Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay’s desire to fight the next election makes a challenge thi

SystemSystem Posts: 12,259
edited August 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay’s desire to fight the next election makes a challenge this autumn more likely

.@nicholaswatt speaks to former Downing St adviser @CraigOliver100 about Theresa May's ambition to stay beyond the next election #newsnight pic.twitter.com/N1VnMGieoB

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,193
    First!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,274
    Second
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,227
    Third! Like the SNP
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    edited August 2017
    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    edited August 2017
    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215
    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.

    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,712

    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching

    Has nothing changed or has Labour's shift helped Hammond? The last thread's podcast suggested that on Brexit, there was not a vast space between Labour, the EU and the Treasury. If Brexit negotiations either flounder or move in that direction, maybe Philip Hammond will look like the grown-up round the Cabinet table. Only if there is a clear win for the home team will Davis look like a hero, and we have already passed peak Boris.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,227


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    None of your 150kg American bombs! Though you have to wonder what they were aiming for aiming for with a bomb that big...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,712
    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    for some reason they seem to be turning up quite a lot this year

    Hannover had to evacuate 50k people about 2 months ago when another ww2 bomb was discovered

    however its not all one way, central birmingham was closed off in april when a german one was dug up
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    It was designed for the Wellington:

    http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=107:4000lb-high-capacity-bomb&catid=43:bombs&Itemid=60
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    Probably a 4000lb "blockbuster", the original source of the term I think.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    DavidL said:

    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.
    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.

    I feel that some people - including OGH - are attributing far too much cunning to Mrs May. For my part, I get the impression that she is completely out of her depth and does not have a clue what to do next.

    From a party political point of view, of course she should carry on, and on. From the sake of
    the country, though, she should go as soon as possible.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    The Lancaster could carry a Grand Slam, which weighed 10 tons:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(bomb)

    However, not many of them were used!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215

    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    It was designed for the Wellington:

    http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=107:4000lb-high-capacity-bomb&catid=43:bombs&Itemid=60
    We apparently dropped thousands of 4000lb bombs. The technological spurt caused by WW2 is genuinely amazing, especially when you consider by the standards of our modern policing actions the whole war was incredibly short.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching

    Bit like Labour and their desperate scrabble for an alternative to Corbyn!

    More seriously, I think her intention was to put the leadership issue to bed for the moment by saying she was staying. However, by doing it in this way she runs the risk of reigniting it instead. It was Thatcher's declaration that she wished to remain PM until 1995 that prompted Meyer to contest the leadership.

    Particularly, given Davis is older than her, it gives him a major incentive to launch a challenge if he does want to be PM (not that I'm convinced he does).
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    CDG is one of the circles of hell done in hideous concrete.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    DavidL said:

    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.

    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.

    Indeed I wish I had written that paragraph myself. Well said
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Good morning, everyone.

    Got to say I was astounded this was top story on ITV News last night. She never said what was attributed to her. May said she was not a quitter. And what was the alternative? Her authority is shaky at best anyway, announce her future departure and she may as well just resign.

    She said she wasn't a quitter, not* that she would fight the next election as PM/Conservative leader.

    *At least, not in any clip I saw.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    Labour says may is 'deluded', a view shared by Tory Mps and the country i feel...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,717
    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    welshowl said:

    CDG is one of the circles of hell done in hideous concrete.
    But a shrine for typologists; frutiger sans was commissioned for the signage there.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,401
    Just heard Kieran's podcast on the previous thread. Manages to say several new and interesting things about Brexit. I highly recommend a listen.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    Ishmael_Z said:

    welshowl said:

    CDG is one of the circles of hell done in hideous concrete.
    But a shrine for typologists; frutiger sans was commissioned for the signage there.
    You are a font of knowledge.

    Where's me coat?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    No, the worst PM ever was Lord Goderich, 1827-28.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    edited August 2017
    For those who haven't listened - the previous thread has a podcast with Jonathan Portes - very informative interview, much better than the stuff that is being talked about in the newspapers by journalists who are guessing and don't even know they are guessing.

    He has a very interesting perspective being both an expert but also having a deep understanding of how government works from his time in DWP and Cabinet Office.

