Rory has said he will not serve under Boris. He will become the leader of the not Boris backbench Tories though.
Useful place to be if Boris makes a total arse of things in the remainder of this year. The media will go to him constantly, his profile rises, and he's in a great spot if there's another leadership election soonish.
No it isn't. Rory needs to achieve something. Look at all the Labour wannabes who have sunk without trace since turning down a shadow cabinet job. If he really can't stomach working with Boris, Rory should angle for the Chairman's job and get on the rubber chicken circuit to try and charm the members who vote in HYUFD's polls.
Owen Thingy sunk without a trace during the campaign, let alone after it.
The gloves are starting to come off, and there are several stories about the age thing, all of a sudden.
Biden's shtick of "aw schucks once trump is gone everything will return to normal and the Republicans will turn back into kitty cats" plays really, really, really badly with the Dem activist base.
People are not yet paying attention, once they do I expect Biden's numbers to start dropping.
Waste of time (who actually watches C4 on a Sunday night?)
He should do BBC and/or ITV though.
Audience numbers not as important as the dire impression it gives.
I think it's OK to pick and choose which debates he does (Cameron did in 2015 for example)
Obviously if he ducked all debate as Theresa May did in 2017 that would be bad but if he says for example, I'll do BBC and ITV but C4 and Sky are a waste of my time, I think that's fair enough.
If I was Javid I would be giving serious thought as to who might offer me Chancellor for the bloc of supporters I may be able to deliver. Gove and Hunt have to be possibilities. Boris probably doesn't need him but may be willing to consider it.
Hancock is grossly over promoted in his current post but must be having similar thoughts about a top job. Home Secretary perhaps.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
I agree with some of that.
However: there are other advantages to moving to green energy. As a simple example, the move away from burning coal means much less crud into the atmosphere and less radioactive waste (flyash is slightly radioactive). And fewer IC cars, and more electric, in our cities will immeasurably improve the quality of life for residents.
It may also increase our energy security - both in terms of supply and sourcing fuel - but only if we get storage sorted.
There were many grumbles over the various clean air acts from the ?1950s? onwards, and they undoubtedly had penalties for our industries. But who would go back to the days of the London smog?
I can see the same being said in fifty years over the current CO2 debate. And the environmentalists will have moved onto something else ...
It's also important not to think that 'costs of trillions of pounds' means trillions of pounds being lost... those costs get recycled through the economy.
Also that might be the total cost but over thirty years we have to replace lots of our infrastructure anyway, and so the marginal cost will be lower - and could even end up being negative if technology develops quickly as has happened with solar.
What happens if BoJo gets over 200 votes in the final three or four? Do they have to go to members or is coronation likely?
I would have thought the term "coronation" is reserved for occasions when the new leader hasn't faced a vote by MPs or by members? eg. Brown, 2007 Howard, 2003
Quite a risky strategy by Stewart but I think his pitch to more moderate Tories is back me for another round to send out a strong message that suspending parliament is unnaceptable .
Once upon a time I remember a rumour going around the Scottish Tories would consider being their own party if May's Brexit deal looked like it would split up the Union. Do we see a situation where Ruth decides it's better off to be SUP? Is Boris a big threat to the union in and of himself?
Quite a risky strategy by Stewart but I think his pitch to more moderate Tories is back me for another round to send out a strong message that suspending parliament is unnaceptable .
He is putting himself in pole position to be the "I told you so" candidate once Johnson has crashed and burned. It's a smart strategy if the Tories can escape from the all-out, hard core English nationalism they have embraced.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
If Boris wins (and it is still an if) then I suspect his premiership will be short and disastrous. I wouldn’t be surprised if he isn’t PM by the end of the year.
Quite a risky strategy by Stewart but I think his pitch to more moderate Tories is back me for another round to send out a strong message that suspending parliament is unnaceptable .
Probably enough votes for one of Hancock, Javid or Stewart to get through the next round but will have to eat into each other's existing support to make it.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
On the other hand, he is vermin.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
If Boris wins (and it is still an if) then I suspect his premiership will be short and disastrous. I wouldn’t be surprised if he isn’t PM by the end of the year.
The albeit Brexit deranged Matthew Parris has said as much in the Times.
