I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
If Labour had a Tony Blair figure in the offing that would be possible. But, of course, they don't.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
And if May hadn't decided to believe the polls they'd be in power now, and would be for four more years. Might be a woman's privilege to change her mind but that doesn't mean it will always work out well!
That's very disappointing news, if so. I very much hope it's not her being a mother of a young son that is stopping her. We really need women to be able to overcome this so we can get young mums into leadership positions.
No it would not. We elect MPs not PMs. Anyone who can command a majority in Parliament is fit and suitable to be a PM as that is ultimately the decision of the MPs not the public.
An unexpected defence from you of the parliamentary democracy that brought us our EU membership in the first place. I suppose you'd be perfectly happy with a Remain majority revoking Article 50 and be sanguine about overturning their actions in the next parliament after they were turfed out?
Yes. That would be way our system works. I would of course then campaign along with millions of others to make sure those who did so lost their seats. I would also want to ensure that no party was able to get into power without committing to reactivating Article 50 on the basis of the original referendum with no further referendum necessary.
If Parliament can overturn a referendum before it has even been invoked then Parliament can also use that referendum as the basis for action without further reference to the electorate.
The problem you have is that in the end no matter what you might want, we will win. The reason is not because the British position will change but because the EU position will continue to change until it reaches a point where it is no longer acceptable, not just to a small majority of the British electorate but to large one. That is why I am sanguine about what happens. In the end it is the EU that will force us out either directly or by default. Nothing you can do will stop that.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
If they abandon the responsibility of governing, the same might apply.
May's disastrous election ploy has put them in an impossible bind. The only possible soution is to get on with the business of governing - and I think that is beyond the shell shocked occupant of No.10.
Having just caught up with Marr I have to say I was surprised to see, contrary to press and social media reports, how far Hammond is in fact wedded to the Leave camp. Leavers can seemingly rest assured the potential coup against May isn't motivated by an underlying desire to sink Brexit. The interesting thing is if there is a leadership election will Tory MP's now ensure Boris doesn't make the final two in the reasonably certain knowledge Brexit is safe.
That's because most Conservatives are still in denial about Brexit. Philip Hammond appears to be one of the more realistic ones. If he's going long on the Leave rhetoric, it just indicates he is hungry for the job of PM and is happy to tell his party what he thinks they want to hear.
Then he can come back and say its impossible and he did his best.
I think that's likely. If Hammond doesn't do a U turn other potential leaders won't do one either. We have to trust his sense of what is possible trumps being honest with his party.
Hmm. Just gone to Hammond's quotes. He seems pretty definite. No SM, no CU. I am not so sure now that Hammond is a safe pair of hands. The Brexit clusterfuck goes up another gear.
That's very disappointing news, if so. I very much hope it's not her being a mother of a young son that is stopping her. We really need women to be able to overcome this so we can get young mums into leadership positions.
Do we ? (The young bit, not the mum bit.)
It's quite possible she's looked at the example of William Hague, who became leader at just about her age, and decided it's too early.
Right now, it's all "Theresa May is crap". A risk for the Tories is that if they replace her with somebody else who also turns out to be crap, that will turn into "The Tories are crap", which will be much more damaging long term. And between having a bad field of candidates to choose from, and the inevitability that whatever Brexit deal we choose will piss off more people than it pleases, the next leader's chances aren't great.
If Hammond is such a great choice why did he not stand a year ago when he was foreign secretary? Like May i do not think he is very good on tv.If May stood down tomorrow Damian Green 25/1 would take over temporarily and that gives him an edge over rivals. Green is nothing special but 25/1 is massive given the context. The best Tory I know on tv is Esther Mcvie who was a junior minister in the Coalition then lost her seat in 2015 but has just got a seat in the new parliament.The experience of being out of parliament will have been good for her What the Tories should be looking for longterm is someone to take on the crypto -communists who now control the education system the way Thatcher took on the crypto-communists who controlled the trade unions in her day. Tories need to ask how did 12 million people including the majority of students end up voting for someone like Corbyn and if the reason is not the left wing education system then what is it?
In all fairness, I'm inclined to think the youth vote was down to massive amounts of freebies being promised by Labour, combined with a bit of anger about the housing market, rather than indoctrination, though.
It would be an even greater insult to democracy for the party that lost the election to become the government. The only way that Labour should come to power is through the ballot box like any other party, and that means winning outright or winning a plurality.
If Hammond is such a great choice why did he not stand a year ago when he was foreign secretary? Like May i do not think he is very good on tv.If May stood down tomorrow Damian Green 25/1 would take over temporarily and that gives him an edge over rivals. Green is nothing special but 25/1 is massive given the context. The best Tory I know on tv is Esther Mcvie who was a junior minister in the Coalition then lost her seat in 2015 but has just got a seat in the new parliament.The experience of being out of parliament will have been good for her What the Tories should be looking for longterm is someone to take on the crypto -communists who now control the education system the way Thatcher took on the crypto-communists who controlled the trade unions in her day. Tories need to ask how did 12 million people including the majority of students end up voting for someone like Corbyn and if the reason is not the left wing education system then what is it?
Idiot.
Young people are on the rotten end of the current economic bargain and want change. That much is obvious. Have you actually spoken to any younger voters recently?
They've had a whopping con put upon them that 40% of them going to university is "a good thing". In Blair's day before this bananas expansion I recall it being put about that there was a £400k lifetime pay premium to having a degree so, the (then smaller) tution fees were still a good deal. Shame nobody seemed to think the law of supply and demand would still apply if you increased the number of graduates in a confetti paper qualifications inflationary war. Still less that they'd then be competing in some cases with the cream of Eastern Europe willing to do jobs for even less.
Add in ultra low interest rates spiralling house prices up and 20% deposits and they are royally screwed compared to us (relative) oldies.
What would I do? Something like -
Stop sending so many to university (half?), subsidise those that do more, build a lot more houses pdq though it will ruffle some nimby feathers, restrict low skilled immigration a tad, oh and put up interest rates to drop house prices. Bit of negative equity for a few might help a lot more youngsters (and oldies saving for a pension).
And tell a few more 18 year olds to "do the bloody maths" as to whether it's really worth going to university? Are you ever really going to get approx £50k back in living expenses, tuition fees, and on top of that opportunity costs for foregone years working?
Mr. Owl, agree entirely we should build some more houses.