    A few points:

    His sense of the economic impact of Brexit (brackets are his comments):
    Lower end - 0.1-0.2% lower GDP growth/year... (rounding error)
    Higher end - 0.5% lower GDP growth/year... (noticeable but not the end of the world)
    Both can be outweighed by other government policies...

    He also says that no chance of a new immigration system in short-term (HO cannot deliver it), but he thinks there will be a significant falls in immigration well before then.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.

    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.

    This may be a thread for another day, but is it really true that a pre-announced departure date is the end? David Cameron's problem was Brexit not that he'd already said he was going, and Tony Blair was already in trouble by the time he conceded he'd need to leave. Unfortunately, that is as far back as memory goes, and two is not much of a sample, but it might be we have just borrowed the lame duck cliche from American presidents' second terms.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    Its' just that her detractors are a bigger laughing stock than she is, Malcolm.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    edited August 2017

    DavidL said:

    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.

    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.

    This may be a thread for another day, but is it really true that a pre-announced departure date is the end? David Cameron's problem was Brexit not that he'd already said he was going, and Tony Blair was already in trouble by the time he conceded he'd need to leave. Unfortunately, that is as far back as memory goes, and two is not much of a sample, but it might be we have just borrowed the lame duck cliche from American presidents' second terms.
    The point is that until Blair came along we didn't have pre-announced departure dates. Macmillan, who during the Profumo affair let the whips hint he would retire early in 1964, would be the nearest. Even Campbell-Bannerman didn't say when he would resign, even though everyone knew he wouldn't be around for long and Asquith was Prime Minister de facto for much of the time.

    So Blair and Howard are the only figures to base such a supposition on, and both of them were unusual circumstances.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587

    Good morning, everyone.

    Got to say I was astounded this was top story on ITV News last night. She never said what was attributed to her. May said she was not a quitter. And what was the alternative? Her authority is shaky at best anyway, announce her future departure and she may as well just resign.

    She said she wasn't a quitter, not* that she would fight the next election as PM/Conservative leader.

    *At least, not in any clip I saw.

    Sky asked her and she said yes, if the Guardian report is correct:

    "Talking to Sky News, May was asked if she wanted to lead the Conservatives into another election. “Yes,” she replied. “I’m in this for the long term.”
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486

    Good morning, everyone.

    Got to say I was astounded this was top story on ITV News last night. She never said what was attributed to her. May said she was not a quitter. And what was the alternative? Her authority is shaky at best anyway, announce her future departure and she may as well just resign.

    She said she wasn't a quitter, not* that she would fight the next election as PM/Conservative leader.

    *At least, not in any clip I saw.

    Sky asked her and she said yes, if the Guardian report is correct:

    "Talking to Sky News, May was asked if she wanted to lead the Conservatives into another election. “Yes,” she replied. “I’m in this for the long term.”
    The FT is also running a story about her confirming she wants to fight another election.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    DavidL said:

    No doubt someone has pointed out the Blair scenario when a fixed departure date resulted in the loss of power and respect. I really doubt she wants to fight an election again but she clearly does not want to be a powerless figurehead either.

    She may not be a quitter but she is absolutely useless as a campaigning politician, truly spectacularly bad. I do not believe that the Tory party would want to risk another zombie campaign with May dodging debates, dodging the public, dodging questions and interviews and saying as little as possible. It may have worked in the Home Office but it does not work for a PM.

    Playinf devil's advocate here (no I'm not saying Mrs May is a devil), I suppose she would say that it was an agreed strategy - avoid contact to (a) prevent the risk of casual errors spoiling the Tory competence lead at the time and (b) maximise exposure of Corbyn, who would no doubt be a terrible campaigner and alienate most voters. She'd argue that in a new election they would have a new strategy, and she'd be happy to engage, debate, etc.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,508
    Well, things have livened up quickly after the summer break!

    I agree with Mike, my first response when I saw this news was she was wittingly or unwittingly bringing on an early contest.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,764
    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Got to say I was astounded this was top story on ITV News last night. She never said what was attributed to her. May said she was not a quitter. And what was the alternative? Her authority is shaky at best anyway, announce her future departure and she may as well just resign.

    She said she wasn't a quitter, not* that she would fight the next election as PM/Conservative leader.

    *At least, not in any clip I saw.

