How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
Actually, I was raising the point that there would be a fuss, not that I necessarily agree with the fuss.
There are lots of quirks in our system and all the better for it sometimes.
Personally, I would say only the MPs choose when there is a handover like this - keep membership and the whole media-driven frenzy, hustings etc etc out of it.
> @anothernick said: > > @rottenborough said: > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
Our new PM will be in office at the behest of Parliament. Which was elected less than 2 years ago by the people of this country. If they chose to keep him or her in power then that is what will happen. If they choose to No Confidence him or her then so be it.
The claim that any new PM lacks democratic legitimacy when they have the support of Parliament reveals a shocking lack of understanding of our constitution.
Prime Ministers who take over mid-term don't have a stellar record.
Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway).
When the ball comes loose from the scrum....
...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition!
> @SouthamObserver said: > > @rottenborough said: > > What is Boris going to do about his seat? Marginal these days and Owen Jones and friends will be camping there for the next three years. > > I can't see how he loses Uxbridge. There is very little third party vote for Labour to squeeze. And what exists is 50/50 UKIP and LibDem.
How they lose it is:
1. BJ becomes PM on the line he's set out - "we're leaving 31 October, deal or no deal".
2. We don't leave on 31 October on no deal, because it's madness and actually BJ is intelligent enough to know that.
3. Brexit Party target him... maybe even Farage personally, for a laugh.
4. Labour get in with 35% of the vote (they got 40% last time).
Basically, Labour don't necessarily need to squeeze a third party vote. I'm not saying it's likely (PMs tend to do well in their own seat). But it's not implausible.
> @anothernick said: > > @rottenborough said: > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
Chosen by thousands of people who voted for other parties yesterday.
"This is unfamiliar territory and many diehard Remainers don’t make a case for the EU but a case against the people who are against it. They are anti-anti-Europeans bewildered by their estrangement from the reassuring political certainties shoved aside by Brexit. As they stumble around, bellowing one minute and weeping the next, liberals are every middle-aged man who isn’t handling the divorce well. She’s turned the C2s, Ds and Es against us."
> > When I used to suggest that Farage was the reason Leave won the referendum, I was howled down with shouts of "It was actually Boris who got them over the line". Now Boris is on the verge of leading the Tory party, all of a sudden he hasn't connected with voters since 2012...
>
> >
>
> > A lot of people say stuff like this to hide their real feelings, but I am not really a particular fan of Boris. I am a Brexiteer and I don't buy that he really is. <
>
>
>
> +++++
>
>
>
> Intriguingly, there's a lot of BXPers on Twitter spitting venom at Boris, saying, like you, that he's not a true Brexiteer, he's just lying etc etc (btw I am not labelling you a Farageist, just noting the echo)
>
>
>
> Beneath all the anger, I think, is a simple fear that Boris is the one Tory politician who has the charisma to outdo Farage, and destroy Farage's new party.
>
>
>
> If that is the case, it is perhaps an argument in Boris's favour.
>
> Funny, before Boris joined the Leave campaign all the Remainers on here were saying he wasn't really a Leaver, he was just doing it for political gain.
>
> Now according to those self-same people he's apparently a True Believer and Leavers not sure of his credentials have ulterior motives.
>
> That's what it's always like with Remainers, nothing but disingenuous gaslighting. It's so boring.
Hilarious. Boris is a charlatan. He says what he thinks will most benefit Boris.
But if the BP were in the 20s with the Lib Dems and Labour close behind it could hardly be seen as an endorsement of leaving, still less leaving without a deal.
Electing the leader of 11 MPs is going to be more significant than electing the next PM? It's a view.
Even if the new Lib Dem leader won the next general election (not entirely inconceivable), the nature of the road to getting there is such that it can only involve a fairly significant PM doing (or not doing) critical things in between.
I have to say, I think Cable is wrong to do it at the same time as the Tory contest. Who the PM is may well affect who the Lib Dems would be best off choosing. Similar thing when Farron got in - they went for a left-ish, revive the activist base candidate in Farron. If they'd known they'd be facing Corbyn (and a load of unhappy Labour MPs who might defect) Lamb would have been the better choice (pragmatic, liked by MPs of other parties).
It doesn't really matter. The Lib Dems are going to choose Swinson whatever happens. I'd have preferred Moran, but Swinson will be fine as long as she gets some good advisers.
(Like any party, the Lib Dems have plenty of greasy-polers keen to proffer really misguided advice to anyone on the up. The biggest danger for Swinson is that she concentrates on taking the woke vote from Corbyn and ends up appealing to no-one.)
> @anothernick said: > > @rottenborough said: > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse.
> @SandyRentool said: > Prime Ministers who take over mid-term don't have a stellar record. > > Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway). > > When the ball comes loose from the scrum.... > > ...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition!
The irony is that those "best" PMs made appalling blunders: the poll tax, Iraq and, well, Brexit to name but three (and there are many others).
It is also the case that at least Wilson and Thatcher were in mental decline by the end. Perhaps we should adopt American-style term limits.
> @RobD said: > > @anothernick said: > > > @rottenborough said: > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday. > > No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse.
The only parties offering no deal in the current elections are BP and UKIP. Their vote will represent a good approximation of the proportion of the electorate favouring no deal. I guess it will be above 30 but below 40.
> How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
>
> Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves).
I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate.
Well the MPs did great last time!
The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
> @rottenborough said: > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
The system for the election of party leaders by members has been around for decades. If people are pissed off at not having a vote, then they should join the party closest to their views. If enough sensible, moderate voters did so, you wouldn't get extreme candidates elected.
> @algarkirk said: > > @algarkirk said: > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > > > > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better? > > > > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves). > > > > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate. > > Well the MPs did great last time! > > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do. > > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
> @anothernick said: > > @RobD said: > > > @anothernick said: > > > > @rottenborough said: > > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > > > > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday. > > > > No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse. > > The only parties offering no deal in the current elections are BP and UKIP. Their vote will represent a good approximation of the proportion of the electorate favouring no deal. I guess it will be above 30 but below 40.
Probably not a good approximation, as it is clear turnout is down by around 50% relative to the referendum. I can imagine leavers (and remainers, too) being sick enough of the entire thing to sit it out. In fact, we've seen this is more pronounced in leave-supporting areas.
