Rudd did very badly in the Frank Luntz Con leaders focus group on Sunday Politics.
5 options were presented:
Hammond and Rudd were eliminated first - neither considered remotely leadership potential.
Boris came 3rd.
Final was Davis v Rees-Mogg - which ended in a tie.
However, Davis, R-M and Boris were all considered entirely plausible.
Hammond and Rudd were not.
Rudd widely considered to be a solid number 2, not a leader.
Perhaps she's just genuinely trying to hold her seat at the next GE - given it (as Hastings) has been a bell-weather seat since 1983, I suspect she's wasting her money.
Rudd surely not secure enough in Hastings to launch a viable bid?
She's hired him to help her hold Hastings and Rye.
Haha! That's going Labour next time then, for sure!
You sound like IOS between 2010 and 2015.
Next you'll be talking about Al Gore Rhythms
Er... stumped on both points. Do they relate to PB before BP?
IOS was a London Labour activist who continually boasted about Labour's 'ground game' and how it was certain to bring victory in 2015.
Ah thanks, I suspected something along those lines.
Well, I am sure TSE didn't make any rash predictions about the size of the Tory GE2017 majority, in the days before I joined the forum
Oh, so many end up looking like fools, it happens to everyone at some point, but tone when making predictions that end up being foolish makes a big difference, particularly in handing having that egg on your face afterwards.
I have heard.
Yes indeed - not everyone can match my high level of predictive accuracy (er, if we overlook Brexit ref, POTUS 2016 and, um, GE 2017).
Rudd did very badly in the Frank Luntz Con leaders focus group on Sunday Politics.
5 options were presented:
Hammond and Rudd were eliminated first - neither considered remotely leadership potential.
Boris came 3rd.
Final was Davis v Rees-Mogg - which ended in a tie.
However, Davis, R-M and Boris were all considered entirely plausible.
Hammond and Rudd were not.
Rudd widely considered to be a solid number 2, not a leader.
Perhaps she's just genuinely trying to hold her seat at the next GE - given it (as Hastings) has been a bell-weather seat since 1983, I suspect she's wasting her money.
Oh god I was joking about Alex Jones.... Apparently this one is false flag by antifa!
I'm sure MP_SE will be along shortly expressing his outrage.
I assume you have got me mixed up with someone else as I haven't speculated as to what the killer's motives were.
But you've been getting exercised by some on the left being complete bellends over the attack, but you're quiet on this, I wonder why.
I don't jump to conclusions and I don't feel the need to virtue signal. If you were right I would have been posting all that crap about his partner being some deranged anti-Trump activist that was doing the rounds earlier.
I am sure you are just tetchy, the last 12 months or so have been particularly difficult for you. No Dave... No George... No more chumocracy...
So that's a no from you, you've been exposed for being a hypocrite.
Why is he a hypocrite?
Because he's only focusing on one side coming up with idiotic comments related to today's shootings.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one. (Apologies for quoting myself but could not edit.)
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
Is that based on income or wealth including housing?. I expect London heavily distorts the figures.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
Come on, if Rudd became PM before the next GE it would provoke the biggest parliamentary decapitation operation ever!
Boris would be even bigger target. He has a London seat on the tube - so easy to swamp with activists - with a diminishing majority which will soon disappear due to demographic changes.
The way things are going I wonder if the Tories will hold any seats in London in a decade outside Havering and Bromley.
I was so certain of a Tory Majority of 70 to 90 I went to bed with a sleeping tablet rather than face the horror of *that* campaign being endorsed by the public. It was going to be another crippling blow to my sense of Britishness and I just couldn't watch. I've watched every election night obsessively since 1983. Obsessively watching Election Nights is part of who I am. But I just couldn't face the pain. So I sent to bed with a sleeping tablet.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
"...the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one."
In income terms maybe, but not, I suspect, in wealth.
I was so certain of a Tory Majority of 70 to 90 I went to bed with a sleeping tablet rather than face the horror of *that* campaign being endorsed by the public. It was going to be another crippling blow to my sense of Britishness and I just couldn't watch. I've watched every election night obsessively since 1983. Obsessively watching Election Nights is part of who I am. But I just couldn't face the pain. So I sent to bed with a sleeping tablet.
Shame - you only needed to stay up til 10pm to see the fun begin!
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
Surely more to do with the Tory voters being on pensions and the Labour voters of working age?
40% of the UK population are not Tarquins, or however your predjudice stereotypes them.