It would be better if a couple of candidates dropped out at this stage. Hancock for example has zilch chance of winning the members ballot unlike say Rory or even Gove.
Quite a risky strategy by Stewart but I think his pitch to more moderate Tories is back me for another round to send out a strong message that suspending parliament is unnaceptable .
He is putting himself in pole position to be the "I told you so" candidate once Johnson has crashed and burned. It's a smart strategy if the Tories can escape from the all-out, hard core English nationalism they have embraced.
When does Labour plan to escape the all-out, hardcore, any-other-country-but-England nationalism they have embraced?
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
Now Sam is out, ALL remainers should be backing Rory.
Andrea Leadsom going out leaves me with just Rory Stewart as a possible losing bet in this race. I'd have thought Jeremy Hunt would be Boris Johnson's preferred opponent. Not that he will be too concerned about any of them.
I've decided to go red on Sajid.
He underperformed my expectations and see no path to the last 2 for him now.
That's a bit disingenuous. He said he was minded to support it, but caveated that he had not yet read the proposal. Once he had done so, he decided against.
Which seems fair enough - though it'd be interesting to know what bits of Labour's proposal put him off.
Labour overplayed their hand, and should have been clear about the motion they intended to table on the 25th in advance.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance.
Surely that assessment rests upon the probability that the theory is right, and if it is the probability of being able to rescue things later if we do nothing now. Simply saying that the costs are high and the probability of correctness isn’t 100% ...
Managing risks where predictions both of probability and of impact are uncertain or unknowable means that we have to use non-quantitative approaches.
Essentially, there are just two: 1. the precautionary principle, however hard or soft a version you wish to apply 2. adaptive risk management
The first in its hard version means not doing something at all until it is proven not to cause harm. That is not feasible in most cases on global issues unless we are prepared for millions to die from starvation and disease, or from war or civil unrest. But a modified version of not doing what we know to have adverse effects, or at least moderating those activities in order to mitigate those effects, is feasible in most cases, because in most cases, as with climate, our ignorance is not total. Clearly, also, we should try to focus on those mitigating actions where our confidence is highest that the benefits will clearly exceed the costs.
Adaptive risk management is about doing what you think will mitigate the risks, but then following the evidence of the impact of those measures, and adapting to that evidence on a continuous basis. This is hard but doable for companies (they like certainty), harder for governments (the don't move that fast) and even harder for the global community (that moves in archeological time).
For these reasons, I personally think that effective responses to the potential damages of climate change will only come about when corporations -rather than governments or international institutions - feel the need to respond to public (i.e. customer) concerns. We see that partly in the rise of electric cars, and in the issue of over-use of plastics.
Risk perceptions are very important in getting to action. The problem with climate change is that humans are pretty poor at judging risk in complex situations. In general, we under- or over-estimate risks for a number of reasons - as many as 13 risk perception factors have been well-documented, including if the risk is in the future, if the risk is chronic vs acute, if the risk is unlikely to affect us, and so on. Most of these cognitive failures in risk valuation apply in the case of climate. So while the public may vaguely agree that climate change is a real risk, their emotional recognition of that risk rarely meets the threshold required to precipitate personal action. And until that happens, companies are going to slow to respond.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
On the other hand, he is vermin.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
Boris will bump up against the reality of the backstop just as May did. There will I suspect be many civil servants, advisers, MPs even, lining up to explain to him the issues at stake and, again like May, he will realise that it is the only option. He will then have no other option but to support the WA and, with him and his undoubted charisma, would have a non-trivial probability of getting it passed.
Whether this dampens his appeal to some of the dolts who currently support him who knows.
The danger for Boris is that he starts losing votes in further rounds to people like Rory Stewart.
How many rounds do you think there will be?
5 most likely.
I think fewer. Some will probably drop out over the weekend. The minimum number goes to 32(I think) next time. There comes a point when people have to get a bit more realistic and sell their support to those who might still have an incentive to offer anything.
Looking at these numbers Javid must be very disappointed.
There are possibly enough from Leadsom and McVey to save either or both Javid and Raab (though there must be a good chance that many pile on to Boris).
