politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Newly published Survation poll sees LAB up 2 to a 6 point lead

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Newly published Survation poll sees LAB up 2 to a 6 point lead

Survation, the pollsters that was widely, and as it turned out unfairly, criticised in the run-up to GE2017 because it had the smallest CON leads has a new voting poll it. Its relatively old with its fieldwork being carried out in the week of the Tory conference when the blue team were making the headlines for all sorts of reason. The splits are CON 38%, LAB 44%, and LD 7%.

Read the full story here

dixiedean

First like the JC steamroller.

Pulpstar

As Morty would say "Aw Jeez"

DavidL

Line 2, "it" should be "out"?

Given the present shambles the solidity of support for the government is remarkable.

dr_spyn

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

Freggles

Remain Sane 52
Take Leave Of Senses 49

DavidL

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

Again, as with government support, the more remarkable thing is the solidity of support for leave in the face of almost universally negative media coverage.

david_herdson

FF43 said:

RobD said:

FF43 said:

RobD said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

This is starting to become a regular occurrence. Interesting tactic:

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/920652671975084034

So Universal Credit is going to be delayed?
But the govt (apparently) doesn't have an opinion on whether it should be delayed or not?

Isn’t the vote basically meaningless?

The government can get away with it as long as the public don't notice. But once the public realise the government can't be bothered to defend their policy and then ignore the vote that took place to stop it, the government are in serious trouble. Labour should make a lot of this.

I’m sure the public will get real riled up about opposition day motions!

The key factor is whether the public turns against Universal Credit, in which case government shenanigans will bite them. If they think UC is fine, methods won't be an issue. The Poll Tax is awful example for the Tories, who by the way lost their presence in Scotland for a generation over using that country as a guinea pig for a policy that was only abolished when problems started in England

That's actually an urban myth, on two scores.

Firstly, if that had been the thinking then the Tories would have suffered in Scotland in 1992. In fact, Major gained a seat north of the border. The Poll Tax was a live issue in 1992, it wasn't in 1987 or in 1997, when the decline happened.

Secondly, Scotland was never used as a guinea pig, though given that it was introduced in Scotland first, it's easy to see why the myth has become established. However, the difference was due primarily to the ease of introducing the two pieces of legislation and the determination of George Younger and Malcolm Rifkind to go into the 1987 election with the achievement of having already abolished the Rates, which were themselves unpopular (though not as unpopular as the Poll Tax would become). Given that there was no time to make meaningful feedback from the one introduction to the other, it couldn't have been a pilot exercise.

DavidL

david_herdson said:

FF43 said:

RobD said:

FF43 said:

RobD said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

This is starting to become a regular occurrence. Interesting tactic:

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/920652671975084034

So Universal Credit is going to be delayed?
But the govt (apparently) doesn't have an opinion on whether it should be delayed or not?

Isn’t the vote basically meaningless?

The government can get away with it as long as the public don't notice. But once the public realise the government can't be bothered to defend their policy and then ignore the vote that took place to stop it, the government are in serious trouble. Labour should make a lot of this.

I’m sure the public will get real riled up about opposition day motions!

The key factor is whether the public turns against Universal Credit, in which case government shenanigans will bite them. If they think UC is fine, methods won't be an issue. The Poll Tax is awful example for the Tories, who by the way lost their presence in Scotland for a generation over using that country as a guinea pig for a policy that was only abolished when problems started in England

That's actually an urban myth, on two scores.

Firstly, if that had been the thinking then the Tories would have suffered in Scotland in 1992. In fact, Major gained a seat north of the border. The Poll Tax was a live issue in 1992, it wasn't in 1987 or in 1997, when the decline happened.

Secondly, Scotland was never used as a guinea pig, though given that it was introduced in Scotland first, it's easy to see why the myth has become established. However, the difference was due primarily to the ease of introducing the two pieces of legislation and the determination of George Younger and Malcolm Rifkind to go into the 1987 election with the achievement of having already abolished the Rates, which were themselves unpopular (though not as unpopular as the Poll Tax would become). Given that there was no time to make meaningful feedback from the one introduction to the other, it couldn't have been a pilot exercise.

Its a myth of tremendous potency. The Tories in Scotland are harangued about the dreaded Poll Tax to this day. And, incredibly, local authorities are still trying to recover unpaid tax resulting in regular headlines about it.

anothernick

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

It's not. Most people are not following the ins and outs of the Brexit debacle that has such a horrid fascination for us on here - a bit like watching bricks being pulled out of a jenga tower.