> @TGOHF said: > > "She’s turned the C2s, Ds and Es against us."
A revealing metaphor that says more about the patronising attitude of people like Stephen Daisley than it does about the target of his criticism. Brexiteers are an elite who think they've won custody of the working classes.
> @IanB2 said: > > @algarkirk said: > > > @algarkirk said: > > > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > > > > > > > > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better? > > > > > > > > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves). > > > > > > > > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate. > > > > Well the MPs did great last time! > > > > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do. > > > > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum. > > It’s a secret ballot, right?
Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election.
> @JohnO said: > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > Richard N > Big G > HYUFD > Tissue Price > TSE > Max > Casino (I think) > DavidL > Moi > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! >
Most importantly, which candidate will deliver you your well-deserved Dukedom?
> @JohnO said: > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > Richard N > Big G > HYUFD > Tissue Price > TSE > Max > Casino (I think) > DavidL > Moi > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! >
I would hardly place myself among such illustrious company, but I do have a vote.
> @RobD said: > > @JohnO said: > > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > > > Richard N > > Big G > > HYUFD > > Tissue Price > > TSE > > Max > > Casino (I think) > > DavidL > > Moi > > > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! > > > > Most importantly, which candidate will deliver you your well-deserved Dukedom?
> @HYUFD said: > > @anothernick said: > > Boris is probably the most hated and despised man in Europe (UK included) at the moment. Making him PM would be, shall we say, interesting. > > Being hated and despised by the liberal left does not stop you winning as a right-winger at the moment, see Trump, Salvini, Netanyahu, Bolsonaro, Modi, Morrison etc. > > If Boris wins over blue collar and skilled working class voters in the suburbs and market towns it does not matter if he loses some urban professional graduates
Oh, Brexit Party will "win". But it's expectations game - if they are doing markedly worse than the polls, and if the Lib Dems and Greens are getting impressive numbers, the headlines aren't as obviously positive for them as they'd hoped.
What if they don't top UKIP's total from last time? (I think they will, by the way, but not as sure as I was on Monday). What if Lib Dem + Green + CUK > Brexit + UKIP?
In a sense, the Lib Dems doing well is still scarier for Labour and Tories than the Brexit Party. The Lib Dems have a history of winning Westminster seats, while the far right have a history of not doing so. They'd looked dead, but the "corpse" is twitching rather alarmingly now.
> @Sean_F said: > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > > > Richard N > > Big G > > HYUFD > > Tissue Price > > TSE > > Max > > Casino (I think) > > DavidL > > Moi > > > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! > > Myself.
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized you had actually rejoined the party and for such a time (3 months?) as to be eligible to vote.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @TheKingofLangley said: > > Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes? > > To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet..
Bet he knows where more than a few bodies are buried too in his role. That's not a bad basis on which to pick up a few votes.
> @Richard_Nabavi said: > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > Richard N > Big G > HYUFD > Tissue Price > TSE > Max > Casino (I think) > DavidL > Moi > > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! > > Good idea, but we need to hear what inducements the candidates are prepared to offer us before committing!
It would be sensible for us all to agree on this but I would really struggle to vote Boris
Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service.
Every politician has flaws but when you see genuine emotion, you have to respond to that with a certain level of respect. Not spewing lies about their record to justify your own hate.
May did not initiate the hostile atmosphere towards illegal immigrants - that was the Labour Party when they were last in power. Windrush generation repatriations started under a Labour administration. Could she have done more to right these wrongs? Of course. But she did not initiate the policies. But Labour and their toxic followers just keep spinning the same lies to deny their culpability in these areas.
As regards the future, I just don't know. The prospect of any move that takes Corbyn even one step closer to Downing Street fills me with dread. But I am not sure that the Conservative Party is capable of finding their feet again in time.
There is one brain round the current Cabinet table that I think could find a way through this but the public perception of him would make it difficult for him to succeed. Johnson - I just don't see it but it feels almost inevitable right now. Raab is a no-hoper. Hunt is a survivor but not a leader, Javid feels a bit like Obama (and not in a good way) - what he appears to represent could be powerful, what he actually says and has done is far less convincing.
I just don't know.
May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @oxfordsimon said: > > > @TheKingofLangley said: > > > Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes? > > > > To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet.. > > Bet he knows where more than a few bodies are buried too in his role. That's not a bad basis on which to pick up a few votes.
"This is unfamiliar territory and many diehard Remainers don’t make a case for the EU but a case against the people who are against it. They are anti-anti-Europeans bewildered by their estrangement from the reassuring political certainties shoved aside by Brexit. As they stumble around, bellowing one minute and weeping the next, liberals are every middle-aged man who isn’t handling the divorce well. She’s turned the C2s, Ds and Es against us."
> > Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election. <
++++
That's a very good point, People moaning about the lack of democracy in members choosing their leader easily forget that the Tory leader used to be selected by half a dozen very rich men, meeting on a grouse moor. Literally. And that was well within living memory.
> @slade said: > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party?
I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that.
> @DecrepitJohnL said: > > @SandyRentool said: > > Prime Ministers who take over mid-term don't have a stellar record. > > > > Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway). > > > > When the ball comes loose from the scrum.... > > > > ...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition! > > The irony is that those "best" PMs made appalling blunders: the poll tax, Iraq and, well, Brexit to name but three (and there are many others). > > It is also the case that at least Wilson and Thatcher were in mental decline by the end. Perhaps we should adopt American-style term limits.
American-style term limits gave them Trump.