I'd assumed a comfortable but not large Tory majority, and intended to sleep, but was rooted to the chair as the night unfolded. First time I have ever voted Tory, I cannot imagine the feeling some proper Tories must have felt.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
It seemed to take Marr by surprise. As I remember the guy he was talking to, Phillip Blond, quoted a source for it.
I was so certain of a Tory Majority of 70 to 90 I went to bed with a sleeping tablet rather than face the horror of *that* campaign being endorsed by the public. It was going to be another crippling blow to my sense of Britishness and I just couldn't watch. I've watched every election night obsessively since 1983. Obsessively watching Election Nights is part of who I am. But I just couldn't face the pain. So I sent to bed with a sleeping tablet.
Shame - you only needed to stay up til 10pm to see the fun begin!
No. Popped my pill at 9.55pm and physically switched off all my internet capable devices. I just couldn't face the hammer blow. *That* campaign winning was just too much to face. Certainly after Indyref, EuRef and Trump. I stayed up all night for the horror of those.
I was so certain of a Tory Majority of 70 to 90 I went to bed with a sleeping tablet rather than face the horror of *that* campaign being endorsed by the public. It was going to be another crippling blow to my sense of Britishness and I just couldn't watch. I've watched every election night obsessively since 1983. Obsessively watching Election Nights is part of who I am. But I just couldn't face the pain. So I sent to bed with a sleeping tablet.
Thankfully only the one.
Though its interesting that so many non-Conservatives expected a big Conservative victory.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
Maybe, but I bet he'd be voting for Jezza too!
Who knows. But he had a very strong work ethic. He wouldn't have liked the betrayal of workers, the poor and the aspirational to give state sponsored prizes to little middle class Tarquins like me...
F##king hell they found 18 guns in the hotel and another 14 (or 16) at his home plus 1000s of rounds....And police think he modified some to become full-auto.
He transported 10 suitcases of weapons and ammo into the hotel.
That got to be a crazy amount of money he spent on all that hardware.
I'd assumed a comfortable but not large Tory majority, and intended to sleep, but was rooted to the chair as the night unfolded. First time I have ever voted Tory, I cannot imagine the feeling some proper Tories must have felt.
I felt crushed, despite my (well hidden) detestation of Mrs May I really wanted three things on election night.
1) Aaron to become an MP, I’ve gotten to know him really well over last 3/4 years and he’s exactly the sort of person we need as an MP.
2) The ending of the Corbyn experiment as the country doesn’t need that kind of socialism.
3) A Scottish Tory surge. When the exit poll came out I thought it meant zero or one Scottish Tory MPs.
Rudd surely not secure enough in Hastings to launch a viable bid?
She's hired him to help her hold Hastings and Rye.
Haha! That's going Labour next time then, for sure!
That's what they thought in the run up to 2015. Instead her majority went up to 4,700.
If the LibDems recover a bit, and the Conservatives don't alienate their core vote next time round, she has a good chance of repeating the trick. Still, she's certainly in danger, and that's definitely a problem for any leadership bid.
Rudd's career history is problematic.
Absolutely. Lynton Crosby is being very badly advised or isn't doing his own research to touch that woman given her past business career. I'll cheer so loudly when she gets beaten at the next general election. Worst moment by far of the election night when she hung on by around 350 votes, and all after asking for a recount. She clearly had no idea of election protocol.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one.
Truly? That is an interesting fact if true.
That doesn't surprise me, actually.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
Maybe, but I bet he'd be voting for Jezza too!
Who knows. But he had a very strong work ethic. He wouldn't have liked the betrayal of workers, the poor and the aspirational to give state sponsored prizes to little middle class Tarquins like me...
Rudd surely not secure enough in Hastings to launch a viable bid?
She's hired him to help her hold Hastings and Rye.
Haha! That's going Labour next time then, for sure!
That's what they thought in the run up to 2015. Instead her majority went up to 4,700.
If the LibDems recover a bit, and the Conservatives don't alienate their core vote next time round, she has a good chance of repeating the trick. Still, she's certainly in danger, and that's definitely a problem for any leadership bid.
Rudd's career history is problematic.
Absolutely. Lynton Crosby is being very badly advised or isn't doing his own research to touch that woman given her past business career. I'll cheer so loudly when she gets beaten at the next general election. Worst moment by far of the election night when she hung on by around 350 votes, and all after asking for a recount. She clearly had no idea of election protocol.
I'm curious as to the recount story ? Was Rudd behind on the first count ?
