such intellectual self-confidence (not to mention suppleness) you should stand for office
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Perhaps it also just indicates a fear of confrontation - people who do important things by text have basically bottled fronting up and speaking directly - it's easier for them. As the days go by it just seems to me more and more cruel that Leadsom's MP supporters are allowing her to carry on to try and secure a role that she is clearly not suited for either temperamentally or intellectually.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible. It makes her sound like somebody who attended a course on negotiation and didn't understand it. That alone should disqualify her in the eyes of the membership
There's little doubt that Team Leadsom represent a continuing and significant strand in the Conservative Party - Continuity IDS has legs !! and have found themselves on the final ballot, probably at the outset to the surprise of many concerned.
However the Conservatives are where they are. An experienced and safe pair of hands against a more radical but untested usurper. If the Tories were electing LotO then Leadsom would enjoy far greater support but the post on offer in a few short weeks is Prime Minister. Accordingly IMO May is the only viable candidate. Not so much a choice than a necessity in the difficult times ahead.
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
Pfft. A few months ago people who didn't like Dave were "terminally stupid", then it moved on to people who wanted to Leave were "terminally stupid", and now anyone who doesn't think Mrs May is the second coming is "terminally stupid" with such intellectual self-confidence (not to mention suppleness) you should stand for office
I'd make a terrible politician, I'm commendably/recklessly honest, which would get me into trouble, I'd be like the Yorkshire Boris Johnson, only with a better knowledge of classical history.
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
A dispiriting contest - one lightweight, and one very lightweight candidate it seems. The run off should have been Boris vs Gove but they went down in their 'pact' of mutual self-destruction. Only bright spot is that Labour are in an even worse state.
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Still banging on about the £350m Scott?
Well, if IDS will bring it up:
Leading Brexit campaigner Iain Duncan Smith has distanced himself from a pledge by the official leave campaign to spend £350m “sent to the EU every week” on the NHS, saying he had never made the claim.
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
Pfft. A few months ago people who didn't like Dave were "terminally stupid", then it moved on to people who wanted to Leave were "terminally stupid", and now anyone who doesn't think Mrs May is the second coming is "terminally stupid" with such intellectual self-confidence (not to mention suppleness) you should stand for office
I'm enjoying this 'Grayling could be Home Sec' conversion by those who relentlessly rubbished him for years as dangerous/stupid/useless - right up to the day he backed May.
A dispiriting contest - one lightweight, and one very lightweight candidate it seems. The run off should have been Boris vs Gove but they went down in their 'pact' of mutual self-destruction. Only bright spot is that Labour are in an even worse state.
Yes the longest serving Home Secretary in 100 year is a lightweight. Seriously think before you post!
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
And now you're changing the subject. Can I assume you accept the £350 figure as accurate?
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Still banging on about the £350m Scott?
Most of the public understand the difference between a campaign group and the government, despite years on this site it seems to have escaped Scott and one or two others. Not that we believe that, they just dont have any other drum bang at the moment, what with having lost and all
This will be doubly the case with a remain supporter as PM, and the likelihood that neither of the key politicians involved in the Leave campaign are in office, and certainly not relevant office. The likelihood of more than 1% of the public giving a crap by the next election is basically zero.
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
How about we don't leave the EU but just say we did? (We can argue over whether or not it's the truth for ages. Of course, experts would be able to say we're still in, but that's not a real worry)
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Tories getting orgasms from attacking the police? Thatcher would have backed them to the hilt.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
Boris finally listened to the advice he's been told for years
'When you're doing a bad thing, pull out before it causes real problems'
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
And now you're changing the subject. Can I assume you accept the £350 figure as accurate?
No. I don't accept "We send £350 million to the EU every week, let's spend it on the NHS instead" as being anything other than deliberately misleading and mendacious. It is amusing watching the arguments defending it ("It depends what the meaning of "is" is")
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Tories getting orgasms from attacking the police? Thatcher would have backed them to the hilt.
She attacked the Federation, and defended the police.
A dispiriting contest - one lightweight, and one very lightweight candidate it seems. The run off should have been Boris vs Gove but they went down in their 'pact' of mutual self-destruction. Only bright spot is that Labour are in an even worse state.