New towns, set up with an eye to future expansion, could be a good way to go, instead of trying to jam in more houses on older settlements where the infrastructure struggles to cope and undeveloped land might well be on flood plains.
Right now, it's all "Theresa May is crap". A risk for the Tories is that if they replace her with somebody else who also turns out to be crap, that will turn into "The Tories are crap", which will be much more damaging long term. And between having a bad field of candidates to choose from, and the inevitability that whatever Brexit deal we choose will piss off more people than it pleases, the next leader's chances aren't great.
Good post, although I would say we're past the Tories are crap point. I say that as someone who votes Conservative on occasion. Their USP of being reliable, competent and careful of people's prosperity is utterly destroyed. They don't have the credibility to call out Corbyn as a risk to the country.
They've had a whopping con put upon them that 40% of them going to university is "a good thing". In Blair's day before this bananas expansion I recall it being put about that there was a £400k lifetime pay premium to having a degree so, the (then smaller) tution fees were still a good deal. Shame nobody seemed to think the law of supply and demand would still apply if you increased the number of graduates in a confetti paper qualifications inflationary war. Still less that they'd then be competing in some cases with the cream of Eastern Europe willing to do jobs for even less.
Add in ultra low interest rates spiralling house prices up and 20% deposits and they are royally screwed compared to us (relative) oldies.
What would I do? Something like -
Stop sending so many to university (half?), subsidise those that do more, build a lot more houses pdq though it will ruffle some nimby feathers, restrict low skilled immigration a tad, oh and put up interest rates to drop house prices. Bit of negative equity for a few might help a lot more youngsters (and oldies saving for a pension).
And tell a few more 18 year olds to "do the bloody maths" as to whether it's really worth going to university? Are you ever really going to get approx £50k back in living expenses, tuition fees, and on top of that opportunity costs for foregone years working?
Yep.
I would add that the state should support those university entrants doing subjects we need. If you are doing STEM subjects then you get your fees paid but only if you do a minimum amount of time working in the UK after you finish university (5 years seems to be the popular number at the moment). But I agree with all the rest of what you say except maybe the limit on immigration. There are better ways to handle that than simply stopping people coming in.
Right now, it's all "Theresa May is crap". A risk for the Tories is that if they replace her with somebody else who also turns out to be crap, that will turn into "The Tories are crap", which will be much more damaging long term. And between having a bad field of candidates to choose from, and the inevitability that whatever Brexit deal we choose will piss off more people than it pleases, the next leader's chances aren't great.
The risk if they don't replace her is that everyone will assume there isn't anyone better available... not a great message.
"Feminist that I am, I have of course wondered what a bloke in my position would do. It’s obvious. Most blokes in my shoes would run for leader like a shot. It’s true that my many years of encouraging women to have the confidence to go for that exciting new role have taught me that women often don’t go for things when they should. But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes and structures that impose a choice on someone, rather than allowing them to make up their own mind."
I agree that many women in her position would make the same call. I do not agree that that is the right call.
A stark and very real warning of what a Corbyn premiership would present. The literal theft of somebody's property because they happen to use it in a way that is perceived to be distasteful - ie - making profit from it, or keeping it vacant, or for whatever reason.
Where will this end? Illegal evictions of private property owners to make way for more 'deserving' demographics? It's only a step away from seizing other assets.
We are living in dangerous times.
Drama Queen
The Conservatives were very happy to requisition people's property in WW2 . They were also happy in the 1950s and 1960s to compulsory purchase it at below market value for major building projects . If you had a nice property but were unlucky to live in the middle of a large slum clearance area again your home was requisitioned with below market value compensation .
Have you got sources for that please?
Back n the 30's my home town collected for a hospital, and JUST before the wat t'committee puchesded a piece of land on which to build it. It was compulsory purchased ten years late for a school at about the price paid before the war; much less than it was then worth.
My maternal grandfather was a plumber who went in for what we would now call Buy to Let in the 1920s. When he died in 1942 the properties went to my grandmother. In the 1960s they were CP'd by the local council for a small office block. She was paid £50 per house.
Mr. Owl, agree entirely we should build some more houses.
New towns, set up with an eye to future expansion, could be a good way to go, instead of trying to jam in more houses on older settlements where the infrastructure struggles to cope and undeveloped land might well be on flood plains.
As the Grenfell Tower tragedy shows, the answer is not blindly to build more houses. We need to build communities, and that's much more involved and expensive.
Building houses to a good standard - and checking that they are - would be a good start. Builders are getting away with too much atm.
Unfortunately this is mostly incompatible with building cheap housing, which is what everyone seems to want.
We are definitely at the start of a realignment of politics, I fully agree with that.
But far from this being the end of Neo-Liberalism, I think it is its down, or at least rebirth.
The expression 'Neo-Liberalism' has been used as an insult by populists, in an attempt to keep us down, classical Liberals, or Libertarians, as those of us who understand the philosophy prefer to be called, is growing, and growing on a wide front, Macron's expected victory in France today is its best example yet.
I would highly recommend this video from the IEA about the their perception of the realignment.
The French have elected probably the free market government in the world. While we can't decide between the illiberal Mrs May or the Marxist Mr Corbyn.
It's difficult to resist the urge to make ad hominem arguments, but when sensible people make irrational choices because of how they feel (or how they think other people feel), and stick to them in the face of evidence of their mistake then we're in dire straights.
Well to make just such an ad hominem argument, that description fits you to a T. Your blind unquestioning support for EU integration is irrational and all the evidence is that it will lead to yet more strife and discord
oh and it is dire 'straits' (as in a narrow passage of water) not 'straights'
I can think of only three reasons why anyone should vote for Brexit.
1. It will make the country more prosperous
2. It will stop intrusive regulation. Lets call it the 'straight banana' factor
3. It will mean we can keep unwanted foreigners out.
The first one is plainly ridiculous. The world and his wife including almost every business leader and nearly every politician have said we'll be financially worse off.
The second is even more spurious. After a catastrophic fire and the worst financial crisis in our history no one but a complete idiot would be advocating loosening regulation and the EU's record on safety regulation is exemplary.
The third is puzzling. If we're worried about numbers why are we letting more people from outside the EU in than we're getting from inside?
My sense is that it's the last thrashing of Empire from a bunch of old union jack wavers and the young particularly find it sad and pathetic.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
If they abandon the responsibility of governing, the same might apply.
May's disastrous election ploy has put them in an impossible bind. The only possible soution is to get on with the business of governing - and I think that is beyond the shell shocked occupant of No.10.