(OK, Obama might not have stood a third time but he was well-placed to do so had he wanted to, and would surely have beaten Trump)
Dan Hannan isn’t confident about his own seat either. This is a very weird election. (FWIW I think he’s misguided, he’ll be re-elected on 8% in the SE which is surely not possible to miss? Although he could well be the only one left). https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1131669660385062912
> @malcolmg said: > I just don't know what to think any more. > > > > Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service. > > > > Every politician has flaws but when you see genuine emotion, you have to respond to that with a certain level of respect. Not spewing lies about their record to justify your own hate. > > > > May did not initiate the hostile atmosphere towards illegal immigrants - that was the Labour Party when they were last in power. Windrush generation repatriations started under a Labour administration. Could she have done more to right these wrongs? Of course. But she did not initiate the policies. But Labour and their toxic followers just keep spinning the same lies to deny their culpability in these areas. > > > > As regards the future, I just don't know. The prospect of any move that takes Corbyn even one step closer to Downing Street fills me with dread. But I am not sure that the Conservative Party is capable of finding their feet again in time. > > > > There is one brain round the current Cabinet table that I think could find a way through this but the public perception of him would make it difficult for him to succeed. Johnson - I just don't see it but it feels almost inevitable right now. Raab is a no-hoper. Hunt is a survivor but not a leader, Javid feels a bit like Obama (and not in a good way) - what he appears to represent could be powerful, what he actually says and has done is far less convincing. > > > > I just don't know. > > May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
I never consider myself off my head or evil but on a human level I do have some sympathy for her, but pleased she has resigned
> @JohnO said: > > @Sean_F said: > > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > > > > > > > Richard N > > > > Big G > > > > HYUFD > > > > Tissue Price > > > > TSE > > > > Max > > > > Casino (I think) > > > > DavidL > > > > Moi > > > > > > > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! > > > > Myself. > > Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized you had actually rejoined the party and for such a time (3 months?) as to be eligible to vote.
I rejoined in September last year, in Battersea.
I think we need to form a syndicate to sell our votes to the highest bidder.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @slade said: > > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party? > > I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that. > > He isn't going to beat Swinson
> @MikeSmithson said: > > @IanB2 said: > > > @algarkirk said: > > > > @algarkirk said: > > > > > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better? > > > > > > > > > > > > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves). > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate. > > > > > > Well the MPs did great last time! > > > > > > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do. > > > > > > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum. > > > > It’s a secret ballot, right? > > Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election.
The last time that system was used (if we exclude 2003), was 56 years ago.
> May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
That says a lot more about you and your attitudes than anything else.
It says I know a lot of people that need sympathy after her debacle , they are not walking away millionaires to a life of luxury. She is a wrong un for sure and crocodile tears don't change it.
> When I used to suggest that Farage was the reason Leave won the referendum, I was howled down with shouts of "It was actually Boris who got them over the line". Now Boris is on the verge of leading the Tory party, all of a sudden he hasn't connected with voters since 2012...
>
> A lot of people say stuff like this to hide their real feelings, but I am not really a particular fan of Boris. I am a Brexiteer and I don't buy that he really is. <
+++++
Intriguingly, there's a lot of BXPers on Twitter spitting venom at Boris, saying, like you, that he's not a true Brexiteer, he's just lying etc etc (btw I am not labelling you a Farageist, just noting the echo)
Beneath all the anger, I think, is a simple fear that Boris is the one Tory politician who has the charisma to outdo Farage, and destroy Farage's new party.
If that is the case, it is perhaps an argument in Boris's favour.
Funny, before Boris joined the Leave campaign all the Remainers on here were saying he wasn't really a Leaver, he was just doing it for political gain.
Now according to those self-same people he's apparently a True Believer and Leavers not sure of his credentials have ulterior motives.
That's what it's always like with Remainers, nothing but disingenuous gaslighting. It's so boring.
Seeing most people think Johnson only believes in his own political gain, I doubt they care what he believes. They care about what he does. Nothing disingenuous about that.
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @Brom said: > > > @Cicero said: > > > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close.. > > > > > > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245 > > > > > > > > > > I can't see it being that close. BXP should win by at least a few points/seats. > > Oh, Brexit Party will "win". But it's expectations game - if they are doing markedly worse than the polls, and if the Lib Dems and Greens are getting impressive numbers, the headlines aren't as obviously positive for them as they'd hoped. > > What if they don't top UKIP's total from last time? (I think they will, by the way, but not as sure as I was on Monday). What if Lib Dem + Green + CUK > Brexit + UKIP? > > In a sense, the Lib Dems doing well is still scarier for Labour and Tories than the Brexit Party. The Lib Dems have a history of winning Westminster seats, while the far right have a history of not doing so. They'd looked dead, but the "corpse" is twitching rather alarmingly now.
TBH, I can't see anything from the turnout numbers to suggest that the polls will be out by much.
> @JohnO said: > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have: > > Richard N > Big G > HYUFD > Tissue Price > TSE > Max > Casino (I think) > DavidL > Moi > > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time! >
> @NickPalmer said: > > @oxfordsimon said: > > I just don't know what to think any more. > > > > Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service. > > > I think you generalise too much about what "the left" think and say. FWIW this was my tweet on the subject: > > Quite apart from politics I thought yesterday's media bullying of May was revolting. I disagreed with her most of the time but she did her best as she saw it - let's let her retire in dignity without further sneering from any side. __________________
Brexit is likely to end in tears for the next Tory leader too, as Dominic Grieve pointed out. It may then penetrate the skull of any Tory members with brain cells that it's not that politician who's at fault, it's Brexit.
We need leadership not subservience to the mob. There are reasons why this is a representative democracy. I've only heard two MPs explicitly say that: Ken Clarke and Jess Phillips.
> > I never consider myself off my head or evil but I on a human level I do have some sympathy for her, but pleased she has resigned <
++++
I have some human sympathy for T May. She was clearly not up to a very difficult job, which she nonetheless coveted. That's hard, for anyone. She deserves a metaphorical hug.
Nonetheless the way she almost broke down at the end of her speech was quite unnerving. You're allowed a tear, which can be swiftly wiped away (like Thatcher in her car), but May was close to crying like a baby.
That shows too much pain and weakness. Not enough steel and strength. It is good she has gone, for her and for us.
> Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes?
To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet..
He looked at the absolute turkeys that have been before him and the clowns slavering on the sidelines and reasonably thought , surely I can beat this load of dross.
> @noneoftheabove said: > > @oxfordsimon said: > > > @slade said: > > > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party? > > > > I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that. > > > > He isn't going to beat Swinson > > Can non MPs stand?
I believe Vince's proposed reforms were rejected by the membership. So it is a very limited number of possible candidates - once you exclude the ones who have already had the job and those who have stated they won't stand.
> > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate.
> > >
> > > Well the MPs did great last time!
> > >
> > > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
> > >
> > > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
> >
> > It’s a secret ballot, right?
>
> Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election.
The last time that system was used (if we exclude 2003), was 56 years ago.