I can't see how Stewart or Hancock get to 33 votes next time. I didn't really get a handle on where Mark Harper's handful came from, but I'd have thought they're more likely Hunt/Gove/Javid's next time. In any case, even if all of his supporters went to Rory it wouldn't be enough.
So next time, I'd imagine Stewart, Hancock and probably at least one of Javid and Raab go out. If they all do, we'll be down to Bozza, Hunt and Gove by Tuesday.. and lose one of them in round 3 on Wednesday to get the final two.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
Now Sam is out, all remainers should be backing Rory.
He's got no chance - remainers would be better off backing a more pragmatic approach of Gove or Hunt.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
A proven election/referndum winner who will fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being, not least because his own career and power depends upon it. We could do - and have done - a lot worse.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
Now Sam is out, all remainers should be backing Rory.
Plus all leavers who want a sensible, balanced compromise solution to Brexit that can start to bring the country together again. Gove is the only other one talking like that and not nearly in the same tones.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
I think Raab will get 33 in the next round because his current support is solid and he should pick up at least 6 from Leadsom and McVey.
It'll be interesting to see who McVey and Leadsom endorse.
Andrea famously fell out with Boris when he started messing her around over that weekend when he want to play cricket.
Boris could have lent Leadson a few votes to get her into the second round today and didn't...
I could see both Leadsom and McVey endorsing Raab to be honest.
If you really don't want Boris as leader, then the only alternative now is to go with Raab as every other candidate is to the left of Boris on Brexit. I still don't think Raab has the personality but I can't see any other scenario where BoJo does not become leader.
I don't think Leadsom brings much to Raab to be honest beyond dull competence. I quite liked the blue collar conservatism of McVey though and, in a run-off between Raab and BoJo, it could make a difference.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
On the other hand, he is vermin.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
Boris will bump up against the reality of the backstop just as May did. There will I suspect be many civil servants, advisers, MPs even, lining up to explain to him the issues at stake and, again like May, he will realise that it is the only option. He will then have no other option but to support the WA and, with him and his undoubted charisma, would have a non-trivial probability of getting it passed.
Whether this dampens his appeal to some of the dolts who currently support him who knows.
Agreed. Alternatively, he gets a huge surge in the polls and calls a Brexit general election? Very risky. Might fragment his party. But it has to be tempting, if the reward is a big majority able to pass Brexit.
He would destroy the now very visibly ageing and querulous Corbyn.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
And only Boris can beat Labour? My goodness, you are in a bad way.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
On the other hand, he is vermin.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
Boris will bump up against the reality of the backstop just as May did. There will I suspect be many civil servants, advisers, MPs even, lining up to explain to him the issues at stake and, again like May, he will realise that it is the only option. He will then have no other option but to support the WA and, with him and his undoubted charisma, would have a non-trivial probability of getting it passed.
Whether this dampens his appeal to some of the dolts who currently support him who knows.
I'm not convince Boris, or anyone, can get the WA through. I'm sure Boris could win round most of the ERG, but it isn't them he needs to win round. For all those talking of 'The ERG blew it', they didn't. The DUP and Grieve and friends blew it.
I don't think the DUP will switch, and Grieve and his small band of merry remainers have probably now reconciled themselves to the end of their political careers being nigh. They won't pass the WA either.
Then it doesn't matter if every remaining ERG member switches, it probably won't be enough.
@ Mr Dancer. Do Ferrari have any chance of changing the ruling on Vettel? It strikes me that, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the original penalty, about a third of the race was conducted in response to that penalty, and hence to overturn it at this point - even if to correct a wrong - is merely to create another wrong to those who adapted their race strategy to the penalty.
I think Raab will get 33 in the next round because his current support is solid and he should pick up at least 6 from Leadsom and McVey.
It'll be interesting to see who McVey and Leadsom endorse.
Andrea famously fell out with Boris when he started messing her around over that weekend when he want to play cricket.
Boris could have lent Leadson a few votes to get her into the second round today and didn't...
I could see both Leadsom and McVey endorsing Raab to be honest.
If you really don't want Boris as leader, then the only alternative now is to go with Raab as every other candidate is to the left of Boris on Brexit. I still don't think Raab has the personality but I can't see any other scenario where BoJo does not become leader.