    Sky asked her and she said yes, if the Guardian report is correct:

    "Talking to Sky News, May was asked if she wanted to lead the Conservatives into another election. “Yes,” she replied. “I’m in this for the long term.”
    I heard the clip and she omitted the word 'yes', saying simply 'I'm in it for the long term'. Fraser Nelson's commentary of it on the World Tonight had it about right in my view.
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:


    Huge british bomb ( 1.8 tonnes ) found in Frankfurt, 70k people evacuated

    Should give bankers something to think about

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/rhein-main/frankfurt/frankfurt-steht-nach-bombenfund-im-westend-vor-groesster-evakuierung-15175578.html

    Wow. What WW2 plane could deliver such a bomb?
    The Lancaster could carry a Grand Slam, which weighed 10 tons:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(bomb)

    However, not many of them were used!
    Believe it or not, ( I caught a TV programme the other day on this, can't find a link to it) but your answer is here:

    http://www.historynet.com/the-miraculous-mosquito.htm
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    edited August 2017
    Mr. Palmer, cheers for that. Sounds like ITV knew the story but their own interview got the quote "I'm not a quitter" which didn't actually fit the line they were running.

    My main point stands, though, which is that if she said she wouldn't she might as well leave now.

    Incidentally, for those gloomy about politics and the way things are run, in just over three weeks Sir Edric's Kingdom comes out, so you can cheer yourself up with some comedy [advisory warning: there are no safe spaces in Sir Edric's Kingdom]: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0757PMR7F/

    Edited extra bit: Mr. Orphan, cheers for that post. Hmm.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,764
    One thing we know for sure is that we can't take May's word at face value. I cite her promise not to call an early general election.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    She's staying. Despite the frequent media bile spouted at her by opponents of Brexit.

    TINA until Brexit is concluded.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Surely the challenge/resignation will come on 30th March 2019.

    Is there a market anywhere for it?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406

    Well, things have livened up quickly after the summer break!

    I agree with Mike, my first response when I saw this news was she was wittingly or unwittingly bringing on an early contest.

    Alternatively - she has decided she needs to claim she will fight another election.
    Whether she actually intends to or not is a different question.

    Only a week ago - Mike ran a thread saying there was a plan for her to stand down once A50 period ends in March 2019. It's quite possible that both are true I think.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    TOPPING said:

    Surely the challenge/resignation will come on 30th March 2019.

    Is there a market anywhere for it?

    Betfair has a market on exit date... that time period is favourite I think
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Eden resigned because of illness, even though in practice it is almost impossible to imagine he could have survived anyway.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Iraq led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, destabilised the whole Middle East and spawned a vicious terrorist sect. Suez and Brexit are trivial in comparison.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,764
    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    Either she's better at jokes than we realised or she said it to help spark a challenge or she's a tool.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    edited August 2017
    kle4 said:

    Either she's better at jokes than we realised or she said it to help spark a challenge or she's a tool.

    Or any two of the above, of course. For example if she meant it as a joke, it is the joke of a tool.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,227

    Mr. Palmer, cheers for that. Sounds like ITV knew the story but their own interview got the quote "I'm not a quitter" which didn't actually fit the line they were running.

    My main point stands, though, which is that if she said she wouldn't she might as well leave now.

    Quite. If she'd said anything else it would be May refuses to rule out standing down - invites leadership contest headlines and she'd be being slammed for "creating uncertainty" and "lack of leadership".
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    More likely that his opponents hate what he did to Iraq and political culture in this country, and his old cheerleaders are let down by the waste of his electoral success. He isn't going to be viewed well by history.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,338
    edited August 2017
    I'm going to love seeing her getting VONC'd by the Parliamentary party.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722
    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    7% of university workers voted Conservative, compared to 43.5% overall, a huge leftward skew. It's probably become a closed loop. Almost the only people who wish to work at universities are left wing, and they only get exposed to left wing arguments.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    edited August 2017
    I doubt there will be a challenge, for starters no polling evidence shows any alternative leader, not Davis (who has his hands full with Brexit anyway), nor Hammond nor Rudd doing any better than May against Corbyn while the Tory poll rating is at least holding firm. JRM is a May loyalist and Boris, the only likely contender who polls marginally better than May, will not challenge May until after the Brexit deal is done. Boris wants to blame others for any bad deal or compromise not be lumbered with having to do most of it himself

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    An aversion to the mass killing of civilians is "current fashion"?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,884
    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching

    Has nothing changed or has Labour's shift helped Hammond? The last thread's podcast suggested that on Brexit, there was not a vast space between Labour, the EU and the Treasury. If Brexit negotiations either flounder or move in that direction, maybe Philip Hammond will look like the grown-up round the Cabinet table. Only if there is a clear win for the home team will Davis look like a hero, and we have already passed peak Boris.

