politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From a media perspective Team Boris will regard last night as

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From a media perspective Team Boris will regard last night as job well done

The Boris plan of refusing almost all media invitations meant that last night was the first time anybody had seen him facing scrutiny since TMay announced that she was going. But the nature of the programme with the BBC feeling it had to bring in questions from studios all over the country meant that the tine spent with the overwhelming betting favourite was very limited.

Read the full story here

DecrepitJohnL

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

DecrepitJohnL

Aftertiming: I made a whole pony, that's £25, on yesterday's ballot, having risked a tenner on Raab receiving fewest votes. Despite my proven expertise in these matters, I am not sure what to make of last night's debate.

The question is not the verdict of the newspapers above, or even what did we, the pb massive, make of it. What matters for betting purposes (and the trivial matters of running the country and exiting the EU) is what 300 Conservative MPs think.

Was there a performance so bad as to make a candidate's round 2 voters change their minds? Probably not. Or one so good as to attract converts? Almost certainly not.

No change.

Except I do wonder if now-homeless Raab voters might have been given cause to doubt Boris's resolve on Brexit.

asjohnstone

So, what's the cut off to make it past round 3? I've lost track of the process at this point

MikeL

asjohnstone said:

So, what's the cut off to make it past round 3? I've lost track of the process at this point

No cut-off now. Just last place drops out.

asjohnstone

MikeL said:

asjohnstone said:

So, what's the cut off to make it past round 3? I've lost track of the process at this point

No cut-off now. Just last place drops out.

Thanks, good to know.

So, 3 more rounds of voting. Should do it papal election style, morning, afternoon and evening votes and knock if off in a day.

DecrepitJohnL

Something remarkable is scheduled to happen tomorrow.

This is the timetable for the next three ballots (taken from ConHome).

Wednesday June 19
15.00 – 17.00: Third ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

Thursday June 20
10.00 – 12.00: Fourth ballot.
13.00 approx: Announcement of result.

15.30 – 17.30: Fifth ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

The 1922 Committee tomorrow afternoon will double its efficiency and count 313 votes in half the time! Shame on cynics for suggesting it is all a charade timed to go out live at the start of the hated BBC's 6 o'clock (or 1 o'clock) News.

IanB2

DecrepitJohnL said:

Aftertiming: I made a whole pony, that's £25, on yesterday's ballot, having risked a tenner on Raab receiving fewest votes. Despite my proven expertise in these matters, I am not sure what to make of last night's debate.

The question is not the verdict of the newspapers above, or even what did we, the pb massive, make of it. What matters for betting purposes (and the trivial matters of running the country and exiting the EU) is what 300 Conservative MPs think.

Was there a performance so bad as to make a candidate's round 2 voters change their minds? Probably not. Or one so good as to attract converts? Almost certainly not.

No change.

Except I do wonder if now-homeless Raab voters might have been given cause to doubt Boris's resolve on Brexit.

The session may have planted some slow burn doubts about Boris that will re-emerge when he goes round the country head to head (?with Hunt).

Boris was on the defensive (and didn’t defend particularly well), and didn’t demonstrate the commanding performance one might expect from someone so widely seen as a shoo-in. And last night he was among friends.

YBarddCwsc

DecrepitJohnL said:

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

My recollection is that, in a previous incarnation, Mike Smithson was Director of Development for Oxford. Wiki tells me:

"Since 1994 he has worked as Director of Development running the fundraising for five UK universities - for the London School of Economics from 1994 to 1996, for Cambridge University from 1996 to 1999, for Oxford University from 1999 to 2005, and for the University of York from 2005 to April 2007."

I am sure OGH will be interested to learn that raising such enormous donations is easy. In fact, so easy that it can be described as "Oxford has done nothing".

I don't know the details of this case, but I imagine it involved a huge amount of hard work over a number of years.

Torby_Fennel

I thought the debate was an utter shambles. I lost count of the number of times that multiple contenders spoke over each other - rendering it impossible to make sense of what any of them were saying. In terms of format alone I think the C4 debate was far superior to the BBC one.

I thought that Rory Stewart looked very odd perched on the edge of his seat but I don't think his overall performance was too bad - though I was doing the ironing so not looking up that often. He probably seemed more awkward to people who were looking at the screen throughout rather than those of us who had the show on as background noise. To my mind Gove was the worst performer - he seemed to be pleading his record rather than debating the issues.

Anyway, as a Lib Dem the one I'd least want to be facing in a GE (based on last night) would probably be Javid.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

F1: French markets mostly up. Bit sleepy though, so unless Ferrari drivers are decent for topping first practice (or it's forecast to be wet, in which case I might throw pennies at backmarkers) I'm not going to be betting just yet.

tlg86

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

My recollection is that, in a previous incarnation, Mike Smithson was Director of Development for Oxford. Wiki tells me:

"Since 1994 he has worked as Director of Development running the fundraising for five UK universities - for the London School of Economics from 1994 to 1996, for Cambridge University from 1996 to 1999, for Oxford University from 1999 to 2005, and for the University of York from 2005 to April 2007."