Producing a leader who was a lovely chap and had a kind face and all that but lost to Harold Wilson the following year.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @slade said: > > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party? > > I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that. > > He isn't going to beat Swinson
I don't see the point of a coronation. It's not like, "ooh, who's going to run the Lib Dems at this crucial time when it's the summer and there's effectively no Government to oppose anyway". A contest gets some coverage, introduces Swinson to activists etc. I'd be begging Davey to stand (and lose in a dignified but clear way).
Leadsom's price drifting. She has indicated she will stand but is out to 26-30 on Betfair. She is now the same price as Penny Mordaunt, 28-29, who has yet to say whether she is running.
The Swiss model, of course, includes FoM. I don't see Boris having the slightest problem with FoM, but getting it past the ultras would be the difficult bit.
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @FF43 said: > > Firstly, in a close referendum all areas had a mix of Remain and Leave voters. All areas will see a big drop in turnout since the referendum. The issue is the relative turnout of the different groups of voters. It's simplistic to split these into Leave voters and Remain voters and Leave areas and Remain areas. > > > ------ > That's wrong. > > What you are suggesting is that Leave voters in Remain-voting areas are more likely to turn out than Leave voters in Leave-voting areas. Why would that be? > > isam's point about where the local elections were contested in 2014 is much more pertinent.
_____________
I am warning about interpreting marginal effects where turnout roughly half of the referendum.
Also note my other point that the polls probably indicate a Remain majority in the euro referendum but Brexit Party coming out with a third of the votes.
> Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service.
>
>
>
> Every politician has flaws but when you see genuine emotion, you have to respond to that with a certain level of respect. Not spewing lies about their record to justify your own hate.
>
>
>
> May did not initiate the hostile atmosphere towards illegal immigrants - that was the Labour Party when they were last in power. Windrush generation repatriations started under a Labour administration. Could she have done more to right these wrongs? Of course. But she did not initiate the policies. But Labour and their toxic followers just keep spinning the same lies to deny their culpability in these areas.
>
>
>
> As regards the future, I just don't know. The prospect of any move that takes Corbyn even one step closer to Downing Street fills me with dread. But I am not sure that the Conservative Party is capable of finding their feet again in time.
>
>
>
> There is one brain round the current Cabinet table that I think could find a way through this but the public perception of him would make it difficult for him to succeed. Johnson - I just don't see it but it feels almost inevitable right now. Raab is a no-hoper. Hunt is a survivor but not a leader, Javid feels a bit like Obama (and not in a good way) - what he appears to represent could be powerful, what he actually says and has done is far less convincing.
>
>
>
> I just don't know.
>
> May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
I never consider myself off my head or evil but on a human level I do have some sympathy for her, but pleased she has resigned
G , I expect nothing else from you, afraid I cannot bring myself to have any sympathy whatsoever for her , she had no endearing features and caused pain for lots of people , interested only in herself.
> @noneoftheabove said: > > @Sandpit said: > > https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/1131940749279420416 > > > > Just needs Corbyn to get challenged next week following an abysmal EU election result, and we’ll have all three replaced over the summer! > > Why clash it with the Tories contest? Another mistake from Uncle Vince.
Nobody knew there was going to be a Conservative dogfight for the leadership of their party. After all, Mrs May has been dragging her feet for months and months. On the other hand, the Lib Dem election was announced several weeks ago.
She made a lot of mistakes but when faced with no deal she did put her country first by getting the extension .
In the cold light of day we can bemoan the missteps and the stupid red lines however she will be seen as trying to find a bearable compromise .
Many criticize her as viewing Brexit as a damage limitation exercise . But for all her faults on that point she certainly didn’t need a reality check .
US commentators often talk about the 'lanes' by which candidates can hope to win a party nomination, for example the 'evangelical' or 'libertarian' or 'moderate' lanes in a Republican nomination contest. The basic idea is that your chance is better if you can dominate one or more lanes, rather than being crowded in with a load of other contenders selling the same thing. It's not the whole story but it can be a useful way of looking at things.
In this contest, I don't see what Raab's 'lane' is. He's not extreme enough to run in the 'purist' lane, having voted for the deal in the final vote. He's crowded out by Boris in the 'leave means leave even without a deal' lane. He's not in the 'moderate pragmatist', ' charismatic winner' or 'stop Boris' lanes.
The same is true of a number of other potential contenders. Although it's a big field, the number of realistic candidates is quite short, I think; as things stand, Boris, Leadsom, and Hunt look most likely to me, in that order, with Boris well ahead unless he screws up (which admittedly is quite likely, and may already have happened with his Oct 31st pledge).
I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking.
Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again.
I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
> @rpjs said: > FPT: > @MaxPB said: > > > So there is at least one good reason to welcome Boris, our new overlord > > > twitter.com/Brexit/status/1131931368580161536 > > > And this is why, despite everything, I'm still minded to vote for Boris.< > > Yes, I can see the logic. Not sure I agree, but I get it, > > And then there's this. Hmm.. > > https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1131932728230850561 > > > > The Swiss model, of course, includes FoM. I don't see Boris having the slightest problem with FoM, but getting it past the ultras would be the difficult bit.
Has anyone ever bothered to do any analysis of the individual ultras to understand whether their Euroscepticism is immigration based or institutional based. If the former then you are right but all the arguments I have seen from them seem to revolve around separation from the institutions and EU law. Hence their opposition to the Customs Union and Single Market.
Is it possible that a route that prioritised separation from the institutions over immigration controls - effectively the Swiss Model - might appeal more to them than May's model of restricting migration over all other considerations?
> @RobD said: > > @dixiedean said: > > Has anyone remarked that we have never had a PM elected by a Party membership before? Uncharted waters in every way. > > I think they have, and will continue to do so.
There hasn't been a mid-term PM elected by anyone other than MPs - so if this leadership campaign goes full term, so to speak, it will be a first.
> @oxfordsimon said: > > @RobD said: > > > @dixiedean said: > > > Has anyone remarked that we have never had a PM elected by a Party membership before? Uncharted waters in every way. > > > > I think they have, and will continue to do so. > > There hasn't been a mid-term PM elected by anyone other than MPs - so if this leadership campaign goes full term, so to speak, it will be a first.
> @El_Capitano said: > I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking. > > Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again. > > I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
I’d certainly be a lot more interested in her memoirs than Cameron’s .
> @El_Capitano said: > I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking. > > Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again. > > I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
"How to blow a 25% poll lead in 4 weeks against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell."