I don't think Leadsom brings much to Raab to be honest beyond dull competence. I quite liked the blue collar conservatism of McVey though and, in a run-off between Raab and BoJo, it could make a difference.
I am sure it is me but what on earth is the attraction of Raab? Personally I would rather have Stewart, Gove, Hunt, Javid, Boris in roughly that order. The only one he might match is Hancock who is a blithering idiot. I just don't get it.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
Didn't the last election show that there has to be a positive reason to vote for a party. Banging on about how bad the others are isn't constructive.
I heard some some silly Tory on the radio saying it should be Boris because it's time for something different. It would certainly be novel knowingly choosing an incompetent to lead the country rather than discovering it after the event.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
Didn't the last election show that there has to be a positive reason to vote for a party. Banging on about how bad the others are isn't constructive.
Yet so many Tories think the lesson is that they weren't negative enough.
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Probably enough votes for one of Hancock, Javid or Stewart to get through the next round but will have to eat into each other's existing support to make it.
Stewart has momentum. I think he goes through, the other two either drop out or will get less than 33 on Tuesday.
Incidentally I watched Boris’s launch speech last night. After all the wild critiques on Twitter I had expected a dull, mirthless, wooden, performance, something painful to view.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
On the other hand, he is vermin.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
And he is never boring, and is plainly a member of the human race, and is funny witty and clever, and transcends political correctness and has lots of interesting bad points and lots of interesting good points. And calling him names isn't going to work because he plainly can't be placed in simple categories. It's like calling Margaret Thatcher names, it tends to rebound on the speaker, who ends up looking like Laura Pidcock wearing a 'Never Kissed a Tory' tee shirt.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
Didn't the last election show that there has to be a positive reason to vote for a party. Banging on about how bad the others are isn't constructive.
Agreed, but does anyone doubt that Boris can present a positive vision - irrespective of the reality or otherwise of that vision - with more passion and conviction than May ever could?
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
We need someone who can beat Labour, who are currently being run by a bunch of clowns and communists. Compared to that, I couldn't care less about Boris' personal foibles.
Didn't the last election show that there has to be a positive reason to vote for a party. Banging on about how bad the others are isn't constructive.
Agreed, but does anyone doubt that Boris can present a positive vision - irrespective of the reality or otherwise of that vision - with more passion and conviction than May ever could?
I've yet to see evidence of that positive vision....
Mr. T, I read a few minutes ago that Ferrari have withdrawn their appeal. Even if they'd maintained it, I think the odds would be practically zero anyway.
Mr. T, I read a few minutes ago that Ferrari have withdrawn their appeal. Even if they'd maintained it, I think the odds would be practically zero anyway.
Mr. Divvie, aye. Daft sods.
Withdrawing their appeal in order to pursue a 'review'. Not sure what that means in F1 terms.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
The role of FS is not one that covers incumbents in glory these days. I think your FS comment is applicable to:
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
I think there is a battle between them when Hunt would have hoped he'd have been clear
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
The very well sourced rumor says that, when Boris decided to go for Leave, there was deathly silence in the Cabinet, and then someone close to the prime minister said ‘shit, we’ve lost this’
Boris won it. Farage created the conditions. Gove brought, ahem, intellectual credibility. But Boris was the vital figurehead. The man who could rally people to the cause. Cameron knew this.
In the opinions of some. Yes. But 1. They are a fairly small hardcore. 2. Does it matter, maybe we need a nasty bastard to take on Barnier et al, 3. This sort of dehumanizing language will possibly shift support TO Boris.
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
The role of FS is not one that covers incumbents in glory these days. I think your FS comment is applicable to:
Jeremy Hunt 2018 to present
Boris Johnson 2016 to 2018
Philip Hammond 2014 to 2016
William Hague 2010 to 2014
David Miliband 2007 to 2010
Margaret Beckett 2006 to 2007
Jack Straw 2001 to 2006
Robin Cook 1997 to 2001
But Boris did at least get a significant co-ordinated international response to Russia after the Novichok poisoning on UK soil.
I doubt he's on Putin's Christmas card list. Despite Brexit.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
Oh god. I thought that was finally, finally, settled
He said he was going to look at the current judicial review very closely.