But when the tower collapses people will notice and that is when opinions might change. Or not.

williamglenn

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

Polling companies should try to find ways to interrogate how solid the Leave vote is. The headline numbers could be concealing a more profound loss of confidence in the project.

TheScreamingEagles

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

foxinsoxuk

anothernick said:

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

It's not. Most people are not following the ins and outs of the Brexit debacle that has such a horrid fascination for us on here - a bit like watching bricks being pulled out of a jenga tower.

But when the tower collapses people will notice and that is when opinions might change. Or not.

It is when the impact becomes real in peoples lives, rather than an apparently esoteric discussion of customs and trade deals, that we will see voters start to shift, as well as a search for the guilty. This will not be pretty, but probably not until after Brexit itself.

FF43

I think it is fair to say that Corbyn hasn't sealed the deal with the British public, but May has unsealed her deal.

Also the Leave/Remain split is the dog that didn't bark. The key point is that there has been no acceptance of Brexit.

TonyE

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

david_herdson

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

FF43 said:

RobD said:

FF43 said:

RobD said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

This is starting to become a regular occurrence. Interesting tactic:

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/920652671975084034

So Universal Credit is going to be delayed?
But the govt (apparently) doesn't have an opinion on whether it should be delayed or not?

Isn’t the vote basically meaningless?

The government can get away with it as long as the public don't notice. But once the public realise the government can't be bothered to defend their policy and then ignore the vote that took place to stop it, the government are in serious trouble. Labour should make a lot of this.

I’m sure the public will get real riled up about opposition day motions!

The key factor is whether the public turns against Universal Credit, in which case government shenanigans will bite them. If they think UC is fine, methods won't be an issue. The Poll Tax is awful example for the Tories, who by the way lost their presence in Scotland for a generation over using that country as a guinea pig for a policy that was only abolished when problems started in England

That's actually an urban myth, on two scores.

Firstly, if that had been the thinking then the Tories would have suffered in Scotland in 1992. In fact, Major gained a seat north of the border. The Poll Tax was a live issue in 1992, it wasn't in 1987 or in 1997, when the decline happened.

Secondly, Scotland was never used as a guinea pig, though given that it was introduced in Scotland first, it's easy to see why the myth has become established. However, the difference was due primarily to the ease of introducing the two pieces of legislation and the determination of George Younger and Malcolm Rifkind to go into the 1987 election with the achievement of having already abolished the Rates, which were themselves unpopular (though not as unpopular as the Poll Tax would become). Given that there was no time to make meaningful feedback from the one introduction to the other, it couldn't have been a pilot exercise.

Its a myth of tremendous potency. The Tories in Scotland are harangued about the dreaded Poll Tax to this day. And, incredibly, local authorities are still trying to recover unpaid tax resulting in regular headlines about it.

I don't deny that it's a political truth; it's just that it's also a factual falsehood. Credit to Labour and the SNP for making the charge stick. But then it was a stupid way to introduce a stupid policy.

TheScreamingEagles

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

david_herdson

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Agreed.

david_herdson

williamglenn said:

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

Polling companies should try to find ways to interrogate how solid the Leave vote is. The headline numbers could be concealing a more profound loss of confidence in the project.

There was some YouGov polling on this recently. It's more that the Remain vote is firming up than the Leave one is weakening.

Brexit'll still happen. The political question is more about avoiding the damage that'll come from it.

PClipp

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Why not?

At least all the guilty Tories could take their turn at being the most despised politician in Britain.

Mind you, dealing with the post Brexit environment isn`s going to be a doddle either, since the present set of Conservatives are set on trashing the economy.

rkrkrk

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

We're a long way from the next election.
I think the Tories are best hoping for something to turn up and accepting the next little period will be tough for them. On the bright side, expectations for Brexit in the media are now so low they've a decent chance of exceeding them!

I still think Tories have a decent shot at holding onto power - the public aren't sold on Corbyn.

A new PM would inherit a pretty horrendous situation.
The DUP might come back and ask for more money. They'd have to make promises in the leadership campaign to the membership on Brexit which might well turn out not to be implementable in practice.

FF43

williamglenn said:

FF43 said:

Please don't stop. Ideas are organisms that breathe and develop. They are not copyright. I am quite an optimistic person and I think there may be a way out of the hole that doesn't involve rejoining the EU. It means getting together with the Swiss and the Norwegians and making a common pitch to the EU for associate membership on a shared values platform. The UK may have enough political clout and, putting it bluntly, money to do this. We would have to lose our negative mindsets, in particular the Leaver mindset of No, No , No (Money, ECJ, FoM, Single Marketetc)

I don't see any real way to design an associate membership that would be 'less Europe' than Dave's deal and the EU would have to slip up significantly for this to end up with the UK leading an alternative power bloc.