> @AndyJS said: > > @El_Capitano said: > > I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking. > > > > Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again. > > > > I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them. > > "How to blow a 25% poll lead in 4 weeks against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell."
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Had they known that would have happened, the manifesto would have surely been steady as she goes, rather than trying to challenge a deeply emotive topic.
Comments
There are lots of quirks in our system and all the better for it sometimes.
Personally, I would say only the MPs choose when there is a handover like this - keep membership and the whole media-driven frenzy, hustings etc etc out of it.
I realise that is probably seen as old fashioned.
> > @rottenborough said:
> > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
>
> This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
Our new PM will be in office at the behest of Parliament. Which was elected less than 2 years ago by the people of this country. If they chose to keep him or her in power then that is what will happen. If they choose to No Confidence him or her then so be it.
The claim that any new PM lacks democratic legitimacy when they have the support of Parliament reveals a shocking lack of understanding of our constitution.
Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway).
When the ball comes loose from the scrum....
...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition!
> > @rottenborough said:
> > What is Boris going to do about his seat? Marginal these days and Owen Jones and friends will be camping there for the next three years.
>
> I can't see how he loses Uxbridge. There is very little third party vote for Labour to squeeze. And what exists is 50/50 UKIP and LibDem.
How they lose it is:
1. BJ becomes PM on the line he's set out - "we're leaving 31 October, deal or no deal".
2. We don't leave on 31 October on no deal, because it's madness and actually BJ is intelligent enough to know that.
3. Brexit Party target him... maybe even Farage personally, for a laugh.
4. Labour get in with 35% of the vote (they got 40% last time).
Basically, Labour don't necessarily need to squeeze a third party vote. I'm not saying it's likely (PMs tend to do well in their own seat). But it's not implausible.
> > @rottenborough said:
> > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
>
> This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
Chosen by thousands of people who voted for other parties yesterday.
> > @Cicero said:
> > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> >
> > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> >
> > <
>
> +++++
>
> That does look promising for Remain. What if Remain has a majority? What does that do to the Tory leadership contest?
Rory Stewart to be caretaker until Theresa May can return in the Autumn.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/brexit-and-the-great-liberal-crack-up/
"This is unfamiliar territory and many diehard Remainers don’t make a case for the EU but a case against the people who are against it. They are anti-anti-Europeans bewildered by their estrangement from the reassuring political certainties shoved aside by Brexit. As they stumble around, bellowing one minute and weeping the next, liberals are every middle-aged man who isn’t handling the divorce well. She’s turned the C2s, Ds and Es against us."
> > @Cicero said:
> > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> >
> > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> >
> > <
>
> +++++
>
> That does look promising for Remain. What if Remain has a majority? What does that do to the Tory leadership contest?
What indeed? Maybe the Lib Dem leadership contest is going to be of greater ultimate significance than the Tory one for the country at large.
> Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
>
> https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
>
>
I can't see it being that close. BXP should win by at least a few points/seats.
> > @Cicero said:
> > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> >
> > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> >
> >
>
> I can't see it being that close. BXP should win by at least a few points/seats.
But if the BP were in the 20s with the Lib Dems and Labour close behind it could hardly be seen as an endorsement of leaving, still less leaving without a deal.
> > @Byronic said:
> > > @Cicero said:
> > > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> > >
> > > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> > >
> > > <
> >
> > +++++
> >
> > That does look promising for Remain. What if Remain has a majority? What does that do to the Tory leadership contest?
>
> What indeed? Maybe the Lib Dem leadership contest is going to be of greater ultimate significance than the Tory one for the country at large.
Electing the leader of 11 MPs is going to be more significant than electing the next PM? It's a view.
Even if the new Lib Dem leader won the next general election (not entirely inconceivable), the nature of the road to getting there is such that it can only involve a fairly significant PM doing (or not doing) critical things in between.
(Like any party, the Lib Dems have plenty of greasy-polers keen to proffer really misguided advice to anyone on the up. The biggest danger for Swinson is that she concentrates on taking the woke vote from Corbyn and ends up appealing to no-one.)
> > @rottenborough said:
> > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
>
> This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse.
Dunno how reliable this is, though.
>
> Why clash it with the Tories contest? Another mistake from Uncle Vince.
I feel it would be a mistake to go for Jo Swinson. Cable should have strung out his departure.
Not uncommon.
> Prime Ministers who take over mid-term don't have a stellar record.
>
> Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway).
>
> When the ball comes loose from the scrum....
>
> ...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition!
The irony is that those "best" PMs made appalling blunders: the poll tax, Iraq and, well, Brexit to name but three (and there are many others).
It is also the case that at least Wilson and Thatcher were in mental decline by the end. Perhaps we should adopt American-style term limits.
> https://twitter.com/mjrharris/status/1131946176654249984
>
> Dunno how reliable this is, though.<
+++++
Could Labour do even WORSE than the Tories?
One can pray.
> > @anothernick said:
> > > @rottenborough said:
> > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
> >
> > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
>
> No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse.
The only parties offering no deal in the current elections are BP and UKIP. Their vote will represent a good approximation of the proportion of the electorate favouring no deal. I guess it will be above 30 but below 40.
The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
> How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
The system for the election of party leaders by members has been around for decades. If people are pissed off at not having a vote, then they should join the party closest to their views. If enough sensible, moderate voters did so, you wouldn't get extreme candidates elected.
> > @algarkirk said:
>
> > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
>
> >
>
> > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
>
>
>
> In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves).
>
>
>
> I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate.
>
> Well the MPs did great last time!
>
> The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
>
> I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
It’s a secret ballot, right?
> > @RobD said:
> > > @anothernick said:
> > > > @rottenborough said:
> > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
> > >
> > > This will soon be a huge issue. Our new PM will have been chosen by probably around 50,000 people, or about 0.1% of the electorate, almost all of them of pensionable age. His or her democratic legitimacy will be pretty much zero and certainly not a mandate to take the UK out of the EU without a deal against the wishes of Parliament and the vast majority of the electorate, as will be revealed by the votes on Sunday.
> >
> > No deal has support as high as 46%. Vast majority my arse.
>
> The only parties offering no deal in the current elections are BP and UKIP. Their vote will represent a good approximation of the proportion of the electorate favouring no deal. I guess it will be above 30 but below 40.