No apparent motivation, yet serious planning and effort. Contrary to popular perception, full auto weapons are not just buyable of the shelf on a walk-in basis even in the most red of red states, so the guy either is on a register or he has modded the kit. Also the rate and length of fire suggests some kind of heavy box.
It doesn't have an obvious shape and most things like this do with 24 hours or so.
No apparent motivation, yet serious planning and effort. Contrary to popular perception, full auto weapons are not just buyable of the shelf on a walk-in basis even in the most red of red states, so the guy either is on a register or he has modded the kit. Also the rate and length of fire suggests some kind of heavy box.
It doesn't have an obvious shape and most things like this do with 24 hours or so.
Rudd surely not secure enough in Hastings to launch a viable bid?
She's hired him to help her hold Hastings and Rye.
Haha! That's going Labour next time then, for sure!
That's what they thought in the run up to 2015. Instead her majority went up to 4,700.
If the LibDems recover a bit, and the Conservatives don't alienate their core vote next time round, she has a good chance of repeating the trick. Still, she's certainly in danger, and that's definitely a problem for any leadership bid.
Rudd's career history is problematic.
Absolutely. Lynton Crosby is being very badly advised or isn't doing his own research to touch that woman given her past business career. I'll cheer so loudly when she gets beaten at the next general election. Worst moment by far of the election night when she hung on by around 350 votes, and all after asking for a recount. She clearly had no idea of election protocol.
I'm curious as to the recount story ? Was Rudd behind on the first count ?
She was always ahead, but still asked for a recount. It didn't make any sense at all. I thought she'd lost after asking for a recount, as its obviously normally the candidate that is behind that requests it.
Then I spent the whole of Friday avoiding any and all media as I couldn't face the result. Everything was the same in town. Everything. I forced myself to observe how detached political obsessives are from real life. The day was like every other.
Then finally on Saturday I forced myself to Google some of the local seat results as a start on the horror. Something was up but I still could face it. Then the full seat totals and national vote shares came up by ' accident ' on the top of one of the local BBC links. I will remember that moment till I die.
Apparently he was firing throw the hotel room door at security and police.
They also found explosives in his car and at his home.
Makes a strong case to exclude plain run of the mill mental illness as sole cause if that is so.
Why do you say that?
Plain mental illness leading to violence tends not to have this kind of depth and planning (or ambition). I exclude absolute psychotics as being ill. They aren't they are just plain bad.
There is an overseas angle to this but it remains to be seen if its of significance.
Apparently he was firing throw the hotel room door at security and police.
They also found explosives in his car and at his home.
Makes a strong case to exclude plain run of the mill mental illness as sole cause if that is so.
Why do you say that?
Plain mental illness leading to violence tends not to have this kind of depth and planning (or ambition). I exclude absolute psychotics as being ill. They aren't they are just plain bad.
There is an overseas angle to this but it remains to be seen if its of significance.
Well he certainly spent a lot of time / money planning and executing. Huge arsenal of weapons, 4 days in a suite with the perfect view setting up his weapons and a platform.
Apparently he was firing throw the hotel room door at security and police.
They also found explosives in his car and at his home.
Makes a strong case to exclude plain run of the mill mental illness as sole cause if that is so.
Why do you say that?
Plain mental illness leading to violence tends not to have this kind of depth and planning (or ambition). I exclude absolute psychotics as being ill. They aren't they are just plain bad.
There is an overseas angle to this but it remains to be seen if its of significance.
Well he certainly spent a lot of time / money planning and executing. Huge arsenal of weapons, 4 days in a suite with the perfect view setting up his weapons and a platform.
All they have to do is check when the booking was made and whether he made similar bookings with similar views before. The date of booking in particular might give an idea of where the head was at.
This is a sentence i never thought I would write, but "start the week" on BBC radio 4 was interesting this morning. Specifically it included a discussion between Andrew Marr and someone from the BES on voter churn around GE2017. If anyone fancies catching up on Iplayer take note the unedited morning broadcast is longer than the evening one.
Wanted to add that the following guy in the broadcast also makes interesting points, for example the average Tory voter is now poorer than the average Labour one. (Apologies for quoting myself but could not edit.)
On the face of it that should give Con a lot of scope for frightening people re higher Lab taxes.
Not just income tax but maybe even more scope on inheritance tax / wealth tax etc.
eg I have a friend, Lab supporter in his 50s - two kids - one just left uni, one still at uni. He thought Corbyn abolishing tuition fees (and maybe historic student debt) is the best thing ever.