The UK and the EU need a relationship. A huge part of the problem is that people talk about deals rather than relationships. The government is the worst offender. The EU is bigger but more importantly represents 27 countries, while we only represent one. First and foremost that relationship has to work for the EU. IT's disappointing that no-one including our supposed negotiators put any effort into understanding what the EU side want. Shared values is a big part of what they are keen on, along with respect for their institutions and money.

dixiedean

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

Which raises the question What should A N Other Tory PM do differently?
We may expect them to do it better, but no magical Brexit deal will be forthcoming anytime soon.
Which specific policies do you expect to be dropped or introduced, given that much of the manifesto has already been ditched in just 4 months?

david_herdson

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

FF43

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

That's actually an urban myth, on two scores.

Firstly, if that had been the thinking then the Tories would have suffered in Scotland in 1992. In fact, Major gained a seat north of the border. The Poll Tax was a live issue in 1992, it wasn't in 1987 or in 1997, when the decline happened.

Secondly, Scotland was never used as a guinea pig, though given that it was introduced in Scotland first, it's easy to see why the myth has become established. However, the difference was due primarily to the ease of introducing the two pieces of legislation and the determination of George Younger and Malcolm Rifkind to go into the 1987 election with the achievement of having already abolished the Rates, which were themselves unpopular (though not as unpopular as the Poll Tax would become). Given that there was no time to make meaningful feedback from the one introduction to the other, it couldn't have been a pilot exercise.

Its a myth of tremendous potency. The Tories in Scotland are harangued about the dreaded Poll Tax to this day. And, incredibly, local authorities are still trying to recover unpaid tax resulting in regular headlines about it.

I don't deny that it's a political truth; it's just that it's also a factual falsehood. Credit to Labour and the SNP for making the charge stick. But then it was a stupid way to introduce a stupid policy.

It's not wholly false. The poll tax was introduced by an effectively colonial Scottish executive The Conservatives weren't the majority party in Scotland at the time and had no mandate in Scotland. The policy was only overturned in Scotland after effective political pressure against it was applied in England. Scottish objections were ignored.

dr_spyn

https://twitter.com/Survation/status/920674483698130945

Pulpstar

Corbynism is like some sort of virulent parasite. Talked to a previously sensible friend in the centre pretty much of British politics. Near enough full on marxist now.

rkrkrk

Pulpstar said:

Corbynism is like some sort of virulent parasite. Talked to a previously sensible friend in the centre pretty much of British politics. Near enough full on marxist now.

I've encountered this reaction from the other side.
A Lib Dem friend I used to agree with a lot on politics horrified that I would support Corbyn.

PClipp

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn`t they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

What the Conservative Party needs is to replace every last one of its MPs.

JohnO

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

Monksfield

Pulpstar said:

Corbynism is like some sort of virulent parasite. Talked to a previously sensible friend in the centre pretty much of British politics. Near enough full on marxist now.

Thing is Corbyn sounded OK at PMQ today. May sounded pretty poor. Brexit is killing the Tories, day after day.

williamglenn

Ksenia Sobchak has announced she's running for the Russian Presidency in 2018. She's the daughter of one of Putin's mentors in Saint Petersburg and is a kind of reality TV star and liberal controversialist. Very interesting move.

TheScreamingEagles

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

Sorry. I won’t say she has to go until next February.

dr_spyn

How often does Vince Cable get to ask a question at PMQs, missed it today, but is he less or more visible than Tim Farron?

JohnO

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

Sorry. I won’t tell her to go until next February.

We can then lead a joint deputation as the men in red shoes.

HYUFD

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/Survation/status/920674483698130945

Subtract 2% from the UKIP score and take them back to general election levels and add that to the Tories and they would be on 40%. Post the Florence speech the Tories are now clearly losing Leavers to UKIP.

The main gains for Labour in this poll have come from the SNP and the LDs not the Tories

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Glenn, I forget, is this the first or second (after the Medvedev break) of Putin's presidential terms?

He can only be president twice consecutively, hence the Medvedev 'premiership', so I'm wondering if she's going to be his glove puppet this time around.

Mind you, Putin must be getting a bit long in the tooth. Sooner or later he'll have to hand over to the next czar.

Tissue_Price

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

TheScreamingEagles

JohnO said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

Sorry. I won’t tell her to go until next February.

We can then lead a joint deputation as the men in red shoes.

Agreed.

david_herdson

FF43 said:

david_herdson said:

DavidL said:

david_herdson said:

That's actually an urban myth, on two scores.