The voters have determined that they want a Conservative government, but one which has to strike bargains with other parties.
So, that is what the Conservatives must give them.
"Feminist that I am, I have of course wondered what a bloke in my position would do. It’s obvious. Most blokes in my shoes would run for leader like a shot. It’s true that my many years of encouraging women to have the confidence to go for that exciting new role have taught me that women often don’t go for things when they should. But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes and structures that impose a choice on someone, rather than allowing them to make up their own mind."
I agree that many women in her position would make the same call. I do not agree that that is the right call.
No one holding a gun to her head. Her choice, her decision.
Given that young mothers are utterly crucial to our national future, it's a real problem how few we have in parliament
Sarah Olney is a young mother.. We need her back in parliament.
I genuinely can't remember - What did you say when Leadsom used the phrase "As a mother..." Was it "that's really great, I'm so glad she's a mother in Parliament"?
I remember the reaction of some of your fellow travellers though.
We are definitely at the start of a realignment of politics, I fully agree with that.
But far from this being the end of Neo-Liberalism, I think it is its down, or at least rebirth.
The expression 'Neo-Liberalism' has been used as an insult by populists, in an attempt to keep us down, classical Liberals, or Libertarians, as those of us who understand the philosophy prefer to be called, is growing, and growing on a wide front, Macron's expected victory in France today is its best example yet.
I would highly recommend this video from the IEA about the their perception of the realignment.
The French have elected probably the free market government in the world. While we can't decide between the illiberal Mrs May or the Marxist Mr Corbyn.
It's difficult to resist the urge to make ad hominem arguments, but when sensible people make irrational choices because of how they feel (or how they think other people feel), and stick to them in the face of evidence of their mistake then we're in dire straights.
Well to make just such an ad hominem argument, that description fits you to a T. Your blind unquestioning support for EU integration is irrational and all the evidence is that it will lead to yet more strife and discord
oh and it is dire 'straits' (as in a narrow passage of water) not 'straights'
I can think of only three reasons why anyone should vote for Brexit.
1. It will make the country more prosperous
2. It will stop intrusive regulation. Lets call it the 'straight banana' factor
3. It will mean we can keep unwanted foreigners out.
The first one is plainly ridiculous. The world and his wife including almost every business leader and nearly every politician have said we'll be financially worse off.
The second is even more spurious. After a catastrophic fire and the worst financial crisis in our history no one but a complete idiot would be advocating loosening regulation and the EU's record on safety regulation is exemplary.
The third is puzzling. If we're worried about numbers why are we letting more people from outside the EU in than we're getting from inside?
My sense is that it's the last thrashing of Empire from a bunch of old union jack wavers and the young particularly find it sad and pathetic.
People in their forties didn't vote for Brexit out of nostalgia for an Empire that had vanished before they were born.
They weighed the EU in the balance and found it wanting.
Mr. Jessop, I agree entirely. We need a thorough re-examination of building regulations.
Mr. Gin, yes and no. Mr. Smithson saw it in time to tweet about it and therefore have backed the others at 5 or 6 each.
So, he might be annoyed Swinson isn't standing, but in timing terms he's probably just made his book a lot greener.
It's not just about new regulations: it's about ensuring what is built meets the relevant codes we do have. As I've pointed out on here many times passim, many modern houses are not being well built.
Having standards that are not met, or are poorly met, is pointless.
Given that young mothers are utterly crucial to our national future, it's a real problem how few we have in parliament
Sarah Olney is a young mother.. We need her back in parliament.
I genuinely can't remember - What did you say when Leadsom used the phrase "As a mother..." Was it "that's really great, I'm so glad she's a mother in Parliament"?
I remember the reaction of some of your fellow travellers though.
Leadsom was saying that she was a mother and Theresa wasn't and that was why she should be PM.
Mr. One, I love that unwitting contradiction in just a few sentences: "But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes..."
I'm against stereotypes. Unless it's ambitious men
"Feminist that I am, I have of course wondered what a bloke in my position would do. It’s obvious. Most blokes in my shoes would run for leader like a shot. It’s true that my many years of encouraging women to have the confidence to go for that exciting new role have taught me that women often don’t go for things when they should. But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes and structures that impose a choice on someone, rather than allowing them to make up their own mind."
I agree that many women in her position would make the same call. I do not agree that that is the right call.
"But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t..."
Sounds as though I was right - she has looked at the example of William Hague and decided (I think correctly) that next time around makes more sense.
Given that young mothers are utterly crucial to our national future, it's a real problem how few we have in parliament
Sarah Olney is a young mother.. We need her back in parliament.
I genuinely can't remember - What did you say when Leadsom used the phrase "As a mother..." Was it "that's really great, I'm so glad she's a mother in Parliament"?
I remember the reaction of some of your fellow travellers though.
Leadsom was saying that she was a mother and Theresa wasn't and that was why she should be PM.
Mr. One, I love that unwitting contradiction in just a few sentences: "But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes..."
I'm against stereotypes. Unless it's ambitious men
Given that young mothers are utterly crucial to our national future, it's a real problem how few we have in parliament
Sarah Olney is a young mother.. We need her back in parliament.
I genuinely can't remember - What did you say when Leadsom used the phrase "As a mother..." Was it "that's really great, I'm so glad she's a mother in Parliament"?
I remember the reaction of some of your fellow travellers though.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
Oh no, if Corbyn McDonnell Labour get in now I expect a 20% Tory lead within 2 years much as New Democracy has over Syriza in Greece in the latest polls. I am not worried about the Tories if Corbyn and McDonnell get in, it is the country I am worried about
Mr. B, ha, reminds me of university. I was in a small room with a few girls (working, I hasten to add) when someone knocked on the door. I was nearest, it was a girl I didn't know, had the wrong room.
Anyway, they asked who it was and I said "Some bird." One of the ladies, not in a nasty or aggressive way, said she thought that was a bit sexist. But it always sounded just like the equivalent of 'some bloke' to me.
Swinson might well be wise not to run now. We'll see.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
If Labour had a Tony Blair figure in the offing that would be possible. But, of course, they don't.
Exactly, it is Tony Benn with a beard the Tories are facing not Tony Blair
They've had a whopping con put upon them that 40% of them going to university is "a good thing". In Blair's day before this bananas expansion I recall it being put about that there was a £400k lifetime pay premium to having a degree so, the (then smaller) tution fees were still a good deal. Shame nobody seemed to think the law of supply and demand would still apply if you increased the number of graduates in a confetti paper qualifications inflationary war. Still less that they'd then be competing in some cases with the cream of Eastern Europe willing to do jobs for even less.