It is fairly later in the day but the airline industry is still very concerned- details of the plans are yet to be finalised, including potential public money for related train and underground proposals.
@ Mr Dancer. Do Ferrari have any chance of changing the ruling on Vettel? It strikes me that, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the original penalty, about a third of the race was conducted in response to that penalty, and hence to overturn it at this point - even if to correct a wrong - is merely to create another wrong to those who adapted their race strategy to the penalty.
No chance at all. Though as Hamilton was still trying to overtake him, and Ferrari somehow neglected to inform Leclerc of the situation at all, no one in contention with him did adapt their race strategy.
I think Raab will get 33 in the next round because his current support is solid and he should pick up at least 6 from Leadsom and McVey.
It'll be interesting to see who McVey and Leadsom endorse.
Andrea famously fell out with Boris when he started messing her around over that weekend when he want to play cricket.
Boris could have lent Leadson a few votes to get her into the second round today and didn't...
I could see both Leadsom and McVey endorsing Raab to be honest.
If you really don't want Boris as leader, then the only alternative now is to go with Raab as every other candidate is to the left of Boris on Brexit. I still don't think Raab has the personality but I can't see any other scenario where BoJo does not become leader.
I don't think Leadsom brings much to Raab to be honest beyond dull competence. I quite liked the blue collar conservatism of McVey though and, in a run-off between Raab and BoJo, it could make a difference.
I am sure it is me but what on earth is the attraction of Raab? Personally I would rather have Stewart, Gove, Hunt, Javid, Boris in roughly that order. The only one he might match is Hancock who is a blithering idiot. I just don't get it.
His resemblance to an SS oberleutnant is unfortunate and while his back story is anything but that I am not sure the British public will ever warm to him.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
Perhaps he can get Lynton Crosby to renegotiate Brexit for him ?
He is a narcissist. A liar. An over-confident, under-prepared lump of privilege. A lazy rich boy who has thrown his cards in with the Bannonites.
C'est ca. Tres bien.
I am sure there was a point in doing that in schoolboy French, but calling someone lazy when you yourself can't be arsed to put the accents in is perhaps un peu fort.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
'Dr. Blue', strictly speaking. The sad thing is I don't disagree with the points you've made, but I think most of the other candidates would go down very badly in an early general election that now looks inevitable whoever becomes leader. Rory Stewart is perhaps the only exception, but both the party and the country are in an insufficiently sane state to appreciate him.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
'Dr. Blue', strictly speaking. The sad thing is I don't disagree with the points you've made, but I think most of the other candidates would go down very badly in an early general election that now looks inevitable whoever becomes leader. Rory Stewart is perhaps the only exception, but both the party and the country are in an insufficiently sane state to appreciate him.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
What makes you think Boris is a fighter? He comes across as being utterly lazy.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
'Dr. Blue', strictly speaking. The sad thing is I don't disagree with the points you've made, but I think most of the other candidates would go down very badly in an early general election that now looks inevitable whoever becomes leader. Rory Stewart is perhaps the only exception, but both the party and the country are in an insufficiently sane state to appreciate him.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
Do the polls pick up that I could just about imagine voting for Jeremy Hunt, but I'd rather coat myself in hazelnuts and honey and leap into a pit of hungry squirrels than vote for Boris Johnson?
When you have a majority of 3 (along with your slightly less than completely reliable friends in the DUP) pretty much everyone is important.
But we are, thankfully, in the final days of his Chancellorship. Its not that he did much wrong but he did very little right. A dull accountant with no imagination. And his failure to prepare for significantly possible outcomes for Brexit was unforgivable.
Opposition MPs who want to attack Boris have oodles of ammunition, but they really would be well advised to avoid accusing him of racism. It's such a feeble and unsubstantiated accusation that it merely distracts from the substantial stuff.
When you have a majority of 3 (along with your slightly less than completely reliable friends in the DUP) pretty much everyone is important.
But we are, thankfully, in the final days of his Chancellorship. Its not that he did much wrong but he did very little right. A dull accountant with no imagination. And his failure to prepare for significantly possible outcomes for Brexit was unforgivable.
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
Agree with this. I thought Hunt would be 50+.
EDIT: votes that is, not current price! But Gove surprised on the upside.