I am sure OGH will be interested to learn that raising such enormous donations is easy. In fact, so easy that it can be described as "Oxford has done nothing".

I don't know the details of this case, but I imagine it involved a huge amount of hard work over a number of years.

Getting undergrads to phone up old students and pester them for cash. That's generally what the colleges do.

Morris_Dancer

I watched a bit of the debate, incidentally. Reminded me why I don't like them. As well as talking over one another, 12 minutes for each candidate, effectively, is faintly ridiculous. Sloganising and soundbites are encouraged by such short bursts of prime time attention, and more considered thoughts squeezed out by time restrictions.

YBarddCwsc

tlg86 said:

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

My recollection is that, in a previous incarnation, Mike Smithson was Director of Development for Oxford. Wiki tells me:

"Since 1994 he has worked as Director of Development running the fundraising for five UK universities - for the London School of Economics from 1994 to 1996, for Cambridge University from 1996 to 1999, for Oxford University from 1999 to 2005, and for the University of York from 2005 to April 2007."

I am sure OGH will be interested to learn that raising such enormous donations is easy. In fact, so easy that it can be described as "Oxford has done nothing".

I don't know the details of this case, but I imagine it involved a huge amount of hard work over a number of years.

Getting undergrads to phone up old students and pester them for cash. That's generally what the colleges do.

Thomas Spotty-Undergrad didn't ring up Stephen Billionaire and say "Can we have £150 million?"

Most of the work of a Director of Development involves securing very large donations from philanthropic individuals.

It is very hard work to persuade wealthy businessmen to offload their cash.

There are plenty of other universities, institutions, museums, galleries & charities all in the queue.

Nigelb

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

My recollection is that, in a previous incarnation, Mike Smithson was Director of Development for Oxford. Wiki tells me:

"Since 1994 he has worked as Director of Development running the fundraising for five UK universities - for the London School of Economics from 1994 to 1996, for Cambridge University from 1996 to 1999, for Oxford University from 1999 to 2005, and for the University of York from 2005 to April 2007."

I am sure OGH will be interested to learn that raising such enormous donations is easy. In fact, so easy that it can be described as "Oxford has done nothing".

I don't know the details of this case, but I imagine it involved a huge amount of hard work over a number of years.

Well they did creep up the research rankings:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jun/19/cambridge-slips-to-lowest-ever-place-in-world-university-table

While the UK overall, as part of the Brexit dividend, is on the slide.

IanB2

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

JosiasJessop

DecrepitJohnL said:

Something remarkable is scheduled to happen tomorrow.

This is the timetable for the next three ballots (taken from ConHome).

Wednesday June 19
15.00 – 17.00: Third ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

Thursday June 20
10.00 – 12.00: Fourth ballot.
13.00 approx: Announcement of result.

15.30 – 17.30: Fifth ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

The 1922 Committee tomorrow afternoon will double its efficiency and count 313 votes in half the time! Shame on cynics for suggesting it is all a charade timed to go out live at the start of the hated BBC's 6 o'clock (or 1 o'clock) News.

Snark aside, that might make sense. In earlier rounds, the count would probably have had representatives from all of the candidates there, ensuring the count is done properly and the votes properly accounted for. With six or seven candidates, that would make for a more time-consuming process.

As the number of candidates decreases, so does the number of interested parties sticking their noses in during the count.

(That is assuming the 22 Committee has a sane counting process.)

JosiasJessop

It'll be interesting to see Corbyn's reaction to this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48685584

YBarddCwsc

Nigelb said:

Well they did creep up the research rankings:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jun/19/cambridge-slips-to-lowest-ever-place-in-world-university-table

While the UK overall, as part of the Brexit dividend, is on the slide.

The table has little for the EU to brag about !!!

Aside from the UK universities, there are just two EU universities in the top fifty.

The European institutions in the top 50 are numerous UK universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Manchester, Bristol, KCL, UCL, IC, and LSE) and two Swiss universities (Zurich, Lausanne).

Paris & Delft are the only EU representatives, and Delft is at 50 (aside from the soon-to-leave UK).

What the table probably shows is the increasing importance of China -- there are many more Chinese universities in the table than I was expecting. I doubt if Brexit has anything to do with it.

OldKingCole

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

There wasn't, was there, a commanding performance from anyone. The one who unimpressed me least (!) was Javid.

Scott_P

As depressing as it was watching the debate as a citizen, imagine how bad it must feel as a Labour MP, knowing that with almost any other leader than Jezza, they would annihilate these clowns

DecrepitJohnL

YBarddCwsc said:

Nigelb said:

Well they did creep up the research rankings:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jun/19/cambridge-slips-to-lowest-ever-place-in-world-university-table

While the UK overall, as part of the Brexit dividend, is on the slide.

The table has little for the EU to brag about !!!

Aside from the UK universities, there are just two EU universities in the top fifty.

The only European institutions in the top 50 are numerous UK universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Manchester, Bristol, KCL, UCL, IC, and LSE) and two Swiss universities (Zurich, Lausanne).

