Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
That's the wrong way of looking at it. IDS's profile was much lower than Clarke or Portillo. He could therefore act effectively as the stop-X candidate against both the other two (helped, it has to be said, by his Euroscepticism).
JRM, despite being a backbencher, is prominent because of - and only because of - his policy stance. That alone will make him a target for stop-X voting rather than a magnet for tactical votes and transfers.
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
Israel offered an unworkable state with no control over their borders or their air space. That is for starters, anyone who has looked at the deal can tell you it wasn't a serious offer.
Israel did at one point start to make serious efforts towards peace. The Israelis assassinated him.
Also I'd point out that refusing to allow a Palestinian state to exist, making one ever more impossible by seizing more land is even worse, even if you make pretty statements about being for a Palestinian state.
Actions speak louder than words, except in this conflict were the beaten poor and starved are the bad guys because you know... words and stuff.
You left your tin foil over there.
Rabin was assassinated by a single extremist, not "the Israelis". But I'm having supper with his grandson on Sunday if you want me to share any evidence that you have...
It's very amusing to see Labour complaining that Boris Johnson is not acting like a colonial-era grandee and calling on him to overrule the benighted locals:
In 75 nations in the world being gay is illegal and will land you in jail and in 11 it is a capital offence subject to the death penalty.
In Bermuda it is still legal and gay partners will continue have full legal recognition of their partnerships in terms of pensions, health inheritance etc - identical to the UK before the coalition. They just can't say they are married.
I wish our MPs had a bit more to say about the 75 and the 11 than stressing about Bermuda where LGBT people have far more rights even post this change than in the majority of the world.
In the end it's an independent governing state and its own parliamentarians have made this choice. Its not Britain - Brits have zero right to live and work there as of right. And it's more progressive on gay laws than many narions of which the Queen is head of state.
Don't our MPs have better things to do with their time? It's for Bermuda and its elected representatives to decide on - not for our MPs,
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
That's the wrong way of looking at it. IDS's profile was much lower than Clarke or Portillo. He could therefore act effectively as the stop-X candidate against both the other two (helped, it has to be said, by his Euroscepticism).
JRM, despite being a backbencher, is prominent because of - and only because of - his policy stance. That alone will make him a target for stop-X voting rather than a magnet for tactical votes and transfers.
Yes but there is always a right wing block vote amongst Tory MPs which ensures one of their own gets to the final 2 e.g. in 2001 for IDS, in 2005 for Davis, in 2016 for Leadsom and maybe next time for Mogg
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
It was better than Hague's is about the best you could say of it but at least you could listen to Hague's speeches and be fired up without cringing as was the case with IDS
If someone other than IDS had won, they would have fought and lost the 2005 election.
And Cameron would never have had the chance to become leader afterwards - he would have been too junior. It would probably have been David Davis...
Cameron only got a Shadow Cabinet position after the 2005 general election, not impossible Portillo could have got a similar result as Howard, resigned and also appointed younger faces to succeed him. Clarke may have got a hung parliament though and stayed on
Did someone say "What if Ken Clarke had won the 2001 Tory leadership contest?"?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
That's the wrong way of looking at it. IDS's profile was much lower than Clarke or Portillo. He could therefore act effectively as the stop-X candidate against both the other two (helped, it has to be said, by his Euroscepticism).
JRM, despite being a backbencher, is prominent because of - and only because of - his policy stance. That alone will make him a target for stop-X voting rather than a magnet for tactical votes and transfers.
Yes but there is always a right wing block vote amongst Tory MPs which ensures one of their own gets to the final 2 e.g. in 2001 for IDS, in 2005 for Davis, in 2016 for Leadsom and maybe next time for Mogg
Which implies that the Stop-JRM will be Boris or Gove (or possibly someone like Raab, if given time).
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
It was better than Hague's is about the best you could say of it but at least you could listen to Hague's speeches and be fired up without cringing as was the case with IDS
If someone other than IDS had won, they would have fought and lost the 2005 election.
And Cameron would never have had the chance to become leader afterwards - he would have been too junior. It would probably have been David Davis...
Cameron only got a Shadow Cabinet position after the 2005 general election, not impossible Portillo could have got a similar result as Howard, resigned and also appointed younger faces to succeed him. Clarke may have got a hung parliament though and stayed on
Did someone say "What if Ken Clarke had won the 2001 Tory leadership contest?"?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
That's the wrong way of looking at it. IDS's profile was much lower than Clarke or Portillo. He could therefore act effectively as the stop-X candidate against both the other two (helped, it has to be said, by his Euroscepticism).
JRM, despite being a backbencher, is prominent because of - and only because of - his policy stance. That alone will make him a target for stop-X voting rather than a magnet for tactical votes and transfers.
