Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If not May, then who?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If not May, then who?
Correctly identifying the next Conservative leader is a notoriously tricky task. While the golden rule is to lay the favourite – something which can accumulate good profits over a prolonged period – it’s still quite a cautious strategy. The more ambitious, but much more difficult, one is to try to back the winner.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/9/16997266/apple-source-code-leak-intern-internal-tools-jailbreaking-github-ios-9
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43013669
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43014081
A couple points. We now know that Cameron was a fully fledged supporter of the EU. Back in 2005 he went to great lengths to hide that from the membership. Hell, he even wound up Merkel by pulling the Tories out of the EPP. But when it came to it, after all the "no ifs, no buts", Cameron showed his true colours in 2016. Whether or not that will have an impact on the leadership election is another matter. My dad (not a Tory Party member) still thinks it's wrong that the Tories ended up with a Remainer after the referendum. But I guess it depends when the election takes place as to the influence of Brexit.
Gove would likely be required by MPs to sign in blood that he wouldn’t invite Dominic Cummings into Number Ten before being assured of their support.
Why? Cummings oversaw one of the greatest political upsets ever. He's a winner.
Finally, what of Phil Hammond? Surely the current CotE is worthy of consideration.
Independent
Amazing that the Chancellor of the Exchequer doesn’t feature in such an article. It shows just how prey to dogma the Conservatives currently are.
Leave areas were warned about the economic choices, including job losses, of leaving. They chose to go against that. It is wrong to insulate voters from the consequences of their actions.
Large scale, well paid manufacturing jobs are going to be few, because of automation as much as any other reason. The few that do exist are going to be highly technical.
More public spending? Well, it's higher than it was last year.
Lower taxes? We can hope so, especially on some VAT-rated products.
I think that things are rarely either as good as they seems or as bad as they seem. Brexit is no apocalypse, nor is it going to be the rebirth of us as the workshop of the world.
None of that alters the issue: in attacking me personally you undermine your own case - ad hominem is the sign of someone who doesn’t have confidence in their own arguments
PB benefits from people sharing something of themselves (as you do also). They should not feel constantly that anything they share might be used against them.
There's a reason why most of those that know what they are talking about, the disparaged experts, supported staying in the EU. Many Leavers operate on faith or intuition, and that's OK, assume Remainers must also build the reality from the belief. But it's not our project. We are more sceptical and so work from the evidence.
Gove *and* Boris making the final three would be interesting. Would raise the rather obvious question about one of them deserting the other on the basis he wasn't up to the job...
It is rather like the bacon and the egg. The chicken is involved but the pig is commited.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/43009816
Not in favour of changing the calendar to accommodate an individual driver.
Hammond doesn't feature not because of his views on the EU, but because of his utter tin ear for politics. Tim Shipman's book "Fallout" makes this very clear, and I'd recommend that to anyone who is yet to read it.
Nor would I rule out JRM because of his views on the EU. He cuts through as well as any other Tory these days. He always engages. He patiently and confidently argues his case from first principles - something which far too many Tories have no clue how to do - and treats everyone with respect. He wins a lot of admiration in doing so, even from his opponents. I also think he is smart - far more so than Corbyn will ever be - if a little eccentric and probably inclined to put the purity of his principles above pragmatism more often than he should.
However, he is too short at current odds and I have never seen any hint of ambition in him for the top job. But, make no mistake: he is a huge asset to the Conservative Party.
Admittedly the other example I can think of is Anthony Barber which would go some way towards supporting your point...
Not that it's my place to say, but it's refreshing to see so many regular posters I immensely respect acting like grown-ups on here this morning.
Very welcome.
Interesting piece here btw, relevant to the header:
https://twitter.com/alexGspence/status/961724387526414336
I can think of Brown and Chamberlain, who sacked all the naysayers and put colourless makeweights in instead. However neither is a happy precedent.
I would have said the best governments have strong, talented figures with independent power bases who can stand up to the PM when they are wrong. In that I am supported by Baldwin, who said that Chamberlain's problem was he had nobody to offer him another view (he said that Chamberlain himself had done that for him).
Of course it can go too far - look at Blair and Brown. But the fact Clegg had an independent power base and an alternative perspective was one reason why the Coalition for all its faults was the best government of the last thirty years.
Cameron/Osborne
Thatcher/Lawson (until it stopped working)
Insults and begrudging curses fly.
Enter the thread of the :tumbleweed:.