Probably not a good approximation, as it is clear turnout is down by around 50% relative to the referendum. I can imagine leavers (and remainers, too) being sick enough of the entire thing to sit it out. In fact, we've seen this is more pronounced in leave-supporting areas.
Richard N
Big G
HYUFD
Tissue Price
TSE
Max
Casino (I think)
DavidL
Moi
It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
> "She’s turned the C2s, Ds and Es against us."
A revealing metaphor that says more about the patronising attitude of people like Stephen Daisley than it does about the target of his criticism. Brexiteers are an elite who think they've won custody of the working classes.
> > @algarkirk said:
> > > @algarkirk said:
> >
> > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
> >
> >
> >
> > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves).
> >
> >
> >
> > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate.
> >
> > Well the MPs did great last time!
> >
> > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
> >
> > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
>
> It’s a secret ballot, right?
Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election.
> So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
>
> Richard N
> Big G
> HYUFD
> Tissue Price
> TSE
> Max
> Casino (I think)
> DavidL
> Moi
>
> It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
Most importantly, which candidate will deliver you your well-deserved Dukedom?
> So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
>
> Richard N
> Big G
> HYUFD
> Tissue Price
> TSE
> Max
> Casino (I think)
> DavidL
> Moi
>
> It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
I would hardly place myself among such illustrious company, but I do have a vote.
> > @JohnO said:
> > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
> >
> > Richard N
> > Big G
> > HYUFD
> > Tissue Price
> > TSE
> > Max
> > Casino (I think)
> > DavidL
> > Moi
> >
> > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
> >
>
> Most importantly, which candidate will deliver you your well-deserved Dukedom?
Well, that should mean Dominic Raab.......
> > @anothernick said:
> > Boris is probably the most hated and despised man in Europe (UK included) at the moment. Making him PM would be, shall we say, interesting.
>
> Being hated and despised by the liberal left does not stop you winning as a right-winger at the moment, see Trump, Salvini, Netanyahu, Bolsonaro, Modi, Morrison etc.
>
> If Boris wins over blue collar and skilled working class voters in the suburbs and market towns it does not matter if he loses some urban professional graduates
Pessimistic as ever, Mr HY
> Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes?
To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet..
> > @Cicero said:
> > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> >
> > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> >
> >
>
> I can't see it being that close. BXP should win by at least a few points/seats.
Oh, Brexit Party will "win". But it's expectations game - if they are doing markedly worse than the polls, and if the Lib Dems and Greens are getting impressive numbers, the headlines aren't as obviously positive for them as they'd hoped.
What if they don't top UKIP's total from last time? (I think they will, by the way, but not as sure as I was on Monday). What if Lib Dem + Green + CUK > Brexit + UKIP?
In a sense, the Lib Dems doing well is still scarier for Labour and Tories than the Brexit Party. The Lib Dems have a history of winning Westminster seats, while the far right have a history of not doing so. They'd looked dead, but the "corpse" is twitching rather alarmingly now.
> So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
>
>
>
> Richard N
>
> Big G
>
> HYUFD
>
> Tissue Price
>
> TSE
>
> Max
>
> Casino (I think)
>
> DavidL
>
> Moi
>
>
>
> It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
> Myself.
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized you had actually rejoined the party and for such a time (3 months?) as to be eligible to vote.
> Laid Boris
I guess that is better than being Laid by Boris
> > @TheKingofLangley said:
> > Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes?
>
> To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet..
Bet he knows where more than a few bodies are buried too in his role. That's not a bad basis on which to pick up a few votes.
> So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
>
> Richard N
> Big G
> HYUFD
> Tissue Price
> TSE
> Max
> Casino (I think)
> DavidL
> Moi
>
>
> It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
> Good idea, but we need to hear what inducements the candidates are prepared to offer us before committing!
It would be sensible for us all to agree on this but I would really struggle to vote Boris
We will see
> > @oxfordsimon said:
> > > @TheKingofLangley said:
> > > Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes?
> >
> > To help stave off criticism for his handling of the past few days and to try to boost his chances of a seat in the new Cabinet..
>
> Bet he knows where more than a few bodies are buried too in his role. That's not a bad basis on which to pick up a few votes.
A good showing may land him a cabinet post
>
> May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
That says a lot more about you and your attitudes than anything else.
So come on labour, have some sense and get rid of Corbyn so we can have three new leaders for September
>
> Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election. <
++++
That's a very good point, People moaning about the lack of democracy in members choosing their leader easily forget that the Tory leader used to be selected by half a dozen very rich men, meeting on a grouse moor. Literally. And that was well within living memory.
> What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party?
I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that.
He isn't going to beat Swinson
> > @SandyRentool said:
> > Prime Ministers who take over mid-term don't have a stellar record.
> >
> > Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Cammo stand out above Callaghan, Major, Brown and May as people who had a grasp on the job (for most of their time in office anyway).
> >
> > When the ball comes loose from the scrum....
> >
> > ...the ref should blow for an infringement and give possession to the opposition!
>
> The irony is that those "best" PMs made appalling blunders: the poll tax, Iraq and, well, Brexit to name but three (and there are many others).
>
> It is also the case that at least Wilson and Thatcher were in mental decline by the end. Perhaps we should adopt American-style term limits.
American-style term limits gave them Trump.
(OK, Obama might not have stood a third time but he was well-placed to do so had he wanted to, and would surely have beaten Trump)
(FWIW I think he’s misguided, he’ll be re-elected on 8% in the SE which is surely not possible to miss? Although he could well be the only one left).
https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1131669660385062912
> I just don't know what to think any more.
>
>
>
> Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service.
>
>
>
> Every politician has flaws but when you see genuine emotion, you have to respond to that with a certain level of respect. Not spewing lies about their record to justify your own hate.
>
>
>
> May did not initiate the hostile atmosphere towards illegal immigrants - that was the Labour Party when they were last in power. Windrush generation repatriations started under a Labour administration. Could she have done more to right these wrongs? Of course. But she did not initiate the policies. But Labour and their toxic followers just keep spinning the same lies to deny their culpability in these areas.
>
>
>
> As regards the future, I just don't know. The prospect of any move that takes Corbyn even one step closer to Downing Street fills me with dread. But I am not sure that the Conservative Party is capable of finding their feet again in time.