Paris & Delft are the only EU representatives, and Delft is at 50 (aside from the soon-to-leave UK).

What the table probably shows is the increasing importance of China -- there are many more Chinese universities in the table than I was expecting. I doubt if Brexit has anything to do with it.

Does it matter? It ought to matter. It certainly should but why is the standing of British universities not reflected in economic or industrial benefits, as in the United States or, as you say, increasingly China?

It cannot be that the league tables are wrong. We do win more than our share of Nobel Prizes, for instance, so we must be doing something right.

There may be soft power or influence to be taken into account. Many foreign leaders have studied here, and presumably we take some lasting benefit from that.

On the rise of China, SeanT saw this years ago, and warned against George Osborne cutting British research.

DecrepitJohnL

JosiasJessop said:

It'll be interesting to see Corbyn's reaction to this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48685584

What will the government reaction be? To call a pre-Brexit EU summit to coordinate action? To wait and see what President Trump and Chancellor Merkel say? Palmerston might have sent a gunboat up the Volga but that will not happen now, especially not since Gavin Williamson was sacked from the MOD.

OldKingCole

Totally O/T but a post has popped up on my Facebook quoting one from the Flat Earth Society, who claim that they have members all around the globe!

You couldn't make it up!

dr_spyn

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

YBarddCwsc

DecrepitJohnL said:

Does it matter? It ought to matter. It certainly should but why is the standing of British universities not reflected in economic or industrial benefits, as in the United States or, as you say, increasingly China?

It cannot be that the league tables are wrong. We do win more than our share of Nobel Prizes, for instance, so we must be doing something right.

There may be soft power or influence to be taken into account. Many foreign leaders have studied here, and presumably we take some lasting benefit from that.

On the rise of China, SeanT saw this years ago, and warned against George Osborne cutting British research.

If you look at the top 50 universities in that list, you see that the major players are the US, the UK and the Far East (China/Singapore/Japan)

We are told that we have to be in the EU, because the big power blocks in the future will be the EU, the US and China.

So, at face value, what that list tells you is what a shitty job the EU is doing in promoting European research and training in the EU universities.

The list isn't telling you that it is the fault of George Osborne or Brexit.

Once the UK leaves, the EU will have TWO universities in the top 50. There is no
way that is anything other than a very poor result for the EU in research and training.

SquareRoot

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

DecrepitJohnL

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Does it matter? It ought to matter. It certainly should but why is the standing of British universities not reflected in economic or industrial benefits, as in the United States or, as you say, increasingly China?

It cannot be that the league tables are wrong. We do win more than our share of Nobel Prizes, for instance, so we must be doing something right.

There may be soft power or influence to be taken into account. Many foreign leaders have studied here, and presumably we take some lasting benefit from that.

On the rise of China, SeanT saw this years ago, and warned against George Osborne cutting British research.

If you look at the top 50 universities in that list, you see that the major players are the US, the UK and the Far East (China/Singapore/Japan)

We are told that we have to be in the EU, because the big power blocks in the future will be the EU, the US and China.

So, at face value, what that list tells you is what a shitty job the EU is doing in promoting European research and training in the EU universities.

The list isn't telling you that it is the fault of George Osborne or Brexit.

Once the UK leaves, the EU will have TWO universities in the top 50. There is no
way that is anything other than a very poor result for the EU in research and training.

True. Except our dominance of the European university scene is not reflected in relative economic performance. That is what I was getting at. I don't know why, but we do not seem to enjoy the spin-offs other countries do.

DecrepitJohnL

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

That is because we all watched the debate last night.

Foxy

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

My piece on Monday morning was quite positive about the LD leadership candidates.

IanB2

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

Nor you about the site, it seems.

IanB2

OldKingCole said:

Totally O/T but a post has popped up on my Facebook quoting one from the Flat Earth Society, who claim that they have members all around the globe!

You couldn't make it up!

The old ones are the best.

DecrepitJohnL

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

MarqueeMark

The only comfort that the candidates for PM can take from last night is that the BBC came out of it as the worst of those on show.

matt

G

Nigelb said:

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

OT but the Times headline in the OP is surely absurd, and presumably written by an Oxford man. Oxford makes history with £150m donation from US billionaire. Oxford is not the active agent in this transaction but the passive recipient of the American's largesse. Oxford has done nothing.

Well, aside from educating Boris, Rory, Jeremy and Michael.

My recollection is that, in a previous incarnation, Mike Smithson was Director of Development for Oxford. Wiki tells me:

"Since 1994 he has worked as Director of Development running the fundraising for five UK universities - for the London School of Economics from 1994 to 1996, for Cambridge University from 1996 to 1999, for Oxford University from 1999 to 2005, and for the University of York from 2005 to April 2007."

I am sure OGH will be interested to learn that raising such enormous donations is easy. In fact, so easy that it can be described as "Oxford has done nothing".

I don't know the details of this case, but I imagine it involved a huge amount of hard work over a number of years.