Firstly, if that had been the thinking then the Tories would have suffered in Scotland in 1992. In fact, Major gained a seat north of the border. The Poll Tax was a live issue in 1992, it wasn't in 1987 or in 1997, when the decline happened.

Secondly, Scotland was never used as a guinea pig, though given that it was introduced in Scotland first, it's easy to see why the myth has become established. However, the difference was due primarily to the ease of introducing the two pieces of legislation and the determination of George Younger and Malcolm Rifkind to go into the 1987 election with the achievement of having already abolished the Rates, which were themselves unpopular (though not as unpopular as the Poll Tax would become). Given that there was no time to make meaningful feedback from the one introduction to the other, it couldn't have been a pilot exercise.

Its a myth of tremendous potency. The Tories in Scotland are harangued about the dreaded Poll Tax to this day. And, incredibly, local authorities are still trying to recover unpaid tax resulting in regular headlines about it.

I don't deny that it's a political truth; it's just that it's also a factual falsehood. Credit to Labour and the SNP for making the charge stick. But then it was a stupid way to introduce a stupid policy.

It's not wholly false. The poll tax was introduced by an effectively colonial Scottish executive The Conservatives weren't the majority party in Scotland at the time and had no mandate in Scotland. The policy was only overturned in Scotland after effective political pressure against it was applied in England. Scottish objections were ignored.

As it was a UK policy, the 'mandate' question doesn't arise. In any case, the Rates were even more unpopular in Scotland among those who paid them than they were in England, which was one of the main reasons the reform was introduced as quickly as it was. Neither Labour nor the SNP made anything of a campaign to retain the Rates.

But your point is a fundamentally different one from the original objection, which was that (1) Scotland was used as a guinea pig for the policy and (2) that the Tories paid the price for doing so. In reality, this retrofitted myth has been built into a left critique of the Tory years well after the event.

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

dr_spyn said:

Another limited move on polling re Remain / Leave, despite all the excited breathless news reporting of deadlock and spin from London and Brussels. How far is this really a shift in sentiment beyond normal margins of error?

Polling companies should try to find ways to interrogate how solid the Leave vote is. The headline numbers could be concealing a more profound loss of confidence in the project.

Remain led with Survation in their final EU referendum poll.

Leave of course won the referendum by 4%.

david_herdson

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

JohnO

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

Scott_P

TonyE said:

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

You still think May can deliver a credible Brexit negotiation?

Bless...

AlastairMeeks

I think the Tories underestimate the advantage they would have of getting a fresh face in the top slot. The public are fair-minded and always give a new leader a chance to make an impression. And a fresh tone would make the world of difference both with sceptics in the UK and with Eurocrats.

JohnO

And Liam Fox but not Davis.

HYUFD

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

If May goes anytime soon either Davis or Johnson are almost certain to be the next PM

JohnO

HYUFD said:

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

If May goes anytime soon either Davis or Johnson are almost certain to be the next PM

I know and both fill me with dread which is why May should stay but only if she conducts an extensive reshuffle now.

Mexicanpete

HYUFD said:

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

If May goes anytime soon either Davis or Johnson are almost certain to be the next PM

...but one comes over as unhinged and the other as useless these days. Ms Rudd is your only hope of redemption. Oh but wait...she generally talks sense so that won't happen.

PClipp

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?
[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Your problem is that they were all elected on the May ticket - so they are all thoroughly tainted as continuity May. And what is worse, they are all propping her up now.

Sorry, Mr Herdson, but your Conservative Party is irretrievably tainted by May. She taints and corrupts the lot of you.

The only exception, just possibly, is TSE.

Pong

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig and be foisted on the country.

JohnO

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

williamglenn

AlastairMeeks said:

I think the Tories underestimate the advantage they would have of getting a fresh face in the top slot. The public are fair-minded and always give a new leader a chance to make an impression. And a fresh tone would make the world of difference both with sceptics in the UK and with Eurocrats.

Bring in a game theory expert from academia to replace Davis perhaps?

Pong

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

After Howard, Hague & IDS had worn them down.

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

foxinsoxuk

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?
[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Your problem is that they were all elected on the May ticket - so they are all thoroughly tainted as continuity May. And what is worse, they are all propping her up now.

Sorry, Mr Herdson, but your Conservative Party is irretrievably tainted by May. She taints and corrupts the lot of you.

The only exception, just possibly, is TSE.

On the subject of May, a little Germanic humour:

https://twitter.com/MichaelH14/status/920401189623169025

TheScreamingEagles

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

No she wouldn’t.

foxinsoxuk

williamglenn said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I think the Tories underestimate the advantage they would have of getting a fresh face in the top slot. The public are fair-minded and always give a new leader a chance to make an impression. And a fresh tone would make the world of difference both with sceptics in the UK and with Eurocrats.