Add in ultra low interest rates spiralling house prices up and 20% deposits and they are royally screwed compared to us (relative) oldies.
What would I do? Something like -
Stop sending so many to university (half?), subsidise those that do more, build a lot more houses pdq though it will ruffle some nimby feathers, restrict low skilled immigration a tad, oh and put up interest rates to drop house prices. Bit of negative equity for a few might help a lot more youngsters (and oldies saving for a pension).
And tell a few more 18 year olds to "do the bloody maths" as to whether it's really worth going to university? Are you ever really going to get approx £50k back in living expenses, tuition fees, and on top of that opportunity costs for foregone years working?
Yep.
I would add that the state should support those university entrants doing subjects we need. If you are doing STEM subjects then you get your fees paid but only if you do a minimum amount of time working in the UK after you finish university (5 years seems to be the popular number at the moment). But I agree with all the rest of what you say except maybe the limit on immigration. There are better ways to handle that than simply stopping people coming in.
If we needed more STEM graduates, the market would pay a huge salary premium but it doesn't because we don't because we've already lost too much industry and R&D to abroad.
Oh no, if Corbyn Labour get in now I expect a 20% Tory lead within 2 years much as New Democracy has over Syria in Greece in the latest polls. I am not worried about the Tories if Corbyn and McDonnell get in, it is the country I am worried about
No, this is your and your Party's mess, entirely of your own making and you need to own it and accept some humiliation.
Even now the old "how can we spin this as a positive for the Conservatives" is coming to the fore. Admit May got it wrong, admit mistakes were made and try a little humility.
Mr. B, ha, reminds me of university. I was in a small room with a few girls (working, I hasten to add) when someone knocked on the door. I was nearest, it was a girl I didn't know, had the wrong room.
Anyway, they asked who it was and I said "Some bird." One of the ladies, not in a nasty or aggressive way, said she thought that was a bit sexist. But it always sounded just like the equivalent of 'some bloke' to me.
Swinson might well be wise not to run now. We'll see.
It is good you have clarified they were working girls in your room.
The French have elected probably the free market government in the world. While we can't decide between the illiberal Mrs May or the Marxist Mr Corbyn.
It's difficult to resist the urge to make ad hominem arguments, but when sensible people make irrational choices because of how they feel (or how they think other people feel), and stick to them in the face of evidence of their mistake then we're in dire straights.
Well to make just such an ad hominem argument, that description fits you to a T. Your blind unquestioning support for EU integration is irrational and all the evidence is that it will lead to yet more strife and discord
oh and it is dire 'straits' (as in a narrow passage of water) not 'straights'
I can think of only three reasons why anyone should vote for Brexit.
1. It will make the country more prosperous
2. It will stop intrusive regulation. Lets call it the 'straight banana' factor
3. It will mean we can keep unwanted foreigners out.
The first one is plainly ridiculous. The world and his wife including almost every business leader and nearly every politician have said we'll be financially worse off.
The second is even more spurious. After a catastrophic fire and the worst financial crisis in our history no one but a complete idiot would be advocating loosening regulation and the EU's record on safety regulation is exemplary.
The third is puzzling. If we're worried about numbers why are we letting more people from outside the EU in than we're getting from inside?
My sense is that it's the last thrashing of Empire from a bunch of old union jack wavers and the young particularly find it sad and pathetic.
People in their forties didn't vote for Brexit out of nostalgia for an Empire that had vanished before they were born.
They weighed the EU in the balance and found it wanting.
It is more visceral than that. You can see it with English football supporters when their team plays the Germans 'Two World Wars and One World Cup' . The Sun often articulates it precisely
Mr. HYUFD, if Corbyn and his far left cabal get in, expect press regulation back on the table. The BBC and Sky are already utterly limp-wristed when reporting on their bullshittery, it'd be even worse if they were in power.
Oh no, if Corbyn Labour get in now I expect a 20% Tory lead within 2 years much as New Democracy has over Syria in Greece in the latest polls. I am not worried about the Tories if Corbyn and McDonnell get in, it is the country I am worried about
No, this is your and your Party's mess, entirely of your own making and you need to own it and accept some humiliation.
Even now the old "how can we spin this as a positive for the Conservatives" is coming to the fore. Admit May got it wrong, admit mistakes were made and try a little humility.
Why? Cameron actually campaigned for Remain which is more than can be said for Corbyn. I am not saying I want a Corbyn government but if we get a Corbyn government I expect it to be by far the worst government of my lifetime, the Tories would see a quicker revival than Lazarus
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
Mr. HYUFD, if Corbyn and his far left cabal get in, expect press regulation back on the table. The BBC and Sky are already utterly limp-wristed when reporting on their bullshittery, it'd be even worse if they were in power.
You could have the only media outlet allowed being the Morning Star but that will not stop people seeing the country going bankrupt, being run by the unions and Corbyn utterly crushed by the EU
In all fairness, I'm inclined to think the youth vote was down to massive amounts of freebies being promised by Labour, combined with a bit of anger about the housing market, rather than indoctrination, though.
You're forgetting the economy and Brexit. If you're around 30, you graduated during the financial crash. Not the Tories fault, fair enough - although the case they'd have been any better at averting it is tenuous to say the least. However you then quite possibly spent your 20s earning less than you thought in more precarious jobs - in some cases directly due to austerity policies - say you wanted to join the police there was a hiring freeze - in others because pay stagnated even as (fairly anaemic) growth returned. If you're a teacher you've seen schools' funding per pupil decline, and deprived pupils worse off, oh, and you've had your pay frozen.
You were told all this was temporary and necessary, maybe even voted or considered voting Tory in 2015 to give them the chance to finish the job. Then will come the pay rise you've foregone - or the social goodies you'd like to see - be it sorting out that housing crisis, paying more for the NHS you worry your parents will need or a boost for schools.
Yet just as the light comes at the end of the tunnel, wham, Brexit - everything's up in the air again and 'austerity' is no longer a time-limited hardship but one without end, and in pursuit of a policy you don't support. Worse, the government can't give any details or reassurances as to how it will work, the potential costs and what it will mean for you. Just trust it's for the best even if it makes no sense whatsoever. Instead you've heard 'crush-the-saboteurs'. Maybe you're not anti-Brexit per se, people voted that way, but you'll be damned if you'll vote for a government like that.