Well they did creep up the research rankings:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jun/19/cambridge-slips-to-lowest-ever-place-in-world-university-table

While the UK overall, as part of the Brexit dividend, is on the slide.

Grafting a French-style “everyone can go to university” system with the British “limited numbers means research is a critical factor” is always going to create challenges. Particularly when added to the assumption that dropping out is a university failure - compare to near 50% first year at a swathe of French institutions. Equating it to Brexit is a little simplistic.

TOPPING

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

Totally O/T but a post has popped up on my Facebook quoting one from the Flat Earth Society, who claim that they have members all around the globe!

You couldn't make it up!

The old ones are the best.

Is the psychic society meeting still on?

Foxy

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

MarqueeMark

TOPPING said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

Totally O/T but a post has popped up on my Facebook quoting one from the Flat Earth Society, who claim that they have members all around the globe!

You couldn't make it up!

The old ones are the best.

Is the psychic society meeting still on?

Cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances....

TOPPING

As for last night.

Both Bozza and Rory showed they weren't PM material. Gove was too solipsistic (which is saying something in the company) which leaves Hunt or The Saj.

Hunt for me.

Jonathan

MarqueeMark said:

The only comfort that the candidates for PM can take from last night is that the BBC came out of it as the worst of those on show.

Nope. Don’t blame the messenger. Not the BBCs job to polish these turds.

dr_spyn

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

eek

DecrepitJohnL said:

YBarddCwsc said:

Nigelb said:

Well they did creep up the research rankings:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jun/19/cambridge-slips-to-lowest-ever-place-in-world-university-table

While the UK overall, as part of the Brexit dividend, is on the slide.

The table has little for the EU to brag about !!!

Aside from the UK universities, there are just two EU universities in the top fifty.

The only European institutions in the top 50 are numerous UK universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Manchester, Bristol, KCL, UCL, IC, and LSE) and two Swiss universities (Zurich, Lausanne).

Paris & Delft are the only EU representatives, and Delft is at 50 (aside from the soon-to-leave UK).

What the table probably shows is the increasing importance of China -- there are many more Chinese universities in the table than I was expecting. I doubt if Brexit has anything to do with it.

Does it matter? It ought to matter. It certainly should but why is the standing of British universities not reflected in economic or industrial benefits, as in the United States or, as you say, increasingly China?

It cannot be that the league tables are wrong. We do win more than our share of Nobel Prizes, for instance, so we must be doing something right.

There may be soft power or influence to be taken into account. Many foreign leaders have studied here, and presumably we take some lasting benefit from that.

On the rise of China, SeanT saw this years ago, and warned against George Osborne cutting British research.

Because our universities still don't have the infrastructure to take their inventions to market. Granted they are far, far better than we used to be (heck someone at University of Newcastle gave the formula to Head and Shoulders away for free down the pub) but they are still nowhere near as good as US universities...

eek

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

If that reflects what the Tory membership believes than he is still a shoo in...

Which means November (or any general election) will be fun...

Dura_Ace

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

SquareRoot

IanB2 said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

Nor you about the site, it seems.

I am negative about the negativity of comment on the site, so I guess that makes me equally guilty. There's nothing wrong with PB, its just the endless negativity that wears one down,

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1141232170222178305

StuartDickson

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

Doesn’t a blithering nincompoop make an ideal leader of the blithering nincompoop party?

eristdoof

YBarddCwsc said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Does it matter? It ought to matter. It certainly should but why is the standing of British universities not reflected in economic or industrial benefits, as in the United States or, as you say, increasingly China?

It cannot be that the league tables are wrong. We do win more than our share of Nobel Prizes, for instance, so we must be doing something right.

There may be soft power or influence to be taken into account. Many foreign leaders have studied here, and presumably we take some lasting benefit from that.

On the rise of China, SeanT saw this years ago, and warned against George Osborne cutting British research.

If you look at the top 50 universities in that list, you see that the major players are the US, the UK and the Far East (China/Singapore/Japan)

We are told that we have to be in the EU, because the big power blocks in the future will be the EU, the US and China.

So, at face value, what that list tells you is what a shitty job the EU is doing in promoting European research and training in the EU universities.

The list isn't telling you that it is the fault of George Osborne or Brexit.

Once the UK leaves, the EU will have TWO universities in the top 50. There is no
way that is anything other than a very poor result for the EU in research and training.

I smell a rat here.

Universities in Europe have grown up to be quite different in each country, where as the Universities in the US are working under a broadly similar system. As such the variety of different types of unis in the EU means that it is unlikely that a large proportion appear in the top-n in any kind of metric used for an international league table. I don't know the details of this top 50, but I think it likely that it uses metrics which benefit an Anglo type of Uni system.

Just as an example, in the UK the expectation is that all students get a bachelor degree in 3 years. If you don't work much then you get a crap degree. In the German system the best bachelor students pass everything in 3 or 3.5 years depending on the degree programme, but average students require longer to meet the required standard. Weak students if determined enough can take 8 or 10 years to graduate, but many just give up after a few years. The standard of Bachelor-Projects that I see here at a not-so-strong Berlin Uni are better than many Master Projects I saw at a top 10 UK Uni. I'm not trying to claim that one is better than the other, but it is easy to see that if a metric used to assess unis internationally is "proportion of students who graduate within four years of registering" then the University of Plymouth will come out massively better than Heidelberg Uni.