Bring in a game theory expert from academia to replace Davis perhaps?

Such as Varoufakis? He did brilliantly for Greece vs EU as I recall!

TonyE

Scott_P said:

TonyE said:

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

You still think May can deliver a credible Brexit negotiation?

Bless...

Prime Ministers don't negotiate. Civil Servants do that, with the guidance of their ministers (in this case Davis). Politicians talk in public, but the real deal is done in private, by technocrats with the skill and understanding that goes way beyond the politician's grasp of detail.

Ishmael_Z

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

She does, but then she has to think what to do about Boris. And even if she doesn't move him, he is likely to think (quite rightly) that large scale "next generation" appointments mean the beginning of the end of his chances for a shot at the leadership.

HYUFD

JohnO said:

HYUFD said:

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

If May goes anytime soon either Davis or Johnson are almost certain to be the next PM

I know and both fill me with dread which is why May should stay but only if she conducts an extensive reshuffle now.

According to Survation in the summer Rudd and Hammond would both do even worse against Corbyn than May with Labour increasing its lead against them, especially Hammond,Boris would increase the Tory voteshare slightly but the Labour lead slightly too, Davis would have a slightly lower Tory voteshare than Boris but with a lower Labour lead.

So there is no panacea at present and the Mogg has a chance if he decided to run

Tissue_Price

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

No she wouldn’t.

Even Boris Johnson wouldn't have beaten May, according to YouGov. @Pong's caricature of the membership is as unfair (and uninformed) as @P_Clipp's caricature of the parliamentary Party.

Scott_P

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

JohnO

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

You’re a Green Party supporter, are you not? With the greatest respect, I think I know my party (as a member for over 40 years...so I’m still a Young Conservative, ahem) a little better than your good self. In 2016 May would have won convincingly. Who knows what will happen when she goes. A right-winger could win (not doubting that) but not necessarily so: as we’re in government the focus will be on who is best placed to secure reelection in a tough contest in 2022.

RochdalePioneers

dixiedean said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

Which raises the question What should A N Other Tory PM do differently?
We may expect them to do it better, but no magical Brexit deal will be forthcoming anytime soon.
Which specific policies do you expect to be dropped or introduced, given that much of the manifesto has already been ditched in just 4 months?

A government can get away with being seen as nasty if the nasty policy works. "Yes it hurt, yes it worked" was a success. The problem with the current Tories is that they are seen as really really nasty and with the policies not fulfilling their intended purpose being utterly crap with it. Nasty for no reason, that's a recipe for long term damage. Because if you want to be seen as a party of amoral sociopaths who like torturing people then keep going.

And Universal Credit is one such policy where most people from all parties agree with the concept, but for some reason the Tories seem determined to deny the effects. A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel. Making people wait at least 6 weeks - longer than any employer - for UC in arrears because "its like being in work" is utterly stupid when no-one in the world of work gets paid 6 weekly. Had they set it to 4 weeks they might at least have had some cover...

The evidence on UC is clear and unambiguous - it creates a wall of debt that cripples the already poor, and is driving a wave of evictions and emergency housing needs that have councils crapping themselves as UC heads in their direction. We the taxpayer pay to mop up the mess in human lives destroyed by this absurd rule, it actually COSTS us money yet the Tory MP sheep bleat out "how would Labour pay for cutting the time" as if there are no on-costs and that human life and dignity has no value.

A new leader could grab the policy and make immediate changes. There, a starter for 10.

MikeSmithson

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

No she wouldn’t.

But she's a mother.

Richard_Tyndall

From the header: "There’s a hypothetical 2nd EuRef question voting question which has Remain 3 points ahead – 52 to 49."

Excuse me asking but has no one noticed that we apparently have 101% of people voting in this hypothetical referendum? Is this a way for Remain to make sure they win by fixing the result?

HYUFD

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

If May goes anytime soon either Davis or Johnson are almost certain to be the next PM

...but one comes over as unhinged and the other as useless these days. Ms Rudd is your only hope of redemption. Oh but wait...she generally talks sense so that won't happen.

Rudd polls worse than both Boris and Davis, she loses Leavers to UKIP and Labour without gaining Remainers from Labour or the LDs.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Meeks, ha.