His Mum has passed away. His Dad is 89 - owns a house worth about £600k outright + has significant savings (I'm not sure how much - not my business).
I (tactfully) asked him how much he thought Corbyn would cost him re his inheritance? He literally hadn't even considered it might cost him a single penny. Never occurred to him. I pointed out it might well be way, way more than the total family saving from scrapping tuition fees + student debt for his elder one (even if that happened, which seems unlikely).
He went extremely quiet.
It's not an easy message to get across but Con has to keep chipping away in this area.
I was stunned for about 10 minutes on discovering on the Saturday evening Corbyn had got 40%. I had to go and sit down quietly on a more comfortable seat just occassion picking the Tablet up to look at the scores in disbelief again. Another lifetime memory. A stable, mature, wise, cynical democracy like the UK and 40% had voted Corbyn ?
Then I just started laughing. Uncontrollably laughing. Not a single day has passed since that Saturday where I haven't laughed out loud at one point. That wretched banshee and her excitable campaign from the lowest circle of Hell failed. I will laugh till that wretched woman is dragged from Downing Street in shame like a pound shop Cersei Lannister.
I will regret to my dying day not voting Labour in June 2017. Me with my self absorbed liberalism, reasonableness and focus on Corbyn's here today, gone tomorrow moral repugnancy.
*That* Conservative campaign deserved the visceral response of a grabbed kitchen knife violently stuck into the gut. And the wise old British electorate did what needed to be done. There are rules. There are limits. There are etiquettes. *That* campaign tore them up. Thank God most voters don't think like me.
But EVERYONE will look shop soiled by 2022, and the next GE.
Corbyn is 68, and will be 73 in 2022. That's really quite old, and, I reckon, way too old for the Brits to elect him as PM.
In four more years will the Labour Conference still be singing Oooooh, Jeremy Corbyn! - call me an old cynic, but I REALLY doubt it. Corbyn is a phenomenon of political youth, he is the latest boyband in a vest, and boybands come and go.
Unlike Corbyn, Boris has been in front line politics for a decade, his initial appeal has very much worn off, but he is still a serious politician. He is also like Churchill in terms of being in and out of favour.
I reckon it will be Boris versus SOMEONE WE CAN'T PREDICT versus Ruth Davidson for Tory leader. Timing is all.
And the next Labour PM will be Emily Thornberry, producing a much more centrist version of Corbynism, with Softer Brexit.
Have you conceded you were mistaken about Khan and Uber yet? Latest London-only poll showing strong support for the decision, plus extremely high ratings for Khan, plus a continuing Labour surge.
I was on a train just pulling into Birmingham New Street at 10pm on election day - had the Wifi on the train just to see the Exit Poll - I was shocked to see NOM being predicted!
F##king hell they found 18 guns in the hotel and another 14 (or 16) at his home plus 1000s of rounds....And police think he modified some to become full-auto.
He transported 10 suitcases of weapons and ammo into the hotel.
That got to be a crazy amount of money he spent on all that hardware.
I was looking up this afternoon online on a discount ammo shop in the US. A 30 round magazine of 7.62 ammo for an AR15 is $23. Bullets - and life - are unfortunately far too cheap.
F##king hell they found 18 guns in the hotel and another 14 (or 16) at his home plus 1000s of rounds....And police think he modified some to become full-auto.
He transported 10 suitcases of weapons and ammo into the hotel.
That got to be a crazy amount of money he spent on all that hardware.
I was looking up this afternoon online on a discount ammo shop in the US. A 30 round magazine of 7.62 ammo for an AR15 is $23. Bullets - and life - are unfortunately far too cheap.
You are right. Just looked and you can get a starter version of an AR15 for $500.
Anyway it's taken nearly four months and the recent stuff from Boris but I think I'm finally at the point of understanding June's result. The stretch from the first unveiling of that f**king bus through to *that* May campaign was the mass money printing devaluing the currency. Corbyn getting 40% was the ensuing hyperinflation.
Games have rules. If one side in a match abandon them so completely as the game breaks down. We are playing cricket but the other lot are cock fighting what do you do ? There is no point being insufferably liberal and responsible about it all. We need to pick up the card table and smash them over the head with it. What have we got to lose ? Apart from everything of course. But maybe us all losing everything is what needed to remind us why the rules existed in the first place.
On topic, I do wonder if the numbers will switch significantly the first time something substantive is achieved (which unless one believes No deal is happening - which is a possibility - is bound to occur at some point).