    Hammond polled worse than any other contender against Corbyn with Survation last month, not that he has a chance of winning the membership vote anyway
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    edited August 2017
    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    May won 42% at the last general election, your heroine Sturgeon 37%. Cameron got 48% in his referendum, Salmond 45% in his
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,449

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    And there will presumably be local/council elections that May so unlikely the Tories will be wanting to deal with a leadership contest then. July/Aug 2019 seems much more likely so that a new leader can be in place in time for the conference
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,884
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
    Blair's will always be damaged, probably irretrievably, by Iraq. Such a pity; he started so well!
  • @lewis_goodall: Senior Tory MP tells me: "My concern is that Theresa May actually believes what she has said. She is delusional."‬
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,227

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    No, she's not a bolter like Cameron...
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    Despite the 2005 election, Iraq brought the de facto downfall of Blairism, and was one of the driving forces in the rise of Corbynism.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,227
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    May won 42% at the last general election, your heroine Sturgeon 37%. Cameron got 48% in his referendum, Salmond 45% in his
    Now now, you know what the Nats are like with numbers...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching

    Has nothing changed or has Labour's shift helped Hammond? The last thread's podcast suggested that on Brexit, there was not a vast space between Labour, the EU and the Treasury. If Brexit negotiations either flounder or move in that direction, maybe Philip Hammond will look like the grown-up round the Cabinet table. Only if there is a clear win for the home team will Davis look like a hero, and we have already passed peak Boris.

    Hammond polled worse than any other contender against Corbyn with Survation last month, not that he has a chance of winning the membership vote anyway
    Indeed but I am speculating on a future in which Hammond turns out to have been right all along.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,849

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    The Conservatives are going to have to market whatever happens as a shining triumph no matter how bad the shit smells.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,353
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    An aversion to the mass killing of civilians is "current fashion"?
    Looking at Yemen, apparently not.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited August 2017
    Dura_Ace said:

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    The Conservatives are going to have to market whatever happens as a shining triumph no matter how bad the shit smells.
    A bit like Cameron's re-negotiation it has to be depicted as a triumph over the eurocrats, but will get a raspberry from the Great British public. Not least because at that point Brexit can no longer be all things to all people.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,074
    Dr. Foxinsox, jein. Obviously, the best result for everyone is a good negotiated settlement. But if there's no deal or a minimal one and the electorate blame the EU, that might not necessarily be a problem for the Conservatives, especially if Labour's shift to the worst of all worlds (out of the EU but in the customs union and single market, lacking any voting rights at all but still subject to EU regulation in a swathe of areas) persists.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    Blair is condemed by people because they beieve he lied about WMD not for the actual war. If WMD had been found I afraid the majority would not be too worried by the civilian casualties
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    nichomar said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    Blair is condemed by people because they beieve he lied about WMD not for the actual war. If WMD had been found I afraid the majority would not be too worried by the civilian casualties
    Don't tell other people what they think, and you are wrong.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    7% of university workers voted Conservative, compared to 43.5% overall, a huge leftward skew. It's probably become a closed loop. Almost the only people who wish to work at universities are left wing, and they only get exposed to left wing arguments.
    What is the source for the 7 % figure?

    The UK Universities were huge gainers from the EU. They were very successful in extracting research & development monies (one of the consequences of tuition fees, in fact, the UK universities are much better resourced than stay the French).

    So, I suspect that will have skewed the figure for 2017.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,717

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    I am too young to know that Mike
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    7% of university workers voted Conservative, compared to 43.5% overall, a huge leftward skew. It's probably become a closed loop. Almost the only people who wish to work at universities are left wing, and they only get exposed to left wing arguments.
    What is the source for the 7 % figure?