The electorate might give a new leader a fair wind. The eurocrats won't care. They swallowed half the rebate and gave nothing back when Blair was PM. When Cameron was holding an In/Out vote they offered peanuts and claimed they were watermelons. When May offered a conciliatory tone at Florence they just wanted to know about the money.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it'd be a mistake to axe May earlier than most would have expected. The problem is that the likeliest successors all look rubbish, and what interesting talent there is languishes on the backbenches because May is too weak to demote ministers and promote fresh blood.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Tyndall, probably 48.5% and 51.5%, rounding up.

Mr. P, and what will the EU demand for that?

HYUFD

JohnO said:

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

You’re a Green Party supporter, are you not? With the greatest respect, I think I know my party (as a member for over 40 years...so I’m still a Young Conservative, ahem) a little better than your good self. In 2016 May would have won convincingly. Who knows what will happen when she goes. A right-winger could win (not doubting that) but not necessarily so: as we’re in government the focus will be on who is best placed to secure reelection in a tough contest in 2022.

Tories told Labour Kendall was their best bet not Corbyn, so why should Tories listen to leftwingers say pick Rudd who none of them would vote for anyway?

Roger

Another tipping point on the way. I think we're approaching a time when we'll need a collective noun for the Remain movement which is more substantial than simply Remainers

foxinsoxuk

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

I think that very likely will happen, and may well be the torpedo that sinks the May government.

Pulpstar

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

JohnO

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

Ishmael_Z

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pong said:

JohnO said:

Pong said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?

[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Wishful thinking.

The party members will decide. They won't accept another stitchup. And they'll go for the most rightwing option available.

Whoever appeals to your execution consultant mate will get the gig.

You mean like they did in 2005?

Leadsom would have beaten May.

Next time around, she (or similar), will.

No she wouldn’t.

But she's a mother.

The horrible thing is, that was the most truthful and insightful remark that anyone made about May at any time up to the GE result. The fact that May is childless and lacks the empathy which in most cases gives the childless a workable degree of insight into parenthood informed the dementia tax and the lack of anything for the young in the manifesto.

Leadsom still shouldn't have said it, of course.

RochdalePioneers

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

What do they care if the planes stop flying? They'll just blame johnny foreigner who should have some bloody respect for the people who liberated/defeated them in WWII. Yes I know that the more you look at the practical details the worse hard brexit gets, but to the swivel-eyed they simply couldn't give a monkeys. In their heads we'll probably send a gunship over to put the fear up them. If France will lend us a gunship...

TheScreamingEagles

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

My own feeling in the views of members is ‘Corbyn as PM, not on my watch’

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

My own feeling in the views of members is ‘Corbyn as PM, not on my watch’

Ruth Davidson badly needs a parachute.

TonyE

RochdalePioneers said:

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

What do they care if the planes stop flying? They'll just blame johnny foreigner who should have some bloody respect for the people who liberated/defeated them in WWII. Yes I know that the more you look at the practical details the worse hard brexit gets, but to the swivel-eyed they simply couldn't give a monkeys. In their heads we'll probably send a gunship over to put the fear up them. If France will lend us a gunship...

What do you think European carriers will say to their respective govts if there is no agreement on flights? It's not going to be just us...

HYUFD

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

If Davidson was a Leaver she would win easily but she is not and she is not interested in the job snyway

JohnO

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

My own feeling in the views of members is ‘Corbyn as PM, not on my watch’

Exactly so. Spot on. But, like Casino (and yourself?) I fear that’s currently the likeliest outcome.

Roger

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

You missed Fox Davis and Patel

rcs1000

JohnO said:

And Liam Fox but not Davis.

When the full story of Brexit is written, Liam Fox's failure to deliver any of the things he promised will deserve a whole chapter.

He has flapped around and shown a total lack of understanding of how trade agreements work. I wonder, before he took his job, if he'd ever even read through a single (simple) agreement. (Forget NAFTA, which takes 32 separate PDFs before appendices.)

And his tweet about the UK being able to sign an FTA with Israel post Brexit demonstrated extraordinary ignorance of the EU's existing agreements.

Could we please give Kwasi Kwarteng the job instead. He's 10x smarter, less arrogant, and understands the world of business and finance. (And he's a Leaver.)

TonyE

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

Don't mobile companies still charge you to call an 0800 number?

RochdalePioneers

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

They know the cost of these numbers. A lot of mobile deals still don't include them, and ones that do often charge a lot more to ring them. A phone number to beg for help when you have nothing by definition should be free. This isn't party politics this is common sense and actually giving a shit about the effect your policies have on people.