Jezza's moon-on-a-stick promises may elicit a raised eyebrow, but why on Earth would you shun them in favour of a government who told you to tighten your belt, which you did, then totally screws you over and tells you to do the same again?
In normal circumstances, Corbyn isn't credible whatsover, but if you're a young voter, you've been given so many reasons not to vote Conservative, that sod it, go with the guy who at least promises nice things even if you doubt his ability to deliver. If the hard left run Britain, they'll owe Farage, Boris and Gove a few beers.
Mr. HYUFD, if Corbyn and his far left cabal get in, expect press regulation back on the table. The BBC and Sky are already utterly limp-wristed when reporting on their bullshittery, it'd be even worse if they were in power.
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
Cable will now win it easily given Swinson is not standing, Lamb could not even beat Tim Farron
Mr. Owls, the far left occupying Ten Downing Street.
Mr. F, I was genuinely unaware of that, and had heard the opposite. Assuming you're correct, it's deeply concerning and could, as you suggest, lead to a lynching.
Mr. HYUFD, I agree, but it'll make it harder for those who aren't hammer and sickle fanatics to wrest back control from Stalin and Trotsky.
Mr. Owls, the far left occupying Ten Downing Street.
Mr. F, I was genuinely unaware of that, and had heard the opposite. Assuming you're correct, it's deeply concerning and could, as you suggest, lead to a lynching.
Mr. HYUFD, I agree, but it'll make it harder for those who aren't hammer and sickle fanatics to wrest back control from Stalin and Trotsky.
I don't think even Stalin and Trotsky can ban the Sun, Mail and Telegraph and as for the BBC I actually find it reasonably balanced at the moment
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
Cable will now win it easily given Swinson is not standing, Lamb could not even beat Tim Farron
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
Cable will now win it easily given Swinson is not standing, Lamb could not even beat Tim Farron
Mr. Owls, the far left occupying Ten Downing Street.
Mr. F, I was genuinely unaware of that, and had heard the opposite. Assuming you're correct, it's deeply concerning and could, as you suggest, lead to a lynching.
Mr. HYUFD, I agree, but it'll make it harder for those who aren't hammer and sickle fanatics to wrest back control from Stalin and Trotsky.
I don't think even Stalin and Trotsky can ban the Sun, Mail and Telegraph and as for the BBC I actually find it reasonably balanced at the moment
Ha! Proof, as if any more was needed, that Laura K is in the tank for the blues!
Mr. Owls, the far left occupying Ten Downing Street.
Mr. F, I was genuinely unaware of that, and had heard the opposite. Assuming you're correct, it's deeply concerning and could, as you suggest, lead to a lynching.
Mr. HYUFD, I agree, but it'll make it harder for those who aren't hammer and sickle fanatics to wrest back control from Stalin and Trotsky.
I don't think even Stalin and Trotsky can ban the Sun, Mail and Telegraph and as for the BBC I actually find it reasonably balanced at the moment
Ha! Proof, as if any more was needed, that Laura K is in the tank for the blues!
She certainly does add to the attractions of the BBC news team, yes
Jo Swinson will stand for the Deputy leader post and will win that.
As for leader, LDV are suggesting Cable /Swinson as the "dream team". I'm less convinced. We can't assume there won't be a GE before 2021-22 (though I think it unlikely) so we are campaigning for the next LD leader at the next GE.
Norman Lamb and Ed Davey are still the more likely candidates.
After May steps down or is pushed out the Tory's need to skip a generation; they need someone who the next generation can relate to, and I think the obvious candidate is Jacob Rees-Mogg. Just look at how well he performs on Have I Got News for You, and even Mairh Black of the SNP has spoken and written warmly of him.
I like to put my money where my mouth is, so what odds can I get for a £20 wager?
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
Cable will now win it easily given Swinson is not standing, Lamb could not even beat Tim Farron
Mr. Franklyn, with Labour occupied by the far left and the Conservatives currently unimpressive, opportunities may abound for the Lib Dems. They should go for Lamb.
Cable's too leftish.
Mr. M, I'm sure Gibraltar has splendid people but the weather would bloody annoy me. I prefer winter. Cold, crisp days, frost glittering, etc etc.
Mr. Franklyn, with Labour occupied by the far left and the Conservatives currently unimpressive, opportunities may abound for the Lib Dems. They should go for Lamb.
Cable's too leftish.
Mr. M, I'm sure Gibraltar has splendid people but the weather would bloody annoy me. I prefer winter. Cold, crisp days, frost glittering, etc etc.
I climbed scafell pike yesterday. Spent most of week worrying it might rain and ended up with sunburn. Far too hot for that sort of thing.
Lamb for the LDs I hope. Cable is poor election material in my mind.
A stark and very real warning of what a Corbyn premiership would present. The literal theft of somebody's property because they happen to use it in a way that is perceived to be distasteful - ie - making profit from it, or keeping it vacant, or for whatever reason.
Where will this end? Illegal evictions of private property owners to make way for more 'deserving' demographics? It's only a step away from seizing other assets.
We are living in dangerous times.
From YouGov today:
Jeremy Corbyn has called for luxury properties in Kensington that are owned but left empty to be requisitioned and provided as accommodation for Grenfell Tower residents who have been made homeless by the fire. Would you support or oppose such a move?
% ...........TOTAL Lab Con LD SNP UKIP Strongly support 33 51 14 35 45 23 Tend to support .26 30 26 34 27 24
So 40% of Tories support Corbyn on this.
I think this is a policy that sounds terrible to anyone who hasn't wandered around the richer bits of London lately. It is getting like a ghost town there.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
There is a serious risk that happens if the leadership changes too, only it will happen sooner.
I am not sure the public will take kindly to a revolving door of leaders in Number 10, so soon after an election. It will look positively chaotic.
I am not saying that May should be there for the long haul. It's clear she has been found wanting. However, she has just secured 42% of the vote. The country deserves a period of stability whilst the Brexit talks get underway. If that period is led by May as a figurehead whilst the people under her get on with the job, I think that's immensely more preferable than the potential fallout a leadership election could cause.
May should not lead the Tories into the next election, on that I think everyone can agree. She should not stay beyond the end (or nearing end) of the Brexit process. However, I think on balance the best thing the Tories can do is get their heads down and get back to the coal face rather than launch into another 6 months of severe instability and naval gazing.