TGOHF

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

Casino_Royale

I’ve topped up on the Saj this morning, who is now my best result.

Given there’s barely 13 votes between all of those in the number two position virtually anything could happen. So 100/1 is value, particularly since he came across pleasantly human last night.

IanB2

Casino_Royale said:

I’ve topped up on the Saj this morning, who is now my best result.

Given there’s barely 13 votes between all of those in the number two position virtually anything could happen. So 100/1 is value, particularly since he came across pleasantly human last night.

Laying Boris is surely now the best strategy, on the assumption that there is bound to be at least a small wobble in his campaign, once he is forced out onto the stump against one of his colleagues?

StuartDickson

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

But not a fan of English-manufactured bikes. You’re so negative.

IanB2

SquareRoot said:

IanB2 said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

Nor you about the site, it seems.

I am negative about the negativity of comment on the site, so I guess that makes me equally guilty. There's nothing wrong with PB, its just the endless negativity that wears one down,

You could have written a nice post complimenting the quality of debate and the experience and knowledge on display by most of the other posters, and then urged us on to be more positive about the future (despite our country’s determined competition with the US to become laughing stock of the world).

That might have cheered us all up this morning?

Foxy

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Scrapheap_as_was

what news of Sir Graham Brady's campaign?

his resignation is getting close to trumping all those of Lord Falconer

IanB2

Zahawi on R4 trying to explain how Boris’s resignation demonstrates the courage needed to do the job.

Immediately after Mr Radcliffe explained the damage Boris’s comments did to the effort to free his wife.

Casino_Royale

IanB2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

I’ve topped up on the Saj this morning, who is now my best result.

Given there’s barely 13 votes between all of those in the number two position virtually anything could happen. So 100/1 is value, particularly since he came across pleasantly human last night.

Laying Boris is surely now the best strategy, on the assumption that there is bound to be at least a small wobble in his campaign, once he is forced out onto the stump against one of his colleagues?

But then you’re effectively backing all the other candidates too, which isn’t what I want to do at this stage. It might be different once it’s down to two. But right now I’m happy with my position on Boris.

I will probably never go “all in” on Boris, except perhaps in the final 24-48 hours, because I’m never going to be 100% confident he won’t blow up or pull out.

tpfkar

DecrepitJohnL said:

Something remarkable is scheduled to happen tomorrow.

This is the timetable for the next three ballots (taken from ConHome).

Wednesday June 19
15.00 – 17.00: Third ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

Thursday June 20
10.00 – 12.00: Fourth ballot.
13.00 approx: Announcement of result.

15.30 – 17.30: Fifth ballot.
18.00 approx: Announcement of result.

The 1922 Committee tomorrow afternoon will double its efficiency and count 313 votes in half the time! Shame on cynics for suggesting it is all a charade timed to go out live at the start of the hated BBC's 6 o'clock (or 1 o'clock) News.

Didn’t work yesterday - they mistimed it and the six o clock news didn’t carry the live result, and initially reported that Rory got 33 not 37 votes

Dura_Ace

Casino_Royale said:

I’m never going to be 100% confident he won’t blow up or pull out.

As Petronella Wyatt found out to her cost and her abortionist's benefit.

StuartDickson

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Like Scotland, 20% will soon seem like a decent score for the Conservatives. Funny how organisations quickly adapt: underperformance becomes the new, accepted norm (cf. Corbyn, Leonard and Drakeford).

Foxy

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

YBarddCwsc

eristdoof said:

I smell a rat here.

Universities in Europe have grown up to be quite different in each country, where as the Universities in the US are working under a broadly similar system. As such the variety of different types of unis in the EU means that it is unlikely that a large proportion appear in the top-n in any kind of metric used for an international league table. I don't know the details of this top 50, but I think it likely that it uses metrics which benefit an Anglo type of Uni system.

Just as an example, in the UK the expectation is that all students get a bachelor degree in 3 years. If you don't work much then you get a crap degree. In the German system the best bachelor students pass everything in 3 or 3.5 years depending on the degree programme, but average students require longer to meet the required standard. Weak students if determined enough can take 8 or 10 years to graduate, but many just give up after a few years. The standard of Bachelor-Projects that I see here at a not-so-strong Berlin Uni are better than many Master Projects I saw at a top 10 UK Uni. I'm not trying to claim that one is better than the other, but it is easy to see that if a metric used to assess unis internationally is "proportion of students who graduate within four years of registering" then the University of Plymouth will come out massively better than Heidelberg Uni.

Of course.

All these University tables are Bollocks. The hilarious thing in this table is that metrics are quoted to 1 dp, so this is Precision Bollocks.

I was merely contesting the claimed fact that impending Brexit has caused the UK universities to fall down the Precision Bollocks Table.