Yes but there is always a right wing block vote amongst Tory MPs which ensures one of their own gets to the final 2 e.g. in 2001 for IDS, in 2005 for Davis, in 2016 for Leadsom and maybe next time for Mogg
Which implies that the Stop-JRM will be Boris or Gove (or possibly someone like Raab, if given time).
Unless there is a bigger stop Boris movement, Gove came third last time
Minford published a report saying that the Irish border won't be a problem since we already have passport checks as the UK isn't in Schengen. He's a crank.
If the Labour party's principles can be abandoned so easily when it comes to Jews, why they might just as easily be abandoned when it comes to other minorities: women, for instance, or gays or others. And some of us might well conclude that Labour's claim to the moral high ground is so much phooey.
Labour's "principles" are too often used to attack others but are not seen as a moral imperative which should govern their own actions.
If your "principles" involve us sitting back and cheering the Israelis on in taking everything from the Palestinians and using their reaction as an excuse to do that then I will have no part in it.
What would those same women and minorities make of us if we abandoned the Arabs living in Palestine to their fate just because the media does not care for them?
I realise that Arabs are deeply unpopular in this country, notice the difference between the attacks in cologne and the presidents club over here.
You stick with your easy target, it was the Jewish people in the 30's, today its the Arabs. I for one will have no part in it, neither will I vote for a party that would.
If the Labour party's principles can be abandoned so easily when it comes to Jews, why they might just as easily be abandoned when it comes to other minorities: women, for instance, or gays or others. And some of us might well conclude that Labour's claim to the moral high ground is so much phooey.
Labour's "principles" are too often used to attack others but are not seen as a moral imperative which should govern their own actions.
If your "principles" involve us sitting back and cheering the Israelis on in taking everything from the Palestinians and using their reaction as an excuse to do that then I will have no part in it.
What would those same women and minorities make of us if we abandoned the Arabs living in Palestine to their fate just because the media does not care for them?
I realise that Arabs are deeply unpopular in this country, notice the difference between the attacks in cologne and the presidents club over here.
You stick with your easy target, it was the Jewish people in the 30's, today its the Arabs. I for one will have no part in it, neither will I vote for a party that would.
If the Labour party's principles can be abandoned so easily when it comes to Jews, why they might just as easily be abandoned when it comes to other minorities: women, for instance, or gays or others. And some of us might well conclude that Labour's claim to the moral high ground is so much phooey.
Labour's "principles" are too often used to attack others but are not seen as a moral imperative which should govern their own actions.
If your "principles" involve us sitting back and cheering the Israelis on in taking everything from the Palestinians and using their reaction as an excuse to do that then I will have no part in it.
What would those same women and minorities make of us if we abandoned the Arabs living in Palestine to their fate just because the media does not care for them?
I realise that Arabs are deeply unpopular in this country, notice the difference between the attacks in cologne and the presidents club over here.
You stick with your easy target, it was the Jewish people in the 30's, today its the Arabs. I for one will have no part in it, neither will I vote for a party that would.
The party is a moral crusade or it is nothing.
Peak bonkers. How many actual rapes at the President's Club?
Comments
NEW THREAD
JRM, despite being a backbencher, is prominent because of - and only because of - his policy stance. That alone will make him a target for stop-X voting rather than a magnet for tactical votes and transfers.
Just how many remains murky:
https://www.haaretz.com/1.4837482
In Bermuda it is still legal and gay partners will continue have full legal recognition of their partnerships in terms of pensions, health inheritance etc - identical to the UK before the coalition. They just can't say they are married.
I wish our MPs had a bit more to say about the 75 and the 11 than stressing about Bermuda where LGBT people have far more rights even post this change than in the majority of the world.
In the end it's an independent governing state and its own parliamentarians have made this choice. Its not Britain - Brits have zero right to live and work there as of right. And it's more progressive on gay laws than many narions of which the Queen is head of state.
Don't our MPs have better things to do with their time? It's for Bermuda and its elected representatives to decide on - not for our MPs,
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/but-for-a-vote-ken-clarke-wins-the-2001-tory-leadership-contest.361152/
He is box office
https://www.economistsforfreetrade.com/News/pessimistic-civil-servants-are-cooking-the-books-patrick-minford/
What would those same women and minorities make of us if we abandoned the Arabs living in Palestine to their fate just because the media does not care for them?
I realise that Arabs are deeply unpopular in this country, notice the difference between the attacks in cologne and the presidents club over here.
You stick with your easy target, it was the Jewish people in the 30's, today its the Arabs. I for one will have no part in it, neither will I vote for a party that would.
The party is a moral crusade or it is nothing.
Thousands of rapes... ohh no. Remember it is okay as long as a Muslim didn't do it.