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Interesting analysis.
I found his stance on same sex marriage quite odd in the period 2012-14.
His opposition to ssm appeared to be "I don't like how fast things are moving" which pleases nobody.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Interesting analysis.
I found his stance on same sex marriage quite odd in the period 2012-14.
His opposition to ssm appeared to be "I don't like how fast things are moving" which pleases nobody.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
Is Corbynism the wake up call or the tipping point? Can the tory party offer a viable conservatism that the young can buy into? A conservatism that is actually in their interests? The future leader of the tory party (or future leader +1) will have grappled with intergenerational economics and have a politically saleable solution.
Perhaps they need to keep their nose clean until Corbyn's had a go and their client vote are desperate? They're risking him succeeding, though.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
Robert, I don't think that having solid core principles that you defend and stoutly uphold, and following where the evidence takes you on policy are mutually exclusive. Indeed, I'd argue that all the great business leaders have and have had rock solid core values, and it is precisely this that allows them the flexibility to follow the evidence without being self-contradictory.
I am with you on the uselessness of seeking certainty and stasis. The world is uncertain, constantly changing and mostly unpredictable, and we must adapt to this change without full knowledge.
If you have not read it, I think you'd enjoy Leslie Valiant's Probably Approximately Correct: Nature's Algorithms for Learning and Prospering in a Complex World.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles....
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
This seems a rather confused way of looking at things. In my experience, the absence of principles is not at all well correlated with the capacity for empiricism.
And it seems so obvious when pointed out - while at the same time understandable that no one thought to test for this before now.
Lots of caveats on jumping to conclusions etc etc. The guy's theory could be irrelevant of course.
But - assuming for a minute that this is the missing link - I'm not sure it's understandable that it didn't show up in tests. Are we not *actual use* testing these innovative construction materials?
And it seems so obvious when pointed out - while at the same time understandable that no one thought to test for this before now.
Lots of caveats on jumping to conclusions etc etc. The guy's theory could be irrelevant of course.
But - assuming for a minute that this is the missing link - I'm not sure it's understandable that it didn't show up in tests. Are we not *actual use* testing these innovative construction materials?
We're seemingly doing very few relevant tests. Those who screech out for more housebuilding might want to consider that there are more problems than just numbers, and in many cases we're leaving people to live in substandard new accommodation.
But if I've read the story correctly, it's a weathering issue. The question then becomes how long you leave it out before testing. Ideally you'd leave some on a building for a few years and then repeat tests, but it would cost a great deal to do it for all new materials, you'd get a lot of passes, and there would be questions of whether you are testing for the right thing.
Presumably a mixture of those who know nothing, those that believe our negotiators are competent and those who quite enjoy them breaking down in chaos.
It is a curious graph, as the numbers were similar before A50 when there were no negotiations. Indeed the main period of support was when the election was on, and little actively happening.
More evidence that this is likely the Chinese century.
It is going to be increasingly difficult for China to continue its rise and maintain its current social and political structure. Graduates like to think and like to earn money; those things are not as easy in China as it might be.
Interesting nod to Corbynism in the government's response to the Monarch collapse. £60m of taxpayers money upfront to cover flights home with costs reclaimed from Credit/Debit Card companies later if possible. Doubtless the coincidence with the Tory Conference will have sharpened minds but it's an interest approach to a free market failure. Big State response to protect customers who were owed nothing under Caveat Emptor but avoiding the moral hazard of saving the Airline it's self. The briefing has started HMG refused a bridging loan.
If they pull it off, and the early signs are it's working, kudos of sorts to the government. It's an I retesting triangulation between a PR fiasco and Corbynist Corporate Welfare.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
The tests have been done for Climate Change and it is real.
Just heard a commentator from the Spectator by way reading the tea-leaves say 'by far the biggest events in Manchester were those hosted by Ruth Davidson and Jacob Rees-Mogg'.
I'm starting to wonder whether in the interests of the country an orderly hand over to Jeremy might be to everyone's long term advantage.
Just heard a commentator from the Spectator by way reading the tea-leaves say 'by far the biggest events in Manchester were those hosted by Ruth Davidson and Jacob Rees-Mogg'.
I'm starting to wonder whether in the interests of the country an orderly hand over to Jeremy might be to everyone's long term advantage.
Moggmentum is a real phenomenon, but Ruth may be the next but one leader.
I watched "Today at Conference" after Newsnight. Not much of a crowd for anyone.