I think the main point I made is true -- the main players in university education are the US, the UK and China (for a number of reasons, including historical). The EU is punching well below weight here.

Dura_Ace

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

nichomar

eek said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

If that reflects what the Tory membership believes than he is still a shoo in...

Which means November (or any general election) will be fun...

The problem is these lies and half truths enter the vocabulary of the leaver who feels safe claiming that we can leave to wto rules and GATT 24 means there are no issues with tariffs. You must have come across such “experts” down the pub telling their mates there in nothing to worry about. Then if challenged they fall back on “they need us more than we need them” claiming they will bend over backwards to give us everything we want after a few days of mild disruption.

Casino_Royale

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time.

It’s ok. The EU have a plan to help you out with that.

MarqueeMark

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

TGOHF

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Yes we had an anti semitic Iman, a green nutter from Scotland who is too young to vote and a socialist married to a property developer.

The whole spectrum...

Theuniondivvie

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

A ray of sunshine speaks.

YBarddCwsc

YBarddCwsc said:

I think the main point I made is true -- the main players in university education are the US, the UK and China (for a number of reasons, including historical). The EU is punching well below weight here.

And, to amplify, one of the main historical reasons is that the Germans had the best universities in the world .... and destroyed them !!

Because there was a time when the best US and UK students aspired to go to Germany !!

eek

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Given most of things being said it's hardly surprising that setting was the one she used...

Foxy

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Perhaps one of these might be in order, perfect transport for a woke matelot flyboy

https://en.simplemobility.org/

Jonathan

Wouldn’t it have been interesting if May had taken part in such a debate last time around.

Jonathan

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

TGOHF

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1141240885801177088?s=21

DavidL

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

It was one of the many absurdities that there was not a single current Conservative voter, ie member of the relevant selectorate, asking a question. Another was Maitliss's need to add a dig and a gotcha quote to every question. It really was a shambles of a show which allowed the candidates to get away with whatever they wanted. For the most part Maitliss was ignored which was fair enough because she added nothing but those selected to ask questions weren't treated much better. Did nobody even watch how the Americans do these things?

Chris

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

If this does all go disastrous wrong and lives are lost as a consequence, I just wish he could be prosecuted for criminal negligence.

Frankly, as the foreign secretary for the first 15 months of the process, I wish this clown could be prosecuted for the damage he has already done to the economy.

StuartDickson

Jonathan said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

B-listers? You’re being generous.

eek

nichomar said:

eek said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

If that reflects what the Tory membership believes than he is still a shoo in...

Which means November (or any general election) will be fun...

The problem is these lies and half truths enter the vocabulary of the leaver who feels safe claiming that we can leave to wto rules and GATT 24 means there are no issues with tariffs. You must have come across such “experts” down the pub telling their mates there in nothing to worry about. Then if challenged they fall back on “they need us more than we need them” claiming they will bend over backwards to give us everything we want after a few days of mild disruption.

And? It's too late now given the electorate of this vote so Boris will win and then the fun begins:If Boris goes for an election 1 of 2 things will occur: -

1) The Tories and Nigel sign a deal and a full on campaign of tactical voting is organised - the Tories won't win a majority
or 2) Nigel stands candidates against the Tories and the party is toast as their split is vote and their members don't know who and how to canvass...

But if he doesn't call an election he needs to some how leave the EU and it's highly unlikely he will have a majority government as soon as he reveals his real plan...

Streeter

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Why don’t you, oh I don’t know this may sound crazy, slow down?

twistedfirestopper3

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Perhaps one of these might be in order, perfect transport for a woke matelot flyboy

https://en.simplemobility.org/

Or he could ride whatever he wanted and just stick to the speed limit......

MarqueeMark

Jonathan said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

She added nothing that the five wouldn't have demonstrated without her presence.

eek

Streeter said:

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Why don’t you, oh I don’t know this may sound crazy, slow down?

I recently had a Toyota Aygo as a hire car. They are cheap and will ensure you never break the speed limit (I don't think it's possible to)...

And if you want thrills trying to get on to a motorway is something you will enjoy everytime you attempt to (acceleration is not a strong point)...

StuartDickson

nichomar said:

eek said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

If that reflects what the Tory membership believes than he is still a shoo in...

Which means November (or any general election) will be fun...

The problem is these lies and half truths enter the vocabulary of the leaver who feels safe claiming that we can leave to wto rules and GATT 24 means there are no issues with tariffs. You must have come across such “experts” down the pub telling their mates there in nothing to worry about. Then if challenged they fall back on “they need us more than we need them” claiming they will bend over backwards to give us everything we want after a few days of mild disruption.

Yepp. England is heading for a world-record-breaking post-cognitive dissonance.

MarqueeMark

eek said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Given most of things being said it's hardly surprising that setting was the one she used...

You might have a point if it were in response to what was being said, rather than her default factory setting.....

kle4

StuartDickson said:

Foxy said:

IanB2 said:

Where was the commanding performance from Johnson that justifies his being seen as a shoo-in for the top job? He was defensive and evasive, even when competing with his friends.