Mr. Recidivist, then they're damned fools. I don't use my camera much. It doesn't mean a keen photographer without a camera gets to seize it.
Also, that is a bloody long paragraph and it doesn't include anything about time limits (permanent, or strictly temporary) or why they're empty (go on holiday, get occupied).
Lastly, but most important, a large number of people can be in favour of something bloody stupid. Being popular and being right aren't the same thing, and throwing away property rights because of populist rabble-rousing is more demented than anything in the Conservative manifesto.
Mr. B2, no, but did he raise the alarm or alert his neighbours?
Yes, he saved his neighbours life by banging on her door. She was interviewed by the BBC on the morning.
I have no better idea than the next person how or why the fire started, aside from what the BBC reported, but I am surprised that this site lets a post accusing a living person of arson and the manslaughter of tens of people stand in this thread. And the poster should know better.
After May steps down or is pushed out the Tory's need to skip a generation; they need someone who the next generation can relate to, and I think the obvious candidate is Jacob Rees-Mogg. Just look at how well he performs on Have I Got News for You, and even Mairh Black of the SNP has spoken and written warmly of him.
I like to put my money where my mouth is, so what odds can I get for a £20 wager?
Jacob Rees Mogg is 60/1 against at Bet365 for next party leader. You might be able to get longer elsewhere or for next PM.
Mr. 64, hope the sunburn isn't too bad. Think I went up there at some point as a child... that and/or maybe Skiddaw.
Cable's too lefty, too old, too likely to prop up than oppose Corbyn. We need a centrist.
Not too bad thanks.
Lamb is biggest winner for me but I'd like them to offer me a good reason to vote for them. I voted Liberal in my first election in 1983 but have voted Con since. Haven't like the last 2 Con manifestoes tho so would like an alternative. Cable doesn't do it for me at all.
I don't know whether this is a good deal or a bad one but this is the sort of thing the Prime Minister should have announced last week -- not the details but the outline. If she can't emote, she needs to take charge. Better late than never, perhaps.
After May steps down or is pushed out the Tory's need to skip a generation; they need someone who the next generation can relate to, and I think the obvious candidate is Jacob Rees-Mogg. Just look at how well he performs on Have I Got News for You, and even Mairh Black of the SNP has spoken and written warmly of him.
I like to put my money where my mouth is, so what odds can I get for a £20 wager?
If Hammond is such a great choice why did he not stand a year ago when he was foreign secretary? Like May i do not think he is very good on tv.If May stood down tomorrow Damian Green 25/1 would take over temporarily and that gives him an edge over rivals. Green is nothing special but 25/1 is massive given the context. The best Tory I know on tv is Esther Mcvie who was a junior minister in the Coalition then lost her seat in 2015 but has just got a seat in the new parliament.The experience of being out of parliament will have been good for her What the Tories should be looking for longterm is someone to take on the crypto -communists who now control the education system the way Thatcher took on the crypto-communists who controlled the trade unions in her day. Tories need to ask how did 12 million people including the majority of students end up voting for someone like Corbyn and if the reason is not the left wing education system then what is it?
In all fairness, I'm inclined to think the youth vote was down to massive amounts of freebies being promised by Labour, combined with a bit of anger about the housing market, rather than indoctrination, though.
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the TES and its polling of readers. It's effectively the house magazine of the NUT and its writers don't take the Morning Star because they try to avoid being defiled by touching right wing newspapers.
I am supposed to be becoming an NUT member in September when my Union merges with them. I am currently drafting a letter of resignation that I hope Mary Bousted, who has blithely announced she has decided she will remain the senior elected official for five years, will not relish.
I understand your thinking but - and I have no idea how old you are - this has a 1992 feel to it. The very real fear among Tories is that if they cling on now they will be out of power for a generation.
There is a serious risk that happens if the leadership changes too, only it will happen sooner.
I am not sure the public will take kindly to a revolving door of leaders in Number 10, so soon after an election. It will look positively chaotic.
I am not saying that May should be there for the long haul. It's clear she has been found wanting. However, she has just secured 42% of the vote. The country deserves a period of stability whilst the Brexit talks get underway. If that period is led by May as a figurehead whilst the people under her get on with the job, I think that's immensely more preferable than the potential fallout a leadership election could cause.
May should not lead the Tories into the next election, on that I think everyone can agree. She should not stay beyond the end (or nearing end) of the Brexit process. However, I think on balance the best thing the Tories can do is get their heads down and get back to the coal face rather than launch into another 6 months of severe instability and naval gazing.
Mr. B2, no, but did he raise the alarm or alert his neighbours?
Yes, he saved his neighbours life by banging on her door. She was interviewed by the BBC on the morning.
I have no better idea than the next person how or why the fire started, aside from what the BBC reported, but I am surprised that this site lets a post accusing a living person of arson and the manslaughter of tens of people stand in this thread. And the poster should know better.
I have heard variations on this story from all sorts of different sources but with the one unifying factor being they all originated somehow on social media. In some cases its a woman, in others they cleared their own property out of the flat before raising the alarm. But the bottom line is that it has the classic signs of an internet meme that has no real basis in fact.
Social media can be wonderful and I wouldn't be without it but it can also be thoughtless, irresponsible and dangerous. I fear this is a case in point.
After May steps down or is pushed out the Tory's need to skip a generation; they need someone who the next generation can relate to, and I think the obvious candidate is Jacob Rees-Mogg. Just look at how well he performs on Have I Got News for You, and even Mairh Black of the SNP has spoken and written warmly of him.
I like to put my money where my mouth is, so what odds can I get for a £20 wager?
evens for a laugh
Even for a laugh, no to Jacob Rees-Mogg, the latter day Mervyn Griffith-Jones.
A stark and very real warning of what a Corbyn premiership would present. The literal theft of somebody's property because they happen to use it in a way that is perceived to be distasteful - ie - making profit from it, or keeping it vacant, or for whatever reason.
Where will this end? Illegal evictions of private property owners to make way for more 'deserving' demographics? It's only a step away from seizing other assets.
We are living in dangerous times.
From YouGov today:
Jeremy Corbyn has called for luxury properties in Kensington that are owned but left empty to be requisitioned and provided as accommodation for Grenfell Tower residents who have been made homeless by the fire. Would you support or oppose such a move?
% ...........TOTAL Lab Con LD SNP UKIP Strongly support 33 51 14 35 45 23 Tend to support .26 30 26 34 27 24
So 40% of Tories support Corbyn on this.