    The UK Universities were huge gainers from the EU. They were very successful in extracting research & development monies (one of the consequences of tuition fees, in fact, the UK universities are much better resourced than stay the French).

    So, I suspect that will have skewed the figure for 2017.
    THES. In 2015, the figure was 11%. I doubt if it's even reached 20% for decades.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,717

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    PeterC said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    That's a moot point - you appear to judge him purely on the Suez fiasco. Eden had been a very substantial figure for 20 years or more prior to that. Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.
    Nah its either Cameron or Eden that claim that special ignominy . Both forced to resign after total collapse of foreign policy.
    Blair must be the least popular of current living politicians?

    Don't see a constituency he wins, which is quite something.
    It's current fashion. Thatcher was similarly unpopular after leaving office. The British have a weird relationship with successful pols. Losers receive more affection.
    An aversion to the mass killing of civilians is "current fashion"?
    Looking at Yemen, apparently not.
    Yes , we are projecting our much vaunted soft power there, ie selling the bombs that do the mass killings. Keeps us as world leader.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
    Blair's will always be damaged, probably irretrievably, by Iraq. Such a pity; he started so well!
    For the left maybe but to be fair to him Iraq is now a functioning democracy and even ISIS have now almost been driven out of the country
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    PeterC said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    Despite the 2005 election, Iraq brought the de facto downfall of Blairism, and was one of the driving forces in the rise of Corbynism.
    Whose record is played 1 lost 1 unlike Blair's played 3 won 3
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I can't think of another candidate who wouldn't have at least half the population retching

    Has nothing changed or has Labour's shift helped Hammond? The last thread's podcast suggested that on Brexit, there was not a vast space between Labour, the EU and the Treasury. If Brexit negotiations either flounder or move in that direction, maybe Philip Hammond will look like the grown-up round the Cabinet table. Only if there is a clear win for the home team will Davis look like a hero, and we have already passed peak Boris.

    Hammond polled worse than any other contender against Corbyn with Survation last month, not that he has a chance of winning the membership vote anyway
    Indeed but I am speculating on a future in which Hammond turns out to have been right all along.
    Depends on what you want Brexit to be
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,717

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    May won 42% at the last general election, your heroine Sturgeon 37%. Cameron got 48% in his referendum, Salmond 45% in his
    Now now, you know what the Nats are like with numbers...
    Ha Ha Ha , Tories desperation is palpable.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Dr. Foxinsox, jein. Obviously, the best result for everyone is a good negotiated settlement. But if there's no deal or a minimal one and the electorate blame the EU, that might not necessarily be a problem for the Conservatives, especially if Labour's shift to the worst of all worlds (out of the EU but in the customs union and single market, lacking any voting rights at all but still subject to EU regulation in a swathe of areas) persists.

    Isn't what you describe as "Labour's shift to the worst of all worlds" also the government's position, at least for a transition period?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,717

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    No, she's not a bolter like Cameron...
    She does not have the brains to know when she is well above her competence level and get out.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    HYUFD said:

    PeterC said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    Despite the 2005 election, Iraq brought the de facto downfall of Blairism, and was one of the driving forces in the rise of Corbynism.
    Whose record is played 1 lost 1 unlike Blair's played 3 won 3
    This is not cricket, despite TSE's delusions. It isn't the size of your majority, it's what you do with it (Fnarrr). Blair's legacy is Iraq, Cameron's is brexit and TMay, and if either of them hit the fastest double century in first class cricket in the process nobody, least of all history, gives a toss.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,884
    Dura_Ace said:

    Surely March 30th 2019 isn’t a day for resigning, UNLESS the whole Brexit negotiation has gone badly wrong, and we’re facing customs posts and tariffs at Calais.
    I really can’t see TMay saying to the country ‘I’ve done it, now I’m going!"

    The Conservatives are going to have to market whatever happens as a shining triumph no matter how bad the shit smells.
    IIRC that happeneed with Suez!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    The 1959 election was 3 years after Suez!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
    Blair's will always be damaged, probably irretrievably, by Iraq. Such a pity; he started so well!
    For the left maybe but to be fair to him Iraq is now a functioning democracy and even ISIS have now almost been driven out of the country
    "14 years on, where’s Iraq’s democracy?
    The invasion failed to introduce the democracy, freedom and liberty."

    http://www.thearabweekly.com/Opinion/8055/14-years-on,-where's-Iraq's-democracy?