He buckled under the most gentle pressure. The tax cuts for higher earners are now merely an “ambition” about which we need to “have a debate”. On Heathrow he restated his “grave concerns” about expansion while effectively conceding he would let it go ahead anyway. He got bounced into conceding an inquiry into Conservative islamophobia that he clearly doesn’t want, which will give new legs to the stories about his various previous remarks. Having tried to make 31 October a red line, he was pushed into conceding himself at least a little wriggle room (now Raab is gone, Brexit is back on the slippery slope). And he had no answer to Hunt’s putative sheep farmer whom a no deal exit would put out of work.

And he can only have been under scrutiny for ten minutes out of the hour!

The members thinking Johnson will provide the strength and resolve that Mrs May apparently lacked surely cannot believe that we saw any of that last night? Mrs May would at least have sat there repeating the same inane phrase until the show got to the end. Boris wobbled and ducked and weaved and began to crumble. And has yet to face the opposition parties and an unfriendly parliament.

You forgot to mention that Boris thinks that No Deal has a transition period, and that GATT 24 means we can trade tariff free with the EU after hard Brexit.

The man is a blithering nincompoop.

Doesn’t a blithering nincompoop make an ideal leader of the blithering nincompoop party?

Some people think parliament needs to reflect the nation and that's it, so see its bitterness and division and inability to resolve the situation as appropriate. The same logic would suggest yes, such a leader would be a great fit for the party.

Jonathan

MarqueeMark said:

Jonathan said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

She added nothing that the five wouldn't have demonstrated without her presence.

You seem to be under the impression that it’s her job to make this lot look good. It isn’t.She let them do the talking. If it didn’t go well they only have themselves to blame.

This is what the next cabinet looks like. God help us.

Nigel_Foremain

I thought the format of the "debate" was dire. I suspect anything more interesting was neutered by Johnson's team. The only good thing is that as Raab is now definitely knocked out I can use my one vote to vote "anyone-but-that-lying-bastard-Johnson" . Not sure it will make a lot of difference. The only upside is that he will be forced to own the disaster that he , for his own selfish reasons, is heavily responsible for.

Nigel_Foremain

StuartDickson said:

Jonathan said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

B-listers? You’re being generous.

Who are the A-listers north of the border? Salmond? oh, whoops, hang on a sec...
To be fair though, can't blame you for mocking, none came over very well, even Stewart, who other than last night, by most standards is a class act.

StuartDickson

eek said:

Streeter said:

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Why don’t you, oh I don’t know this may sound crazy, slow down?

I recently had a Toyota Aygo as a hire car. They are cheap and will ensure you never break the speed limit (I don't think it's possible to)...

And if you want thrills trying to get on to a motorway is something you will enjoy everytime you attempt to (acceleration is not a strong point)...

We briefly owned the Peugeot equivalent of the Aygo (were they using the Dictionary of the Scots Language when thinking up that wonderful name?)

I loved that little car. Fantastic acceleration from the lights; you can totally ignore speed signs and cameras (it never gets up there) and cheaper than public transport.

Only problem is that where we live the roads are jam-packed full of HGVs and other heavy vehicles; roadworks everywhere; and huge Volvos, Beamers and Mercs. Every journey scared the shit it of me.

Gallowgate

eek said:

Streeter said:

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Dura_Ace said:

SquareRoot said:

The site should be renamed. The negativity blog. Noone has anything positive to say about anything.

I like the new Yamaha TT700.

It does look rather fun, but don't you think you might keep your licence longer on a Vespa?

I have my licence back but my next speeding offence will almost certainly mean jail time. So, while life in the Royal Navy was first class preparation for eating dreadful food and sleeping in close proximity to highly enthusiastic masturbators, I am sticking to a mixed mode bicycle/Uber transportation system for now and only driving cars on track.

Why don’t you, oh I don’t know this may sound crazy, slow down?

I recently had a Toyota Aygo as a hire car. They are cheap and will ensure you never break the speed limit (I don't think it's possible to)...

And if you want thrills trying to get on to a motorway is something you will enjoy everytime you attempt to (acceleration is not a strong point)...

To be fair, if I drop my 70hp (when brand new) 2007 Ford Fiesta into 4th gear on the motorway, it pulls!

Alternatively, going 60mph on a country road feels very fast in such a small car!

Nigel_Foremain

TGOHF said:

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1141240885801177088?s=21

I think the best worse case scenario would be Gove backed by Rory. If we have got to have a brexiter as PM (which is a bit like putting a vandal in charge of local law and order), then this would be better than Boris.

Cyclefree

My husband saw the debate later after me and felt that Rory had not done at all badly. Son thought he was nervous or stressed because of the odd body language.

But he was up again at the crack of dawn on the Today programme. Plugging his message.

I’m not sure how much further he can go and, in many ways, it might be better not to be PM for the inevitable Brexit car crash. But he has done himself a load of good by his campaign and if MPs and voters don’t want to hear honesty, well, more fools them.