Yes the longest serving Home Secretary in 100 year is a lightweight. Seriously think before you post!
The way you get to be the longest serving Home Secretary in 100 years in work for a PM that doesn't do reshuffles and don't noticeably screw anything up. The obvious way to not screw anything up, is not to do anything significant.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
I think Gove had come to the conclusion that Boris was unable to present a coherent or consistent Brexit argument and that he would therefore lose to a true Brexiteer.
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
Pfft. A few months ago people who didn't like Dave were "terminally stupid", then it moved on to people who wanted to Leave were "terminally stupid", and now anyone who doesn't think Mrs May is the second coming is "terminally stupid" with such intellectual self-confidence (not to mention suppleness) you should stand for office
I'm enjoying this 'Grayling could be Home Sec' conversion by those who relentlessly rubbished him for years as dangerous/stupid/useless - right up to the day he backed May.
Until recently, the consensus here was that Grayling could hardly tie his own shoelaces.
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
And now you're changing the subject. Can I assume you accept the £350 figure as accurate?
No. I don't accept "We send £350 million to the EU every week, let's spend it on the NHS instead" as being anything other than deliberately misleading and mendacious. It is amusing watching the arguments defending it ("It depends what the meaning of "is" is")
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Tories getting orgasms from attacking the police? Thatcher would have backed them to the hilt.
She attacked the Federation, and defended the police.
What happened as a result of her speech? I can't recall anything off the top of my head.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
Boris finally listened to the advice he's been told for years
'When you're doing a bad thing, pull out before it causes real problems'
*Innocent Face*
Has Boris actually been seen in public since scuttling off after what was supposed to be the launch of his Prime Ministerial campaign?
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
And now you're changing the subject. Can I assume you accept the £350 figure as accurate?
No. I don't accept "We send £350 million to the EU every week, let's spend it on the NHS instead" as being anything other than deliberately misleading and mendacious. It is amusing watching the arguments defending it ("It depends what the meaning of "is" is")
What part of "They are a pressure group not a government" do you not understand? You assume the voter is terminally stupid and that's why you lost.
The hoary £350 million is a matter of fact. The other fact that we get a proportion back in grants to the regions and the farmers is well known, or do you suppose the voters don't understand joined up writing or add-ons? That's the insult, and then you wonder why they vote Leave?
It's not stupidity - a lot is anger at Remain's arrogance .
It's over, we are leaving.
Except that the £350 million is NOT true. Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week. Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
It is accurate. You're quibbling over gross and net.
Please explain how we can spend the gross on the NHS as promised?
And now you're changing the subject. Can I assume you accept the £350 figure as accurate?
Most honest people would either:
a. net off the two; or
b. indicate the payment flows either way.
The c. option favoured by leave is/was utterly dishonest.
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Tories getting orgasms from attacking the police? Thatcher would have backed them to the hilt.
She attacked the Federation, and defended the police.
What happened as a result of her speech? I can't recall anything off the top of my head.
Poliicing has been cut back. In my town there’s a debate over more CCTV vs vigilante patrols.
The key factor in why I backed Ms May for Tory leader is that she has had her Thatcher Moment,no-one else has.In her case,it was when she totally humiliated the coppers' union and had the temerity to do it on their own manor,at the Police Fed conference.For Tories,this is orgasmic stuff and hits that sweet spot that makes a Tory a Tory.I watched the speech at the time and it made me shiver.It's worth a look.That's why I have always believed she will win.
Tories getting orgasms from attacking the police? Thatcher would have backed them to the hilt.
She had a good record of attacking vested interests in a lot more areas than just bastions of the left like the unions; the deregulation of the clubby investment banking world being one.
In any case, the police and the Police Fed are rather different beasts to what they were in Thatcher's day. That they colluded in bringing down a cabinet minister would have given her pause for thought as to whose side they were on (their own).
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Still banging on about the £350m Scott?
Most of the public understand the difference between a campaign group and the government, despite years on this site it seems to have escaped Scott and one or two others. Not that we believe that, they just dont have any other drum bang at the moment, what with having lost and all
This will be doubly the case with a remain supporter as PM, and the likelihood that neither of the key politicians involved in the Leave campaign are in office, and certainly not relevant office. The likelihood of more than 1% of the public giving a crap by the next election is basically zero.