Go ask anyone who isn't a git whether setting a chargeable phone number for people who are penniless makes any kind of sense.

williamglenn

TonyE said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

What do they care if the planes stop flying? They'll just blame johnny foreigner who should have some bloody respect for the people who liberated/defeated them in WWII. Yes I know that the more you look at the practical details the worse hard brexit gets, but to the swivel-eyed they simply couldn't give a monkeys. In their heads we'll probably send a gunship over to put the fear up them. If France will lend us a gunship...

What do you think European carriers will say to their respective govts if there is no agreement on flights? It's not going to be just us...

The weakest link is Brexit. It will break long before it gets to that point.

Pulpstar

RochdalePioneers said:

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

They know the cost of these numbers. A lot of mobile deals still don't include them, and ones that do often charge a lot more to ring them. A phone number to beg for help when you have nothing by definition should be free. This isn't party politics this is common sense and actually giving a shit about the effect your policies have on people.

Go ask anyone who isn't a git whether setting a chargeable phone number for people who are penniless makes any kind of sense.

Oh get off your high horse, you voted for Brexit, and you're going to vote for Corbyn too. Both will hit the poorest hardest.

RochdalePioneers

TonyE said:

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

Don't mobile companies still charge you to call an 0800 number?

Nope. Been free for 2 years

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

TonyE said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

What do they care if the planes stop flying? They'll just blame johnny foreigner who should have some bloody respect for the people who liberated/defeated them in WWII. Yes I know that the more you look at the practical details the worse hard brexit gets, but to the swivel-eyed they simply couldn't give a monkeys. In their heads we'll probably send a gunship over to put the fear up them. If France will lend us a gunship...

What do you think European carriers will say to their respective govts if there is no agreement on flights? It's not going to be just us...

The weakest link is Brexit. It will break long before it gets to that point.

If May goes Brexit is even more likely as she was a Remainer and would be replaced by a Leaver and Corbyn remains committed to Brexit too.

JohnO

Roger said:

JohnO said:

Tissue_Price said:

JohnO said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.

Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.

It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.

She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

Absolutely and depressingly it seems I have to re-educate TSE on this point almost every week. But even my patience and loyalty is being stretched to breaking point.

Time is now running very very short for this reshuffle to bring on new talent into senior positions with credible leadership prospects three years hence.

If these changes do not take place before Christmas, and the govt staggers on in pathetic aimlessness well then, this Tory activist is in oh, ffs, PM, just GO and let’s be done with you.

I would like to see a reshuffle too. But who can she sack? Can we collectively come up with a plausible, balanced list of (say) 6 Cabinet ministers?

Johnson, Truss, Javid, Green, Grayling, Leadsom - that’s my first six. More may follow.

You missed Fox Davis and Patel

I added Fox but would retain Davis who is performing better than I had expected (not that I would want him as leader). Thought about adding Patel (who personally I loath) but the Tories are a coalition and she represents an important section of the party. She stays.

Richard_Tyndall

Roger said:

Another tipping point on the way. I think we're approaching a time when we'll need a collective noun for the Remain movement which is more substantial than simply Remainers

A Whinge of Remainers?

RochdalePioneers

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

They know the cost of these numbers. A lot of mobile deals still don't include them, and ones that do often charge a lot more to ring them. A phone number to beg for help when you have nothing by definition should be free. This isn't party politics this is common sense and actually giving a shit about the effect your policies have on people.

Go ask anyone who isn't a git whether setting a chargeable phone number for people who are penniless makes any kind of sense.

Oh get off your high horse, you voted for Brexit, and you're going to vote for Corbyn too. Both will hit the poorest hardest.

"Ah but" actually its you hurting the poor, not me. Convincing...

On issues like UC I don't give a toss about party politics, I just want to the destruction of people's lives to stop. And if that is the Tories stopping the roll-out to fix it then fantastic. They won't though, it costs too much money apparently.

Mortimer

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Pulpstar said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A phone line to beg for money when penniless that costs 55p a minute isn't just stupid, its cruel.

The phone line was a local ratenumber, unless you want the full nationalisation of mobbile phone companies you can't lay this one at the government's door.
OK So they've changed it to freephone (And thats no bad thing) - but using the HEARTLESS 55p line as part of your argument is tribal tripe.

They know the cost of these numbers. A lot of mobile deals still don't include them, and ones that do often charge a lot more to ring them. A phone number to beg for help when you have nothing by definition should be free. This isn't party politics this is common sense and actually giving a shit about the effect your policies have on people.

Go ask anyone who isn't a git whether setting a chargeable phone number for people who are penniless makes any kind of sense.

Oh get off your high horse, you voted for Brexit, and you're going to vote for Corbyn too. Both will hit the poorest hardest.

+1

The rise and emboldening of the SJW-class is one of the most annoying aspects of Corbo's leadership.