Just heard a commentator from the Spectator by way reading the tea-leaves say 'by far the biggest events in Manchester were those hosted by Ruth Davidson and Jacob Rees-Mogg'.
I'm starting to wonder whether in the interests of the country an orderly hand over to Jeremy might be to everyone's long term advantage.
Even if the alternative is Jacob Rees-Mogg, that is still preferable to a Corbyn government. Mogg at least has a brain, some experience of work, has never been accused of supporting terrorism and has never so far as I know had to face awkward questions about his silence over child sexual abuse.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
Just heard a commentator from the Spectator by way reading the tea-leaves say 'by far the biggest events in Manchester were those hosted by Ruth Davidson and Jacob Rees-Mogg'.
I'm starting to wonder whether in the interests of the country an orderly hand over to Jeremy might be to everyone's long term advantage.
Moggmentum is a real phenomenon, but Ruth may be the next but one leader.
I watched "Today at Conference" after Newsnight. Not much of a crowd for anyone.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
On topic - there are Brexit negotiations? From what I can see/read our team confidently go into the sessions having told the press there would be the mother of all battles and telling Johnny foreigner to spin on it, then the EU say "no seriously we aren't goi g to do that" and our team say "yeah alright then".
No apparent motivation, yet serious planning and effort. Contrary to popular perception, full auto weapons are not just buyable of the shelf on a walk-in basis even in the most red of red states, so the guy either is on a register or he has modded the kit. Also the rate and length of fire suggests some kind of heavy box.
It doesn't have an obvious shape and most things like this do with 24 hours or so.
No heavy box he was changing magazines as you can hear in one of the videos.
What have we done to deserve the choice of Boris or Jez ?
The only one that looks remotely qualified to run the country from either of the big two right now is Phil Hammond.
He seems to provoke visceral dislike from many Tories. He was being briefed against for months in the lead up to the referendum, and while such polling as exists suggests he is hardly super popular with the rank and vile, I struggle to see why the possibility provokes such animus.
He has an annoying habit of talking sense.
It is pretty easy to see why he is not popular - he has no principles.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
Just as a matter of interest, how do people benefit from their politicians having principles?
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
The tests have been done for Climate Change and it is real.
Indeed. There is no doubt whatsoever that anthropogenic global warming and consequent climate change is a real and significant effect. The doubt lies only in the extent to which it will impact on human life and the timescale over which this will happen.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10....
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10....
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
This Conference shows the price paid for having a zombie as leader. We have a number of people trying to make a splash but their efforts are all being judged in the context of a potential leadership campaign. The Tories are not going to come out of this conference with any kind of momentum or vision of where the government is going. This lack of coherence, vision and grip is not likely to improve the perception of how the Brexit negotiations are going.
I fear the longer May remains as leader the longer this will go on. The question is whether the damage is permanent or not. I think it is going to be hard to recover.
Who does Grant Shapps tilt towards? Who are his allies?
He has huge bad blood with Nick Timothy, so very anti-May.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
Ta.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Just googled it and it is public knowledge so I'm not breaking any confidences.
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
This Conference shows the price paid for having a zombie as leader. We have a number of people trying to make a splash but their efforts are all being judged in the context of a potential leadership campaign. The Tories are not going to come out of this conference with any kind of momentum or vision of where the government is going. This lack of coherence, vision and grip is not likely to improve the perception of how the Brexit negotiations are going.
I fear the longer May remains as leader the longer this will go on. The question is whether the damage is permanent or not. I think it is going to be hard to recover.
Still, at this rate they'll be able to pick the next leader on a show of hands.
Comments
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/23/why-a-1997-style-landslide-or-even-a-1983-style-landslide-might-not-happen-but-maybe-a-2005-style-majority-of-66-will/
The weekend before the result I did say Mrs May's ratings were collapsing like the French Army in any war.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/06/04/the-polling-that-should-worry-mrs-may-and-all-tories/
And of course, my magnum opus from September 2016, which warned the Tories not to underestimate Jeremy Corbyn
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/08/30/in-praise-of-jeremy-corbyn/
In hindsight, the last piece is the best piece I've ever written for PB.
I expect him to back David Davis, although he might back any Cameroon style leader.
He's sounding pretty isolated at the moment, to be honest...
Grant Shapps was Tory chairman in 2014, Nick Timothy was on the candidates list, Nick Timothy was asked by Shapps to go campaign in the Rochester by election in 2014 to help beat the traitorous pig dog defector Mark Reckless.
Timothy refused, and Shapps removed Timothy from the candidates list and well, this happened.