Opposition MPs who want to attack Boris have oodles of ammunition, but they really would be well advised to avoid accusing him of racism. It's such a feeble and unsubstantiated accusation that it merely distracts from the substantial stuff.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
'Dr. Blue', strictly speaking. The sad thing is I don't disagree with the points you've made, but I think most of the other candidates would go down very badly in an early general election that now looks inevitable whoever becomes leader. Rory Stewart is perhaps the only exception, but both the party and the country are in an insufficiently sane state to appreciate him.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
What makes you think Boris is a fighter? He comes across as being utterly lazy.
Agreed. I think he will be like Gordon Brown. To him it is all about his ego. He just wants to be able to say to himself that he got the top job. He has no idea what he will do with it. Where I do agree with "Dr" Blue, is that we Tories (it will soon be THE Tories when I have resigned my membership) are in a deep deep hole. Where I would go further is to say that fat lazy Boris will not be the person to get his party and the country out of it. A hole largely of his creation.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
HS2 is more threatened.
Yep. Hs2 looks dead to me now. How many MPs have the leading runners promised it will be shut down.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
Isn't he supposed to be lying down in front of the bulldozers glued to John McDonnell or something? It's going to be tricky for him to brush the issue off.
The most powerful man of Earth is someone who claims to have negotiated with the 'Prince of Whales', FFS. Quiet competence wins polite plaudits from the dress circle, pugnaciousness fills the stalls with roars.
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
Agree with this. I thought Hunt would be 50+.
EDIT: votes that is, not current price! But Gove surprised on the upside.
I predicted Hunt would get 45 votes which I thought was maybe a little on the low side but in fact he only got 43 which was interesting.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
HS2 is more threatened.
A lot depends on whether Boris will listen to and be influenced by the Cabinet Office machine (his time at London suggests, possibly, at least on all but a few major issues) or, whether like Trump (cf. Fire and Fury) he simply doesn't read and doesn't listen.
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
Isn't he supposed to be lying down in front of the bulldozers glued to John McDonnell or something? It's going to be tricky for him to brush the issue off.
If he was committed to taking down Heathrow he would have voted against. Instead he abstained. Moral principle is not, ahh, one of his greatest strengths. My guess - and it is only a guess - is that he will let it pass, reluctantly. But with some bluster about “making it work for all of Britain!”
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
Agree with this. I thought Hunt would be 50+.
EDIT: votes that is, not current price! But Gove surprised on the upside.
I predicted Hunt would get 45 votes which I thought was maybe a little on the low side but in fact he only got 43 which was interesting.
Mr. (Miss?) Blue, he was incompetent as Foreign Secretary. He's been proven not to do what he promises. A Heathrow resignation was promised, instead he hid in Afghanistan. When it comes to leaving the EU on 31 October will we find him in cupboard in Khartoum?
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
'Dr. Blue', strictly speaking. The sad thing is I don't disagree with the points you've made, but I think most of the other candidates would go down very badly in an early general election that now looks inevitable whoever becomes leader. Rory Stewart is perhaps the only exception, but both the party and the country are in an insufficiently sane state to appreciate him.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
Where do you get time to hold an election given the time frame a general election requires?
Remember you need 5 weeks minimum to hold an election and it takes 2 weeks for a new Parliament to be sworn in and a Queen's Speech to occur.
Even if the Parliament did nothing given the leave date of 31st October the election can't be later than 17th October and realistically the 3rd / 10th.
And to hold an election on October 10th the election needs to be called 35 days earlier on roughly September 4th which is literally the first day after Summer Recess..
What happens to Heathrow expansion if Boris becomes PM?
I was thinking the same. I suspect the die is cast and LHR3 will survive. Boris has got Brexit to deal with (if he wins). Trying to unpick the Heathrow decision would use up tons of spare energy and capital which he can’t afford.
HS2 is more threatened.
A lot depends on whether Boris will listen to and be influenced by the Cabinet Office machine (his time at London suggests, possibly, at least on all but a few major issues) or, whether like Trump (cf. Fire and Fury) he simply doesn't read and doesn't listen.
Pretty sure he can read. He read classics didn't he?