I think this is a policy that sounds terrible to anyone who hasn't wandered around the richer bits of London lately. It is getting like a ghost town there.
Regent's Park is the worst. There's giant terrace upon giant terrace in and around Park Rd, NW1, with no-one in there at all. You can look inside the houses and it's obvious that not a speck of dust has been displaced for months. I don't see why some of these places couldn't be used on a temporary basis, in an emergency. If well managed, it would work.
They've had a whopping con put upon them that 40% of them going to university is "a good thing". In Blair's day before this bananas expansion I recall it being put about that there was a £400k lifetime pay premium to having a degree so, the (then smaller) tution fees were still a good deal. Shame nobody seemed to think the law of supply and demand would still apply if you increased the number of graduates in a confetti paper qualifications inflationary war. Still less that they'd then be competing in some cases with the cream of Eastern Europe willing to do jobs for even less.
Add in ultra low interest rates spiralling house prices up and 20% deposits and they are royally screwed compared to us (relative) oldies.
What would I do? Something like -
Stop sending so many to university (half?), subsidise those that do more, build a lot more houses pdq though it will ruffle some nimby feathers, restrict low skilled immigration a tad, oh and put up interest rates to drop house prices. Bit of negative equity for a few might help a lot more youngsters (and oldies saving for a pension).
And tell a few more 18 year olds to "do the bloody maths" as to whether it's really worth going to university? Are you ever really going to get approx £50k back in living expenses, tuition fees, and on top of that opportunity costs for foregone years working?
Yep.
I would add that the state should support those university entrants doing subjects we need. If you are doing STEM subjects then you get your fees paid but only if you do a minimum amount of time working in the UK after you finish university (5 years seems to be the popular number at the moment). But I agree with all the rest of what you say except maybe the limit on immigration. There are better ways to handle that than simply stopping people coming in.
If we needed more STEM graduates, the market would pay a huge salary premium but it doesn't because we don't because we've already lost too much industry and R&D to abroad.
Simply not true. Many companies bring in STEM graduates from overseas because of the lack of graduates in this country. One of the things I regularly hear both on the media and in person is employers saying they can't get the right kinds of graduates from within the UK.
Comments
Might be a woman's privilege to change her mind but that doesn't mean it will always work out well!
That's very disappointing news, if so. I very much hope it's not her being a mother of a young son that is stopping her. We really need women to be able to overcome this so we can get young mums into leadership positions.
If Parliament can overturn a referendum before it has even been invoked then Parliament can also use that referendum as the basis for action without further reference to the electorate.
The problem you have is that in the end no matter what you might want, we will win. The reason is not because the British position will change but because the EU position will continue to change until it reaches a point where it is no longer acceptable, not just to a small majority of the British electorate but to large one. That is why I am sanguine about what happens. In the end it is the EU that will force us out either directly or by default. Nothing you can do will stop that.
May's disastrous election ploy has put them in an impossible bind.
The only possible soution is to get on with the business of governing - and I think that is beyond the shell shocked occupant of No.10.
(The young bit, not the mum bit.)
It's quite possible she's looked at the example of William Hague, who became leader at just about her age, and decided it's too early.
I hadn't heard any rumours about him, to be honest.
In all fairness, I'm inclined to think the youth vote was down to massive amounts of freebies being promised by Labour, combined with a bit of anger about the housing market, rather than indoctrination, though.
Add in ultra low interest rates spiralling house prices up and 20% deposits and they are royally screwed compared to us (relative) oldies.
What would I do? Something like -
Stop sending so many to university (half?), subsidise those that do more, build a lot more houses pdq though it will ruffle some nimby feathers, restrict low skilled immigration a tad, oh and put up interest rates to drop house prices. Bit of negative equity for a few might help a lot more youngsters (and oldies saving for a pension).
And tell a few more 18 year olds to "do the bloody maths" as to whether it's really worth going to university? Are you ever really going to get approx £50k back in living expenses, tuition fees, and on top of that opportunity costs for foregone years working?
New towns, set up with an eye to future expansion, could be a good way to go, instead of trying to jam in more houses on older settlements where the infrastructure struggles to cope and undeveloped land might well be on flood plains.
Given that young mothers are utterly crucial to our national future, it's a real problem how few we have in parliament
I would add that the state should support those university entrants doing subjects we need. If you are doing STEM subjects then you get your fees paid but only if you do a minimum amount of time working in the UK after you finish university (5 years seems to be the popular number at the moment). But I agree with all the rest of what you say except maybe the limit on immigration. There are better ways to handle that than simply stopping people coming in.
"Feminist that I am, I have of course wondered what a bloke in my position would do. It’s obvious. Most blokes in my shoes would run for leader like a shot. It’s true that my many years of encouraging women to have the confidence to go for that exciting new role have taught me that women often don’t go for things when they should. But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes and structures that impose a choice on someone, rather than allowing them to make up their own mind."
I agree that many women in her position would make the same call. I do not agree that that is the right call.
I think William Hill is sunning himself and leaving rich pickings to us!
Edit: Oh They've just taken down all bets.
Building houses to a good standard - and checking that they are - would be a good start. Builders are getting away with too much atm.
Unfortunately this is mostly incompatible with building cheap housing, which is what everyone seems to want.
1. It will make the country more prosperous
2. It will stop intrusive regulation. Lets call it the 'straight banana' factor
3. It will mean we can keep unwanted foreigners out.
The first one is plainly ridiculous. The world and his wife including almost every business leader and nearly every politician have said we'll be financially worse off.
The second is even more spurious. After a catastrophic fire and the worst financial crisis in our history no one but a complete idiot would be advocating loosening regulation and the EU's record on safety regulation is exemplary.
The third is puzzling. If we're worried about numbers why are we letting more people from outside the EU in than we're getting from inside?
My sense is that it's the last thrashing of Empire from a bunch of old union jack wavers and the young particularly find it sad and pathetic.
So, that is what the Conservatives must give them.
Mr. Gin, yes and no. Mr. Smithson saw it in time to tweet about it and therefore have backed the others at 5 or 6 each.
So, he might be annoyed Swinson isn't standing, but in timing terms he's probably just made his book a lot greener.
What did you say when Leadsom used the phrase "As a mother..."
Was it "that's really great, I'm so glad she's a mother in Parliament"?
I remember the reaction of some of your fellow travellers though.