It’s mot a high bar, admittedly, but I think he’s the best thing that’s come out of the Tory party for a long time.

Casino_Royale

DavidL said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

".

It was one of the many absurdities that there was not a single current Conservative voter, ie member of the relevant selectorate, asking a question. Another was Maitliss's need to add a dig and a gotcha quote to every question. It really was a shambles of a show which allowed the candidates to get away with whatever they wanted. For the most part Maitliss was ignored which was fair enough because she added nothing but those selected to ask questions weren't treated much better. Did nobody even watch how the Americans do these things?

Paxman effect. Journalists are obsessed with doing that these days.

StuartDickson

Nigel_Foremain said:

StuartDickson said:

Jonathan said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Last night she managed to show the candidates for what they are. No grandstanding to an audience, no polished 1:1 interview techniques. Just squabbling B listers without a clue.

B-listers? You’re being generous.

Who are the A-listers north of the border? Salmond? oh, whoops, hang on a sec...
To be fair though, can't blame you for mocking, none came over very well, even Stewart, who other than last night, by most standards is a class act.

We don’t need to be superstars. We just need to be better than our opponents.

The Scons, SLDs and SLabbers are just making life too easy for us. Their problem is that over the decades recruitment has dried up. Must be all that negativity putting young people off.

Jonathan

Cyclefree said:

My husband saw the debate later after me and felt that Rory had not done at all badly. Son thought he was nervous or stressed because of the odd body language.

But he was up again at the crack of dawn on the Today programme. Plugging his message.

I’m not sure how much further he can go and, in many ways, it might be better not to be PM for the inevitable Brexit car crash. But he has done himself a load of good by his campaign and if MPs and voters don’t want to hear honesty, well, more fools them.

It’s mot a high bar, admittedly, but I think he’s the best thing that’s come out of the Tory party for a long time.

Good, potentially prophetic choice of words: “Come out of the Tory party”.

He is a square peg in a round cesspit.

FF43

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

TGOHF said:

dr_spyn said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

dr_spyn said:

It appears that Guido has had a look at a twitter feed of one of the questioners last night. He appears to have some very robust views, the uncharitable would wonder why he was chosen to speak on air.

https://order-order.com/2019/06/19/abdullah-bristol-wants-know-panel-agree-words-consequences/

That Boris-booster Guido was even looking makes one suspect that he was not impressed by his man's handling of the question, especially when he let the Saj bounce him into conceding an inquiry (even if it can be kicked into the long grass).

For some reason, the quoted twitter feed has gone. May be some surprised Guardian journalists and readers this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/19/disappointing-and-deluded-imam-lambasts-tory-hopefuls-on-islamophobia

All the woketard boxes were ticked with the questions last night - phobias, dead polar bears, evil cuts.

All added to the farce.

I think the clue was in the title "Our Next PM" so the questions came from across the political spectrum. They did not treat it as what it is, a leadership contest in a party currently running at 20% in the polls.

Would have been far, far more insight if they had run it from a ConClub in Lancashire. "And any bugger swearing on telly will be barred from snooker room for a month."

Emily Maitliss doesn't have the professional ability to differentiate her demeanour between being presented with a live living Tory and a steaming turd. Her one and only setting is "How could any sentient being EVER vote Tory?".

Good question, though, based on current performance. I guess Boris was the winner of last night's debate by showing that he can actually turn up. The Tory Party was surely the loser by making all too clear that this lot should never be anywhere near power.

Gallowgate

Cyclefree said:

My husband saw the debate later after me and felt that Rory had not done at all badly. Son thought he was nervous or stressed because of the odd body language.

But he was up again at the crack of dawn on the Today programme. Plugging his message.

I’m not sure how much further he can go and, in many ways, it might be better not to be PM for the inevitable Brexit car crash. But he has done himself a load of good by his campaign and if MPs and voters don’t want to hear honesty, well, more fools them.

It’s mot a high bar, admittedly, but I think he’s the best thing that’s come out of the Tory party for a long time.

I agree 100%. He's genuine and actually willing to engage. I think he has respect right across the political spectrum.

HYUFD

TGOHF said:

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1141240885801177088?s=21

Stewart likely goes out today as he will get likely 0 Raab votes which will mainly go to Boris with a few to Javid.

If Rory then backs Gove with some of Javid's supporters also rumoured to be going to the Environment Secretary that could be enough to put Gove in the last 2 with Boris in the final round of MPs voting, ahead of Hunt

TGOHF

https://twitter.com/joerichlaw/status/1141241949594275841?s=21

Jonathan

The speedball pact of Gove and Rory is intriguing, but probably too little, too late.

eek

StuartDickson said:

We don’t need to be superstars. We just need to be better than our opponents.

The Scons, SLDs and SLabbers are just making life too easy for us. Their problem is that over the decades recruitment has dried up. Must be all that negativity putting young people off.

I don't think it's that - Given Social Media, 24 hour news and complainers have 24/7 access to you via social media who on earth wants to be politician...

There are easier (and more profitable) ways to change the world nowadays.