I suspect we'll still be hearing about the £350m claim from bitter Remainers in 20 years...
No. I don't accept "We send £350 million to the EU every week, let's spend it on the NHS instead" as being anything other than deliberately misleading and mendacious. It is amusing watching the arguments defending it ("It depends what the meaning of "is" is")
Would you care to compare it in terms of levels of misleadingness and mendaciousness to say refugee camps in Kent, or causing conflict in Europe, or better still causing the end of western civilisation. If you think the £350m was a bit dodgy, perhaps you would like to contrast it with the £4300 from Remain, and particularly on the use of the otherwise unknown statistic GDP per household, taking special care to use 2030 GDP projections and 2015 household numbers and discounting the possibility that having left the EU we might do a trade deal with anyone else (hint: Australia, NZ, Canada and several other countries are asking for a trade deal and we haven't even left yet).
Mr. Eagles, please re-attach your trousers. You're coming across as a bigger fanboy than Kylo Ren.
It's not heat. It's daftness from those making those comments. We had this conversation when I criticised Cameron for his approach in the referendum. You said he was ruthless, playing to win etc. Calling your adversaries (especially those you wish to become allies immediately after the vote) 'terminally stupid' is just not smart.
I view Leadsom/ContinuityIDS as a virus that needs to be repelled. The future of the country is at stake. By any necessary means to defeat her is acceptable.
Pfft. A few months ago people who didn't like Dave were "terminally stupid", then it moved on to people who wanted to Leave were "terminally stupid", and now anyone who doesn't think Mrs May is the second coming is "terminally stupid" with such intellectual self-confidence (not to mention suppleness) you should stand for office
I'm enjoying this 'Grayling could be Home Sec' conversion by those who relentlessly rubbished him for years as dangerous/stupid/useless - right up to the day he backed May.
Until recently, the consensus here was that Grayling could hardly tie his own shoelaces.
Indeed. Then I found out he read History at Cambridge. Sound fellow.
It says a lot about his tenure as Justice Secretary that Michael Gove's first six months in that job was undoing most of what Grayling had done.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
I think Gove had come to the conclusion that Boris was unable to present a coherent or consistent Brexit argument and that he would therefore lose to a true Brexiteer.
Or Gove came to the conclusion that Boris couldn't be trusted to go through with Brexit.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
Boris finally listened to the advice he's been told for years
'When you're doing a bad thing, pull out before it causes real problems'
*Innocent Face*
Has Boris actually been seen in public since scuttling off after what was supposed to be the launch of his Prime Ministerial campaign?
He's out campaigning for Leadsom
The former Mayor of London joined her at a charity event in her Northampton constituency last night to celebrate her meteoric rise that saw her knock out Michael Gove in the final vote of Tory MPs.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
I would be astonished if neither wrote their memoirs / autobiography - though I'd be less than astonished if their accounts of that incident tallied entirely.
I'd also expect both books to be essential and entertaining reading.
The Tory MPs that support Leadsom, and the Tory members who'll vote for her, are foolish. Theresa May is more or less an experienced version of Leadsom and anyone in the Tory party should think themselves lucky to find such a Dry leader who actually has some general support outside the party.
As a sane member of the human race I'd be sad if Leadsom became PM (The very thought!!) but happy for the other political parties that the Tory membership had done some of their work for them.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
Boris finally listened to the advice he's been told for years
'When you're doing a bad thing, pull out before it causes real problems'
*Innocent Face*
Has Boris actually been seen in public since scuttling off after what was supposed to be the launch of his Prime Ministerial campaign?
Good question, but then our PM spends more time watching tennis than working.
Call me old fashioned but I'd say it's a bit rude - a quick phone call or note would have been politer - at least it's done so we can get onto weightier matters.
Whoever is running Leadsom's media campaign deserves a medal from Team May. Texting an apology is yet another misstep. An impersonal response to a very personal situation. Leadsom should have spoken directly by phone to May or met her in private.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible.