TheScreamingEagles

JohnO said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

My own feeling in the views of members is ‘Corbyn as PM, not on my watch’

Exactly so. Spot on. But, like Casino (and yourself?) I fear that’s currently the likeliest outcome.

I try and not be defeatist but I think Brexit is going to doom the Tories to opposition for a while.

This piece by the always excellent Tom Clark has written this which seems very plausible.

The seven steps from a “no-deal” Brexit to Jeremy Corbyn’s Britain.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-seven-steps-from-the-no-deal-brexit-to-jeremy-corbyns-britain

Roger

foxinsoxuk said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

PClipp said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TonyE said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

She really needs to go.
Six points behind with the gold standard and losing at PMQs on the subject of the economy to Jezbollah.

This is daft - why sacrifice another candidate on the Brexit process? Wait, get the negotiation done, then bring in the next candidate to deal with the post Brexit environment.

Because the longer she stays the bigger Corbyn’s majority.
It is like osmosis, her shiteness is now damaging the Tory brand.

The shiteness won't be changed sufficiently by replacing her with Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Rudd or whoever. Not at the moment anyway. It all stems from Brexit and the splits internally, and the difficulty in reaching a deal with the EU, will not be resolved by a change of leader.
She needs a reshuffle to bring in the next generation and then time to mature as potential leadership candidates. Someone untainted can then lead the party into 2022.

But wouldn't they be equally tainted if they were promoted by her?
[snip].

No - or only if they sought to be a Continuity May. Any new leader has the chance to set their own agenda, subject to their own actions and record.

Your problem is that they were all elected on the May ticket - so they are all thoroughly tainted as continuity May. And what is worse, they are all propping her up now.

Sorry, Mr Herdson, but your Conservative Party is irretrievably tainted by May. She taints and corrupts the lot of you.

The only exception, just possibly, is TSE.

On the subject of May, a little Germanic humour:

https://twitter.com/MichaelH14/status/920401189623169025

That is VERY good! Cruel but spot on!

Pulpstar

RochdalePioneers said:

On issues like UC I don't give a toss about party politics, I just want to the destruction of people's lives to stop. And if that is the Tories stopping the roll-out to fix it then fantastic. They won't though, it costs too much money apparently.

UC has its issues, I won't deny.
The gov't tagging on a local rate phoneline for issues is not a deliberate act of cruelty though.

justin124

I see Sarah Wollaston has said she may vote with Labour tonight.

FF43

AlastairMeeks said:

I think the Tories underestimate the advantage they would have of getting a fresh face in the top slot. The public are fair-minded and always give a new leader a chance to make an impression. And a fresh tone would make the world of difference both with sceptics in the UK and with Eurocrats.

Who?

Mortimer

justin124 said:

I see Sarah Wollaston has said she may vote with Labour tonight.

For someone who continually professes not to be a Labour supporter, you sound amazingly like a Labour supporter....

Ishmael_Z

RochdalePioneers said:

Scott_P said:

Prediction:

We will ask for an extension to Article 50.

The "no deal" brigade have been busted. When they say "no deal", they mean "apart from the deals that keep the planes flying and so on and so forth..."

Our team are so crap, there is no chance of us negotiating such a "no deal" in the time left.

There will be a vote in Parliament to ask for an extension which the Government will lose.

What do they care if the planes stop flying? They'll just blame johnny foreigner who should have some bloody respect for the people who liberated/defeated them in WWII. Yes I know that the more you look at the practical details the worse hard brexit gets, but to the swivel-eyed they simply couldn't give a monkeys. In their heads we'll probably send a gunship over to put the fear up them. If France will lend us a gunship...

Are you usually this Dave Spart-ist?

Not gunships btw, Lancasters. The Boche still build quite a lot of cars downstream of the Möhne Dam.

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

And even on Con Home favourabity ratings, it’s Ruth Davidson that tops the polls. Most members are not that ideologically committed one way or the other.

My own feeling in the views of members is ‘Corbyn as PM, not on my watch’

Exactly so. Spot on. But, like Casino (and yourself?) I fear that’s currently the likeliest outcome.

I try and not be defeatist but I think Brexit is going to doom the Tories to opposition for a while.

This piece by the always excellent Tom Clark has written this which seems very plausible.

The seven steps from a “no-deal” Brexit to Jeremy Corbyn’s Britain.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-seven-steps-from-the-no-deal-brexit-to-jeremy-corbyns-britain

If Corbyn wins it will be weariness of austerity which does it not Brexit.

Corbyn has simply neutralised Brexit by accepting it to focus on attacking austerity, zero hours contracts, housing, students loan costs etc