A TOP Tory claims he became target of a vicious smear campaign after he stopped two of Theresa May’s closest aides becoming MPs.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps says the angry pair stormed out of a meeting vowing: “You will live to regret this decision.”
He then found himself at the centre of a wave of false and malicious rumours which began sweeping Westminster.
Mr Shapps lifted the lid on the “destructive” forces at the heart of the PM’s team as he urged her to clean up the toxic atmosphere in Number 10.
He told how he met a fearsome backlash after he blocked two senior advisers from running in safe Tory seats at the General Election.
Nick Timothy and Stephen Parkinson were suspended from the party’s approved candidates list after they refused to campaign in the 2014 Rochester by-election won by Ukip.
Mrs May, who was Home Secretary at the time, pleaded with Mr Shapps three times to overturn his decision.
He stood firm but agreed to meet them “out of courtesy.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3977187/top-tory-grant-shapps-targeted-in-vicious-smear-campaign-after-stopping-two-of-theresa-mays-closest-aides-becoming-mps/
kle4 2017
You wouldn't have been the only one - a certain ancient Jacobite for example.
Labour are for the metropolitan, middle classes now. The unaspirational who want publicallyfunded prizes for everyone, and especially their little Tarquins..
My Labour voting, Welsh railway worker grandfather would be turning in his grave.
The way things are going I wonder if the Tories will hold any seats in London in a decade outside Havering and Bromley.
In income terms maybe, but not, I suspect, in wealth.
40% of the UK population are not Tarquins, or however your predjudice stereotypes them.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/02/white-house-trump-las-vegas-gun-debate-243371
Though its interesting that so many non-Conservatives expected a big Conservative victory.
He transported 10 suitcases of weapons and ammo into the hotel.
That got to be a crazy amount of money he spent on all that hardware.
1) Aaron to become an MP, I’ve gotten to know him really well over last 3/4 years and he’s exactly the sort of person we need as an MP.
2) The ending of the Corbyn experiment as the country doesn’t need that kind of socialism.
3) A Scottish Tory surge. When the exit poll came out I thought it meant zero or one Scottish Tory MPs.
No apparent motivation, yet serious planning and effort. Contrary to popular perception, full auto weapons are not just buyable of the shelf on a walk-in basis even in the most red of red states, so the guy either is on a register or he has modded the kit. Also the rate and length of fire suggests some kind of heavy box.
It doesn't have an obvious shape and most things like this do with 24 hours or so.
They also found explosives in his car and at his home.
Then finally on Saturday I forced myself to Google some of the local seat results as a start on the horror. Something was up but I still could face it. Then the full seat totals and national vote shares came up by ' accident ' on the top of one of the local BBC links. I will remember that moment till I die.
There is an overseas angle to this but it remains to be seen if its of significance.
Not just income tax but maybe even more scope on inheritance tax / wealth tax etc.
eg I have a friend, Lab supporter in his 50s - two kids - one just left uni, one still at uni. He thought Corbyn abolishing tuition fees (and maybe historic student debt) is the best thing ever.
His Mum has passed away. His Dad is 89 - owns a house worth about £600k outright + has significant savings (I'm not sure how much - not my business).
I (tactfully) asked him how much he thought Corbyn would cost him re his inheritance? He literally hadn't even considered it might cost him a single penny. Never occurred to him. I pointed out it might well be way, way more than the total family saving from scrapping tuition fees + student debt for his elder one (even if that happened, which seems unlikely).
He went extremely quiet.
It's not an easy message to get across but Con has to keep chipping away in this area.
Then I just started laughing. Uncontrollably laughing. Not a single day has passed since that Saturday where I haven't laughed out loud at one point. That wretched banshee and her excitable campaign from the lowest circle of Hell failed. I will laugh till that wretched woman is dragged from Downing Street in shame like a pound shop Cersei Lannister.
I will regret to my dying day not voting Labour in June 2017. Me with my self absorbed liberalism, reasonableness and focus on Corbyn's here today, gone tomorrow moral repugnancy.
*That* Conservative campaign deserved the visceral response of a grabbed kitchen knife violently stuck into the gut. And the wise old British electorate did what needed to be done. There are rules. There are limits. There are etiquettes. *That* campaign tore them up. Thank God most voters don't think like me.