That then triggered Gove....who had to take Johnson down to stand.....I'm not sure if this is the 'tragedy' or 'farce' version of history......
Yes. I think this was the real reason Gove stood. Boris failed to square Andrea so Andrea decided to stand. Gove thought he was better than both of them and couldn't stomach the idea of Andrea winning so he decided to mortally wound Boris and stand himself.
I don't think that makes sense. Between Andrea and Boris the Brexit candidate would of course have been Boris.
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
I think Gove had come to the conclusion that Boris was unable to present a coherent or consistent Brexit argument and that he would therefore lose to a true Brexiteer.
Still don't know why Boris felt he had to pull out. Gove basically just said what everyone already knew for years that Boris was a bit of a shambolic operator. What next - bears excrete in the woods? Yet Boris seems to have gone 'The game's up!' and thrown in the towel immediately.
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
Still banging on about the £350m Scott?
Most of the public understand the difference between a campaign group and the government, despite years on this site it seems to have escaped Scott and one or two others. Not that we believe that, they just dont have any other drum bang at the moment, what with having lost and all
This will be doubly the case with a remain supporter as PM, and the likelihood that neither of the key politicians involved in the Leave campaign are in office, and certainly not relevant office. The likelihood of more than 1% of the public giving a crap by the next election is basically zero.
I suspect we'll still be hearing about the £350m claim from bitter Remainers in 20 years...
Well, from Scott and a couple of others that live in their mother's basement on here anyway, most people have lives to live and will have moved on to more fertile lines of argument well before the next election. The idea more than a handful of voters will care by 2020 is laughable.
Comments
"The Times are now admitting that on unreleased audio, @AndreaLeadsom says that motherhood has no bearing on Tory leadership contest."
twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/752145161300434944
But I agree with you that her response to the hoopla has been poor.
Normally that would have made me despair, but he's been impressive in recent months.
Fuck me, this is what the conservative party and its supporters have sunk to.
Risible.
His final report actually looked an awful lot like CCHQ trying to power grab instead. My CCP is actively asking members not to use the CCHQ system, but renew directly with them. I obliged. It may not be as efficient or whatever, but it does mean they retain their independence. I'm very happy to share - but being merged with others is a no no.
Like most Leadsomites you're reduced to making stuff up
If you're looking for risible look in the mirror.
It's part of a pattern of behaviour that the Conservative electorate will take into account among many other factors in determining their choice.
The force works in mysterious ways in the Labour party
Oh hang on, I'm being thick - Diane is Princess Leia and in the rebel alliance.. doh
The legal side is another matter of course.
Beyond a few tribal saddos on here the nation is looking on and shaking its head at the choice we face and what criteria is being used.
Womb efficiency and text messaging seem of paramount importance.
For my money I see little value in the odds. May is the steady hand option with more ' politics experience' but Leadsom being the brexit candidate from outside the political spectrum with more 'business experience' means she is worth a second look. Leadsom is the better TV debate performer so I expect her stock to rise at least some point during the campaign if she can swerve gaffes.
May's weak point in the Tory members eyes is that on a subject that caused such polarisation of opinions and was the political talking point of the year why did May not have any strong convictions? This is a weakness that I'm sure Leadsom camp can exploit. I'd probably agree with Mike and say we are around the 75/25 chance as things stand.
Her vanity at declaring herself a candidate because Boris didn't do something according to her own silly deadline is incredible. It makes her sound like somebody who attended a course on negotiation and didn't understand it. That alone should disqualify her in the eyes of the membership
More polling by reputable BPC companies is needed imho, I hope there are plenty to come.
In the venn diagram, they tend also to be overlapping with those quite keen on this Leadsom lady.
This though is the problem - the rule change was an attempt to re-create a mass party movement. I mean, £3 isn't a huge amount and I suspect those of us who are members of parties are and have paid a great deal more.
Getting 100,000 people to pay £3 each and you can claim you are a mass party but if 30 people give £10,000 each it's seen in very different terms. Political parties aren't like the National Trust or a charity - it's not an unreasonable premise to expect new members to share the core beliefs of the party yet I assume there's no vetting process.