>
>
>
> There is one brain round the current Cabinet table that I think could find a way through this but the public perception of him would make it difficult for him to succeed. Johnson - I just don't see it but it feels almost inevitable right now. Raab is a no-hoper. Hunt is a survivor but not a leader, Javid feels a bit like Obama (and not in a good way) - what he appears to represent could be powerful, what he actually says and has done is far less convincing.
>
>
>
> I just don't know.
>
> May has got her deserved comeuppance, anyone who has sympathy for her is not right in the head or evil.
I never consider myself off my head or evil but on a human level I do have some sympathy for her, but pleased she has resigned
> > @Sean_F said:
> > So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
> >
> >
> >
> > Richard N
> >
> > Big G
> >
> > HYUFD
> >
> > Tissue Price
> >
> > TSE
> >
> > Max
> >
> > Casino (I think)
> >
> > DavidL
> >
> > Moi
> >
> >
> >
> > It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
> >
> > Myself.
>
> Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized you had actually rejoined the party and for such a time (3 months?) as to be eligible to vote.
I rejoined in September last year, in Battersea.
I think we need to form a syndicate to sell our votes to the highest bidder.
> > @slade said:
> > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party?
>
> I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that.
>
> He isn't going to beat Swinson
Can non MPs stand?
> > @IanB2 said:
> > > @algarkirk said:
> > > > @algarkirk said:
> > >
> > > > How long before the fuss seriously starts on 150K members deciding who is PM, while the rest of us look on?
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Yes there will be a fuss, However it is a given that we have the FTPA, and a fact that we elect MPs who are responsible for formation of governments. This combines with the fact that the system allows both MPs and members a say, and that any adult can join a party if they want but most choose to leave it to others. So the question would be: How would you do it better?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In terms of good governance, MPs choosing makes more sense (and although a smaller electorate, they do at least have more democratic accountability themselves).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I understand the yearning of parties to give their members a say... but they rarely choose people who appeal to the wider electorate.
> > >
> > > Well the MPs did great last time!
> > >
> > > The right to narrow it down to two gives MPs a colossal say. It is a very odd state of affairs when there aren't two (or more) outstanding statemen/women to give to the members to choose from, but we live in odd times. BTW I'm no good at maths or predicting, but it seems to me that if Boris has 90-100 MPs unwavering support then he is nailed on because if he gets to the last two he gets it, and to guarantee getting to the last two you need a third of the members to vote for you (though sometimes less will do.
> > >
> > > I rather doubt, at this early stage, whether MPs will be prepared to veto Boris this time as I think the members reaction will be a bit like offending Momentum.
> >
> > It’s a secret ballot, right?
>
> Letting the members have a say is a very modern thing and it was not so long ago that Tory leaders "emerged" rather than be subject to an election.
The last time that system was used (if we exclude 2003), was 56 years ago.
> > @Brom said:
> > > @Cicero said:
> > > Remainers have been voting. Hearing that the differential turn out is going to make it close..
> > >
> > > https://scontent-arn2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/61126872_338541080192705_3280457121166000128_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-arn2-2.xx&oh=2ce9e868844b76044b1fcbe3bb52b347&oe=5D52F245
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I can't see it being that close. BXP should win by at least a few points/seats.
>
> Oh, Brexit Party will "win". But it's expectations game - if they are doing markedly worse than the polls, and if the Lib Dems and Greens are getting impressive numbers, the headlines aren't as obviously positive for them as they'd hoped.
>
> What if they don't top UKIP's total from last time? (I think they will, by the way, but not as sure as I was on Monday). What if Lib Dem + Green + CUK > Brexit + UKIP?
>
> In a sense, the Lib Dems doing well is still scarier for Labour and Tories than the Brexit Party. The Lib Dems have a history of winning Westminster seats, while the far right have a history of not doing so. They'd looked dead, but the "corpse" is twitching rather alarmingly now.
TBH, I can't see anything from the turnout numbers to suggest that the polls will be out by much.
> So who am I missing from pb's Great and Grand Electors (aka Tory party members)? I have:
>
> Richard N
> Big G
> HYUFD
> Tissue Price
> TSE
> Max
> Casino (I think)
> DavidL
> Moi
>
> It's imperative we vote en bloc at the duly appointed time!
>
[Gently raises hand]
> > @oxfordsimon said:
> > I just don't know what to think any more.
> >
> > Today has seen a lot of hate-filled postings from those on the left towards a person who tried as hard as possible to navigate an impossible situation. They are used lies to justify their hate and they have shown that they lack basic human courtesy towards someone who has dedicated much of her adult life to public service.
> >
> I think you generalise too much about what "the left" think and say. FWIW this was my tweet on the subject:
>
> Quite apart from politics I thought yesterday's media bullying of May was revolting. I disagreed with her most of the time but she did her best as she saw it - let's let her retire in dignity without further sneering from any side.
__________________
Brexit is likely to end in tears for the next Tory leader too, as Dominic Grieve pointed out. It may then penetrate the skull of any Tory members with brain cells that it's not that politician who's at fault, it's Brexit.
We need leadership not subservience to the mob. There are reasons why this is a representative democracy. I've only heard two MPs explicitly say that: Ken Clarke and Jess Phillips.
>
> I never consider myself off my head or evil but I on a human level I do have some sympathy for her, but pleased she has resigned <
++++
I have some human sympathy for T May. She was clearly not up to a very difficult job, which she nonetheless coveted. That's hard, for anyone. She deserves a metaphorical hug.
Nonetheless the way she almost broke down at the end of her speech was quite unnerving. You're allowed a tear, which can be swiftly wiped away (like Thatcher in her car), but May was close to crying like a baby.
That shows too much pain and weakness. Not enough steel and strength. It is good she has gone, for her and for us.
> > @oxfordsimon said:
> > > @slade said:
> > > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party?
> >
> > I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that.
> >
> > He isn't going to beat Swinson
>
> Can non MPs stand?
I believe Vince's proposed reforms were rejected by the membership. So it is a very limited number of possible candidates - once you exclude the ones who have already had the job and those who have stated they won't stand.
> > @slade said:
> > What are the odds on the new leader of the Lib Dems getting more votes from party members than the new leader of the Conservative party?
>
> I don't think it is certain that LD members will get a vote in the end. Davey may well come under huge pressure to stand aside - 'for the good of the party'... and all that.