They weighed the EU in the balance and found it wanting.
Having standards that are not met, or are poorly met, is pointless.
"But just as often I have observed men going for the promotion when they shouldn’t. Just because a man would do it, doesn’t make it the right thing to do. I have consistently fought against stereotypes..."
I'm against stereotypes. Unless it's ambitious men
Sounds as though I was right - she has looked at the example of William Hague and decided (I think correctly) that next time around makes more sense.
https://mobile.twitter.com/YS/status/875867173528494080
Anyway, they asked who it was and I said "Some bird." One of the ladies, not in a nasty or aggressive way, said she thought that was a bit sexist. But it always sounded just like the equivalent of 'some bloke' to me.
Swinson might well be wise not to run now. We'll see.
Even now the old "how can we spin this as a positive for the Conservatives" is coming to the fore. Admit May got it wrong, admit mistakes were made and try a little humility.
Mr. HYUFD, if Corbyn and his far left cabal get in, expect press regulation back on the table. The BBC and Sky are already utterly limp-wristed when reporting on their bullshittery, it'd be even worse if they were in power.
Would May still be enjoying a honeymoon with her approval ratings?
Disappointed Jo Swinson isn't going to stand as LD leader - I think of all the MPs she's the one who could have offered some new thinking and taken the Party in a different direction.
There's a possibility that as with Sir Menzies Campbell, the new leader will be a stop gap especially if, as I suspect, we are looking at a full 5 year Parliament.
I hope Vince doesn't stand and a contest between Norman Lamb and Ed Davey doesn't inspire that much. I'd love Tom Brake to stand but he won't.
I hope Lamb wins.
You were told all this was temporary and necessary, maybe even voted or considered voting Tory in 2015 to give them the chance to finish the job. Then will come the pay rise you've foregone - or the social goodies you'd like to see - be it sorting out that housing crisis, paying more for the NHS you worry your parents will need or a boost for schools.
Yet just as the light comes at the end of the tunnel, wham, Brexit - everything's up in the air again and 'austerity' is no longer a time-limited hardship but one without end, and in pursuit of a policy you don't support. Worse, the government can't give any details or reassurances as to how it will work, the potential costs and what it will mean for you. Just trust it's for the best even if it makes no sense whatsoever. Instead you've heard 'crush-the-saboteurs'. Maybe you're not anti-Brexit per se, people voted that way, but you'll be damned if you'll vote for a government like that.
Jezza's moon-on-a-stick promises may elicit a raised eyebrow, but why on Earth would you shun them in favour of a government who told you to tighten your belt, which you did, then totally screws you over and tells you to do the same again?
In normal circumstances, Corbyn isn't credible whatsover, but if you're a young voter, you've been given so many reasons not to vote Conservative, that sod it, go with the guy who at least promises nice things even if you doubt his ability to deliver. If the hard left run Britain, they'll owe Farage, Boris and Gove a few beers.
This is one of those nasty stories on social media that could lead to someone being lynched.
What are you actually afraid of?
Mr. F, I was genuinely unaware of that, and had heard the opposite. Assuming you're correct, it's deeply concerning and could, as you suggest, lead to a lynching.
Mr. HYUFD, I agree, but it'll make it harder for those who aren't hammer and sickle fanatics to wrest back control from Stalin and Trotsky.
Without Swinson it's:
Lamb 30, Cable 29, Davey 18
Run-off: Lamb 52, Cable 48
Without Lamb: Cable 57, Davey 43
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=4761a1f83089fd89eba4fef19&id=d608adefa6&e=[UNIQID&utm_content=bufferc8495&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
As an aside, I'll be glad when this stupid hot weather ends.
Gorgeous. And its Day Three of the tuna season.
Went out for a few hours today but haven'y caught anything yet.
As for leader, LDV are suggesting Cable /Swinson as the "dream team". I'm less convinced. We can't assume there won't be a GE before 2021-22 (though I think it unlikely) so we are campaigning for the next LD leader at the next GE.
Norman Lamb and Ed Davey are still the more likely candidates.
I like to put my money where my mouth is, so what odds can I get for a £20 wager?
Cable's too leftish.
Mr. M, I'm sure Gibraltar has splendid people but the weather would bloody annoy me. I prefer winter. Cold, crisp days, frost glittering, etc etc.
Lamb for the LDs I hope. Cable is poor election material in my mind.
Cable's too lefty, too old, too likely to prop up than oppose Corbyn. We need a centrist.
I am not sure the public will take kindly to a revolving door of leaders in Number 10, so soon after an election. It will look positively chaotic.
I am not saying that May should be there for the long haul. It's clear she has been found wanting. However, she has just secured 42% of the vote. The country deserves a period of stability whilst the Brexit talks get underway. If that period is led by May as a figurehead whilst the people under her get on with the job, I think that's immensely more preferable than the potential fallout a leadership election could cause.
May should not lead the Tories into the next election, on that I think everyone can agree. She should not stay beyond the end (or nearing end) of the Brexit process. However, I think on balance the best thing the Tories can do is get their heads down and get back to the coal face rather than launch into another 6 months of severe instability and naval gazing.
Also, that is a bloody long paragraph and it doesn't include anything about time limits (permanent, or strictly temporary) or why they're empty (go on holiday, get occupied).
Lastly, but most important, a large number of people can be in favour of something bloody stupid. Being popular and being right aren't the same thing, and throwing away property rights because of populist rabble-rousing is more demented than anything in the Conservative manifesto.
Anyway, I'm hot and I'm off.
I have no better idea than the next person how or why the fire started, aside from what the BBC reported, but I am surprised that this site lets a post accusing a living person of arson and the manslaughter of tens of people stand in this thread. And the poster should know better.
Lamb is biggest winner for me but I'd like them to offer me a good reason to vote for them. I voted Liberal in my first election in 1983 but have voted Con since. Haven't like the last 2 Con manifestoes tho so would like an alternative. Cable doesn't do it for me at all.
I am supposed to be becoming an NUT member in September when my Union merges with them. I am currently drafting a letter of resignation that I hope Mary Bousted, who has blithely announced she has decided she will remain the senior elected official for five years, will not relish.
All I can say, naturally, is #Priti4Leader
However, if I was betting on the outcome I would say Hammond.
Of course, both May and Hammond are merely Jeremy's underlings.
Social media can be wonderful and I wouldn't be without it but it can also be thoughtless, irresponsible and dangerous. I fear this is a case in point.