And yet, when Parties are bankrolled by a very few - whether they be Unions or hedge funds or whatever, it drives the disconnection between the leadership who know they have to stay on good terms with the money and the members who don't see it that way.
I spent too much time delivering leaflets, knocking on doors and attending business meetings when all I wanted was a good old political discussion. It became a chore and it was my free time so I stepped back. PB in a sense is the political discussion I never had as an activist and in its early days was an incredibly good place where there was room for compromise and people were prepared to consider ideas beyond their comfort zones.
I think 2007-8 changed that - I'm not quite sure how or why. I think people got frightened and defensive and retreated back to what they knew and understood.
Of course if one is a member of no political party then I think they are free (As I was at the time) to vote how they like ! (1. Kendall 2. Jezza) for me !
Or do we want laws on windows into people's souls...
I won't be voting this time, as I am a member of another political party now.
Presently the Tory contest is a huge mismatch. It's almost as if Team Leadsom were completely unprepared to run a full time, hands on campaign. Maybe there were?
The result is that May is streets ahead without drawing breath while Team Leadsom is floundering about explaining and apologizing.
Q.E.D.
It may be my imagination, but PB seems to have many more posters who've joined/rejoined a political party in the last year. And quite a few as a result of the referendum.
Even before the spend in the UK, we have the famous rebate, worth about £100 million per week.
Whenever Leavers defend the figure, they always seem to omit the rebate in order to imply that the figure was accurate.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-36574590
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmPNwf03qV0
I do hope the Conservative leadership campaign moves on to areas of policy rather than this 'children' mush.
Even the people who fronted "£350m for the NHS" have admitted it isn't accurate, because of course they can't answer the question "Well, when do we get it then?"
However the Conservatives are where they are. An experienced and safe pair of hands against a more radical but untested usurper. If the Tories were electing LotO then Leadsom would enjoy far greater support but the post on offer in a few short weeks is Prime Minister. Accordingly IMO May is the only viable candidate. Not so much a choice than a necessity in the difficult times ahead.
Plus I don't fancy the pay cut either.
https://twitter.com/michaelpdeacon/status/747000584226607104
Leading Brexit campaigner Iain Duncan Smith has distanced himself from a pledge by the official leave campaign to spend £350m “sent to the EU every week” on the NHS, saying he had never made the claim.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/eu-referendum-brexit-vote-leave-iain-duncan-smith-nhs
I still don't think any of us really know's what happened between Gove and Boris and maybe we never will...
This will be doubly the case with a remain supporter as PM, and the likelihood that neither of the key politicians involved in the Leave campaign are in office, and certainly not relevant office. The likelihood of more than 1% of the public giving a crap by the next election is basically zero.
(We can argue over whether or not it's the truth for ages. Of course, experts would be able to say we're still in, but that's not a real worry)
'When you're doing a bad thing, pull out before it causes real problems'
*Innocent Face*
I don't accept "We send £350 million to the EU every week, let's spend it on the NHS instead" as being anything other than deliberately misleading and mendacious.
It is amusing watching the arguments defending it ("It depends what the meaning of "is" is")
a. net off the two; or
b. indicate the payment flows either way.
The c. option favoured by leave is/was utterly dishonest.
In any case, the police and the Police Fed are rather different beasts to what they were in Thatcher's day. That they colluded in bringing down a cabinet minister would have given her pause for thought as to whose side they were on (their own).
It says a lot about his tenure as Justice Secretary that Michael Gove's first six months in that job was undoing most of what Grayling had done.
The former Mayor of London joined her at a charity event in her Northampton constituency last night to celebrate her meteoric rise that saw her knock out Michael Gove in the final vote of Tory MPs.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3680577/Boris-bangs-drum-fellow-Brexit-champion-Andrea-Leadsom-battle-Number-10-says-confident-optimistic-approach-make-great-PM.html#ixzz4E5Wgxrdc
I'd also expect both books to be essential and entertaining reading.
As a sane member of the human race I'd be sad if Leadsom became PM (The very thought!!) but happy for the other political parties that the Tory membership had done some of their work for them.
I really doubt it helps Leadsom at this stage for her supporters to make things up.