Games have rules. If one side in a match abandon them so completely as the game breaks down. We are playing cricket but the other lot are cock fighting what do you do ? There is no point being insufferably liberal and responsible about it all. We need to pick up the card table and smash them over the head with it. What have we got to lose ? Apart from everything of course. But maybe us all losing everything is what needed to remind us why the rules existed in the first place.
<blockquote class="UserQuote">
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/02/las-vegas-shooting-facebook-google-fake-news-shooter
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
I found his stance on same sex marriage quite odd in the period 2012-14.
His opposition to ssm appeared to be "I don't like how fast things are moving" which pleases nobody.
This is a guy who always portrayed himself as a eurosceptic. The moment the referendum arrived, he switched to remain because he thought they would win. When he became Chancellor, he seemed to support hard Brexit and spoke about how the UK could become a low tax haven if the EU refused to deal. Then, the moment May lost the election and 'soft Brexit' became the fashion, he suddenly changed tack again. He gives the impression of someone who has been house-trained by the Treasury.
He will never be Tory leader - the only people who support him are those who want to reverse Brexit, which is a clear minority in the Party (eg he is only popular amongst non-Tory Remainers). If he did become leader, he would probably betray them and go for WTO if he thought it would help him.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/28/philip-hammond-gay-marriage-incest
8/11/13:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10435540/Legalising-same-sex-marriage-was-damaging-for-Tories-Philip-Hammond-says.html
30/3/14:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10732827/Get-used-to-gay-marriage-Philip-Hammond-tells-Tory-critics.html
Hammond is a bad fit for an age of conviction politicians.
Interesting to compare this (volatile) polling with the (stable) leave/remain polls.
The best people to run organisations are those without fixed beliefs, who go where the facts tell them, rather than with preconceived notions.
I don't know whether global warming is real. I don't know what the best system of criminal justice is for minimising offending rates. I don't know what the best education system is.
But I can devise tests and see what works.
People crave certainty, and those that will not change their minds. Those people are disastrous leaders of organisations. Why would we expect them to make good Prime Ministers?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07wphhk
Is Corbynism the wake up call or the tipping point? Can the tory party offer a viable conservatism that the young can buy into? A conservatism that is actually in their interests? The future leader of the tory party (or future leader +1) will have grappled with intergenerational economics and have a politically saleable solution.
Perhaps they need to keep their nose clean until Corbyn's had a go and their client vote are desperate? They're risking him succeeding, though.
That's the real tory nightmare.
I am with you on the uselessness of seeking certainty and stasis. The world is uncertain, constantly changing and mostly unpredictable, and we must adapt to this change without full knowledge.
If you have not read it, I think you'd enjoy Leslie Valiant's Probably Approximately Correct: Nature's Algorithms for Learning and Prospering in a Complex World.
https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/some-notes-finances-top-chinese-universities
More evidence that this is likely the Chinese century.
But - assuming for a minute that this is the missing link - I'm not sure it's understandable that it didn't show up in tests. Are we not *actual use* testing these innovative construction materials?
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/02/las-vegas-shootings-nra-guns-243394?lo=ap_b1
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/10/02/today_in_conservative_media_making_sense_of_las_vegas.html
But if I've read the story correctly, it's a weathering issue. The question then becomes how long you leave it out before testing. Ideally you'd leave some on a building for a few years and then repeat tests, but it would cost a great deal to do it for all new materials, you'd get a lot of passes, and there would be questions of whether you are testing for the right thing.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2017/oct/02/anywhere-but-westminster-return-to-brexit-britain-video
RIP.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41475013
It is a curious graph, as the numbers were similar before A50 when there were no negotiations. Indeed the main period of support was when the election was on, and little actively happening.
I'm starting to wonder whether in the interests of the country an orderly hand over to Jeremy might be to everyone's long term advantage.
I watched "Today at Conference" after Newsnight. Not much of a crowd for anyone.
https://twitter.com/BarryGardiner/status/914947044879556608
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1C61S9 Even if the alternative is Jacob Rees-Mogg, that is still preferable to a Corbyn government. Mogg at least has a brain, some experience of work, has never been accused of supporting terrorism and has never so far as I know had to face awkward questions about his silence over child sexual abuse.
Even if he made it up entirely - which seems mildly unlikely - it would still marginally improve my respect for him.
Another election with May as leader and the party might fold like a wet paper bag.
Making thing up is what the disgraced internet scammer, Grant Shapps, does;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2015/mar/16/grant-shapps-business-mp-conservative-chairman-michael-green
I fear the longer May remains as leader the longer this will go on. The question is whether the damage is permanent or not. I think it is going to be hard to recover.