    But what would they know?

    And from that article, "In the first three years after the invasion, a British medical publication, the Lancet, recorded that 654,965 Iraqis had lost their lives by June 2006 as a direct consequence of the invasion." High price for a couple of rigged elections.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    Ishmael_Z said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
    Blair's will always be damaged, probably irretrievably, by Iraq. Such a pity; he started so well!
    For the left maybe but to be fair to him Iraq is now a functioning democracy and even ISIS have now almost been driven out of the country
    "14 years on, where’s Iraq’s democracy?
    The invasion failed to introduce the democracy, freedom and liberty."

    http://www.thearabweekly.com/Opinion/8055/14-years-on,-where's-Iraq's-democracy?

    But what would they know?

    And from that article, "In the first three years after the invasion, a British medical publication, the Lancet, recorded that 654,965 Iraqis had lost their lives by June 2006 as a direct consequence of the invasion." High price for a couple of rigged elections.
    Iraq now has a democratically elected government not a dictator and Saddam killed hundreds of thousands himself
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,657
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    The 1959 election was 3 years after Suez!
    Oh big difference!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,884
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    PeterC said:

    Roger said:

    Despite the unseemly scrabble for the Tory leadership after Cameron went the only realistic candidate was May and nothing has changed.

    I think you are right, at least for now. Mrs May is just poking fun at her detractors.
    How a laughing stock like her thinks she can poke fun at anyone is just amazing. An absolute loser and destined to take Cameron's crown as worst PM ever.
    The worst PM ever was Anthony Eden
    Brown was just as bad as Eden, Callaghan and Heath only marginally better of post-war PMs
    Blair's will always be damaged, probably irretrievably, by Iraq. Such a pity; he started so well!
    For the left maybe but to be fair to him Iraq is now a functioning democracy and even ISIS have now almost been driven out of the country
    I’m not sure about the relevance of the word functioning. Wikitravel, having just had a look at it, is full of warnings about not going here, there and everywhere.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,759
    edited August 2017
    May looks at the "talent" in her party and probably comes to the right conclusion. When chancers, incompetents and troglodytes are the alternatives, she could well be safe for another five years.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    PeterC said:

    Suez was a personal catastrophe for Eden but it is remarkable how little substantive long-term damage was done by it and how quickly MacMillan was able to restore an even keel.

    One could argue that Blair's Iraq war was far worse than Suez and inflicted much more long-term damage. Perhaps the worst PM ever was Tony Blair.

    Iain Macleod thought that Suez cost the Conservatives their credibility among the intellectual voters as a party of competence. It's hard to argue that they've ever really regained it; although there was some evidence of a swing back in the late 1970s that surely had at least as much to do with the intellectual and political bankruptcy of Labour and socialism more generally as with a love of Toryism.

    Although the intelligentsia were quite a small group at the time, they are now much larger, and the Tories continue to struggle with them. That is how they ended up doing so badly in university seats. While you might argue there are other factors for that, Suez was the moment that cost them the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances. Ever since, this group has assumed the worst of them.

    It may indeed be too early to say just how damaging Suez was for the Tories. But it surely isn't altogether a coinicdence how thin the talent on the front bench is right now - and has been for a very long time with rare exceptions.
    Yet the Tories still won the general election 2 years after Suez as Labour won the general election 2 years after the Iraq invasion
    The 1959 election was 3 years after Suez!
    Oh big difference!
    Indeed so - 50% bigger!
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    Sean_F said:


    7% of university workers voted Conservative, compared to 43.5% overall, a huge leftward skew. It's probably become a closed loop. Almost the only people who wish to work at universities are left wing, and they only get exposed to left wing arguments.

    The biggest increase vs. nationally is the Lib Dems... polling at 24% is more than 3x what they got from the GE. 54% polling for Labour vs. 40% in GE. I wonder how different that is to public sector organizations generally...

    As to why the Conservative party are so unpopular among university workers... Part of the answer might be the policies of May? Probably Gove's attacks on academics didn't go down well either.

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/general-election-2017-54-per-cent-backing-for-labour-in-poll#survey-answer
This discussion has been closed.