Thinking about this further, it seems to me that the candidate whose underperformance is most serious is Jeremy Hunt. Given that Gove was suffering from a little local difficulty, and that Javid didn't make much impression, I'd have expected Hunt to pick up a larger chunk of the centre ground of Tory MPs. Instead a lot of those potential votes seem have gone to Boris, and probably aren't coming back. Unfortunately for Hunt, he doesn't seem particularly well placed to pick up transfers from lower-ranked candidates; those who supported Raab, Leadsom and McVey are probably going to go either for Boris or for Gove in preference to Hunt, and the pool of more centrist/moderate transfers is rather small and will be split three ways.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
Agree with this. I thought Hunt would be 50+.
EDIT: votes that is, not current price! But Gove surprised on the upside.
I predicted Hunt would get 45 votes which I thought was maybe a little on the low side but in fact he only got 43 which was interesting.
Amazing if true. It means he has another 25 supporters who haven't been made public on his BackBoris twitter page, which I expect will start appearing on there over the next few days.
Comments
People are not yet paying attention, once they do I expect Biden's numbers to start dropping.
Obviously if he ducked all debate as Theresa May did in 2017 that would be bad but if he says for example, I'll do BBC and ITV but C4 and Sky are a waste of my time, I think that's fair enough.
Hancock is grossly over promoted in his current post but must be having similar thoughts about a top job. Home Secretary perhaps.
It was quite the opposite. Passionate, articulate, sometimes flowery, sometimes boastful, yet generally sensible. Sure it lacked a classic gag in the Boris mould, but this was not a time for blatant jokes.
That said, he got in some subtle digs and trolls, which I am not sure any other politician would dare to do, or even be smart enough to do
First, When asked about those opinions on burqas, he said ‘the public don’t want politicians real opinions to be muffled, or, if I might say so, veiled’
Second, when asked about his alleged cocaine use, he talked about the public not wanting to focus on this trivia, ‘so let’s just blow this nonsense away’. Blow? I thought it was possibly a coincidence but it wasn’t. You see a tiny twinkle as does it.
Third. He used the word syzygy. Correctly. Surely a first in a leadership race!
I don’t like Boris. I think he is too chaotic, and narcissistic, and his morals ARE highly questionable, and that matters. Personally I’d go for Rory.
But Boris is clever, cunning, punchy and ruthless - and yet also very flexible. These aren’t bad attributes to have, in a leader, as we take on Brexit. And at least he will watchable. Unlike Mrs May.
eg.
Brown, 2007
Howard, 2003
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1139112970166919169
The blue David Miliband.
It would be better if a couple of candidates dropped out at this stage. Hancock for example has zilch chance of winning the members ballot unlike say Rory or even Gove.
They're mad to be backing a known incompetent.
Essentially, there are just two:
1. the precautionary principle, however hard or soft a version you wish to apply
2. adaptive risk management
The first in its hard version means not doing something at all until it is proven not to cause harm. That is not feasible in most cases on global issues unless we are prepared for millions to die from starvation and disease, or from war or civil unrest. But a modified version of not doing what we know to have adverse effects, or at least moderating those activities in order to mitigate those effects, is feasible in most cases, because in most cases, as with climate, our ignorance is not total. Clearly, also, we should try to focus on those mitigating actions where our confidence is highest that the benefits will clearly exceed the costs.
Adaptive risk management is about doing what you think will mitigate the risks, but then following the evidence of the impact of those measures, and adapting to that evidence on a continuous basis. This is hard but doable for companies (they like certainty), harder for governments (the don't move that fast) and even harder for the global community (that moves in archeological time).
For these reasons, I personally think that effective responses to the potential damages of climate change will only come about when corporations -rather than governments or international institutions - feel the need to respond to public (i.e. customer) concerns. We see that partly in the rise of electric cars, and in the issue of over-use of plastics.
Risk perceptions are very important in getting to action. The problem with climate change is that humans are pretty poor at judging risk in complex situations. In general, we under- or over-estimate risks for a number of reasons - as many as 13 risk perception factors have been well-documented, including if the risk is in the future, if the risk is chronic vs acute, if the risk is unlikely to affect us, and so on. Most of these cognitive failures in risk valuation apply in the case of climate. So while the public may vaguely agree that climate change is a real risk, their emotional recognition of that risk rarely meets the threshold required to precipitate personal action. And until that happens, companies are going to slow to respond.