>
> He isn't going to beat Swinson
I don't see the point of a coronation. It's not like, "ooh, who's going to run the Lib Dems at this crucial time when it's the summer and there's effectively no Government to oppose anyway". A contest gets some coverage, introduces Swinson to activists etc. I'd be begging Davey to stand (and lose in a dignified but clear way).
My money is on Penny. Just hoping she runs .....
> @OblitusSumMe said:
> > @FF43 said:
> > Firstly, in a close referendum all areas had a mix of Remain and Leave voters. All areas will see a big drop in turnout since the referendum. The issue is the relative turnout of the different groups of voters. It's simplistic to split these into Leave voters and Remain voters and Leave areas and Remain areas.
> >
> ------
> That's wrong.
>
> What you are suggesting is that Leave voters in Remain-voting areas are more likely to turn out than Leave voters in Leave-voting areas. Why would that be?
>
> isam's point about where the local elections were contested in 2014 is much more pertinent.
_____________
I am warning about interpreting marginal effects where turnout roughly half of the referendum.
Also note my other point that the polls probably indicate a Remain majority in the euro referendum but Brexit Party coming out with a third of the votes.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/1131940749279420416
> >
> > Just needs Corbyn to get challenged next week following an abysmal EU election result, and we’ll have all three replaced over the summer!
>
> Why clash it with the Tories contest? Another mistake from Uncle Vince.
Nobody knew there was going to be a Conservative dogfight for the leadership of their party. After all, Mrs May has been dragging her feet for months and months. On the other hand, the Lib Dem election was announced several weeks ago.
> https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1131920807087792130
Gaelic-speaking nuns from the Western Isles are profoundly unlikely to be Con members. Mostly vote Angus Brendan MacNeil I would have thought.
She made a lot of mistakes but when faced with no deal she did put her country first by getting the extension .
In the cold light of day we can bemoan the missteps and the stupid red lines however she will be seen as trying to find a bearable compromise .
Many criticize her as viewing Brexit as a damage limitation exercise . But for all her faults on that point she certainly didn’t need a reality check .
> Laid Boris
Ewww
In this contest, I don't see what Raab's 'lane' is. He's not extreme enough to run in the 'purist' lane, having voted for the deal in the final vote. He's crowded out by Boris in the 'leave means leave even without a deal' lane. He's not in the 'moderate pragmatist', ' charismatic winner' or 'stop Boris' lanes.
The same is true of a number of other potential contenders. Although it's a big field, the number of realistic candidates is quite short, I think; as things stand, Boris, Leadsom, and Hunt look most likely to me, in that order, with Boris well ahead unless he screws up (which admittedly is quite likely, and may already have happened with his Oct 31st pledge).
> Has anyone remarked that we have never had a PM elected by a Party membership before? Uncharted waters in every way.
I think they have, and will continue to do so.
Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again.
I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
> FPT: > @MaxPB said:
>
> > So there is at least one good reason to welcome Boris, our new overlord
>
> > twitter.com/Brexit/status/1131931368580161536
>
> > And this is why, despite everything, I'm still minded to vote for Boris.<
>
> Yes, I can see the logic. Not sure I agree, but I get it,
>
> And then there's this. Hmm..
>
> https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1131932728230850561
>
>
>
> The Swiss model, of course, includes FoM. I don't see Boris having the slightest problem with FoM, but getting it past the ultras would be the difficult bit.
Has anyone ever bothered to do any analysis of the individual ultras to understand whether their Euroscepticism is immigration based or institutional based. If the former then you are right but all the arguments I have seen from them seem to revolve around separation from the institutions and EU law. Hence their opposition to the Customs Union and Single Market.
Is it possible that a route that prioritised separation from the institutions over immigration controls - effectively the Swiss Model - might appeal more to them than May's model of restricting migration over all other considerations?
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.158459621
> > @dixiedean said:
> > Has anyone remarked that we have never had a PM elected by a Party membership before? Uncharted waters in every way.
>
> I think they have, and will continue to do so.
There hasn't been a mid-term PM elected by anyone other than MPs - so if this leadership campaign goes full term, so to speak, it will be a first.
> > @RobD said:
> > > @dixiedean said:
> > > Has anyone remarked that we have never had a PM elected by a Party membership before? Uncharted waters in every way.
> >
> > I think they have, and will continue to do so.
>
> There hasn't been a mid-term PM elected by anyone other than MPs - so if this leadership campaign goes full term, so to speak, it will be a first.
As the prophecy foretold
The ERG and most Tories are more anti EU on sovereignty grounds .
> Why is Graham Brady standing? What makes him think he has the chance of picking up any significant number of votes?
So that Boris says - if you and your 3 supporters back me you will get XYZ job..
Same with another half dozen that are standing - its a means to an end.
> https://twitter.com/garius/status/1131949245127364610
John Hillview-Ladel
Hmm not bad.
> I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking.
>
> Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again.
>
> I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
I’d certainly be a lot more interested in her memoirs than Cameron’s .
> https://twitter.com/garius/status/1131949245127364610
Dick Chiltern-Honey-Drizzler
> https://twitter.com/danielhewittitv/status/1131955400096534528?s=21
We're gonna need a bigger ring...
> I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking.
>
> Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again.
>
> I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
"How to blow a 25% poll lead in 4 weeks against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell."
> https://twitter.com/danielhewittitv/status/1131955400096534528?s=21
I'm sure they'll be quaking in their boots...
> > @El_Capitano said:
> > I will be absolutely fascinated to read May's memoirs, if they're written with any honesty. By which I don't mean self-criticism - she could write 300 pages of "Exactly Why I Was Always Right" and I'd want to read it - but rather, actually letting on what she was thinking.
> >
> > Over the past three years, very little of the inner May has been let out. She has stood at that sodding lectern how many times and repeated that "nothing has changed". She has mouthed platitudinous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", which means nothing. It is remarkable how we still don't really know this person whose every act has been microscopically examined over and over again.
> >
> > I never voted for her, but if her memoirs tell us something about why she did what she did, I will be first in the queue to buy them.
>
> "How to blow a 25% poll lead in 4 weeks against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell."
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Had they known that would have happened, the manifesto would have surely been steady as she goes, rather than trying to challenge a deeply emotive topic.