I think Boris is an inevitability now though.
Whether this dampens his appeal to some of the dolts who currently support him who knows.
I can't see how Stewart or Hancock get to 33 votes next time. I didn't really get a handle on where Mark Harper's handful came from, but I'd have thought they're more likely Hunt/Gove/Javid's next time. In any case, even if all of his supporters went to Rory it wouldn't be enough.
So next time, I'd imagine Stewart, Hancock and probably at least one of Javid and Raab go out. If they all do, we'll be down to Bozza, Hunt and Gove by Tuesday.. and lose one of them in round 3 on Wednesday to get the final two.
I can't see it going beyond round 4, certainly.
Exactly what we do not need, I would say.
What was it in his performance as foreign secretary that makes you think he deserves a crack at anything other than his next floozy?
I don't think Leadsom brings much to Raab to be honest beyond dull competence. I quite liked the blue collar conservatism of McVey though and, in a run-off between Raab and BoJo, it could make a difference.
He would destroy the now very visibly ageing and querulous Corbyn.
I don't think the DUP will switch, and Grieve and his small band of merry remainers have probably now reconciled themselves to the end of their political careers being nigh. They won't pass the WA either.
Then it doesn't matter if every remaining ERG member switches, it probably won't be enough.
It seems to me, therefore, that the market may be over-estimating his chance of making the final two; we may well see Michael Gove overtake him as the rounds progress.
As for 'referendum-winning', he did play a role in the referendum result. So did many others. His victory there alienated most of London, which provided his earlier electoral success. His conduct since, including in office, has put off those of us with not afflicted with amnesia or blind optimism.
I'm sure he'll fight Corbyn with every fibre of his being. The problem is being incompetent. He was a failure of a Foreign Secretary. He reneged upon a promise made to the electorate.
What thing has Boris achieved? The referendum result was as much, perhaps even more so, down to Gove in the winning of it, and Farage in creating the circumstances of it being held. Boris' triumphs are shared or long past, his incompetence recent and plain to see.
Maybe I'll be wrong. I hope I am.
Mr. Divvie, aye. Daft sods.
Jeremy Hunt
2018 to present
Boris Johnson
2016 to 2018
Philip Hammond
2014 to 2016
William Hague
2010 to 2014
David Miliband
2007 to 2010
Margaret Beckett
2006 to 2007
Jack Straw
2001 to 2006
Robin Cook
1997 to 2001
Boris won it. Farage created the conditions. Gove brought, ahem, intellectual credibility. But Boris was the vital figurehead. The man who could rally people to the cause. Cameron knew this.
I doubt he's on Putin's Christmas card list. Despite Brexit.
An old man shouting at the wind.
It is fairly later in the day but the airline industry is still very concerned- details of the plans are yet to be finalised, including potential public money for related train and underground proposals.
Though as Hamilton was still trying to overtake him, and Ferrari somehow neglected to inform Leclerc of the situation at all, no one in contention with him did adapt their race strategy.
We Tories are in a deep, deep hole, with nothing but bad options. But if you're going to be in a fight for your life, then you bloody well need a fighter, and Boris will be that.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1feCjt98HJcY9tlc5Zx78ZoSOC2fN-j0vRVFD5eUTbUE/edit#gid=0
But we are, thankfully, in the final days of his Chancellorship. Its not that he did much wrong but he did very little right. A dull accountant with no imagination. And his failure to prepare for significantly possible outcomes for Brexit was unforgivable.
EDIT: votes that is, not current price! But Gove surprised on the upside.
HS2 is more threatened.
It is a somewhat... long list
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/how-boriss-campaign-predicted-he-would-get-114-votes/
Remember you need 5 weeks minimum to hold an election and it takes 2 weeks for a new Parliament to be sworn in and a Queen's Speech to occur.
Even if the Parliament did nothing given the leave date of 31st October the election can't be later than 17th October and realistically the 3rd / 10th.
And to hold an election on October 10th the election needs to be called 35 days earlier on roughly September 4th which is literally the first day after Summer Recess..
Knife crime at a 9 year high. Not helpful.