Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Failing to back the ambassador – the first mistake of the Bori

124»

Comments

  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 1,729

    Blimey.. India 5 for 2 after 3 overs. Kohli and Rohit out for 1 each

    5 for 3!!! Rahul also out for 1
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,653

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    A comprehensive character assassination of Johnson by John Major on radio 4. Who'd have thought.....

    Yeterday we had an even more surprising interview when William Hague revealed himself to be more impresive than all the current Tory MPs put together. He thinks Johnson is a liar incompetent and unsuitable (my precis)

    It seems the only serious Tory who still hinks Boris has any qualities is our very own HYUFD.

    HYUFD will claim that Major and Hague are not “real” Tories.
    No, they are Remainer establishment Tories who lost 2 general elections out of 3 between them 2 by landslide defeats.

    Much like Bush Snr, Romney and McCain who between them lost 3 out of 4 presidential elections they fought dismissed Trump before he actually won the presidential election
    Comedy gold
    Far be it for me to stick up for @HYUFD but where is he factually wrong on any of that assessment?
    I didn't say that it was factually incorrect, but that it is comedic for him to use phrases like "remainer establishment Tories" (esp when he is a remainer himself) and to try and use the unavoidable '97 loss against Major (esp given his surprise success in '92). HY is sadly willing to twist or misuse any passing fact without shame.
    The difference is I respect the Leave vote unlike John Major who seems to have sadly become a diehard Remainer even prepared to use a JR to stop Brexit
    To stop a NO DEAL Brexit achieved by shutting down parliament.

    Why can’t you just be straight about facts?
    A no deal Brexit can't be achieved by shutting down Parliament. No laws are changed while Parliament is shut so unless Parliament has already voted for a no deal Brexit to occur on a certain date shutting it down achieves nothing.

    No Deal is the de facto outcome on 31st October unless there is an agreement or Parliament mandates the PM to seek an extension. Shutting down Parliament ensures that MPs - elected by voters who gave their majority backing to parties rejecting a No Deal at the last election - are unable to force the PM to seek such an extension.

  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155
    From people who have thought about it for more than 5 minutes (unlike myself)

    http://afreeride.org/faqs/
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    What is an ambassador for? Surely he is there to represent our interests, to build contacts and increase our influence in the administration that he or she is dealing with. The extent to which you might be able to do this will of course vary. I suspect that our ambassador in Tehran has very little scope but the ambassador to our closest ally really has to work at this both with the current administration and future possible administrations.

    An ambassador who has fallen out with the incumbent President to the extent that he is being disinvited to events and meetings, such as Fox's meeting yesterday, are cancelled because of his attendance is not able to do his job. Rather than improving and smoothing relationships he is aggravating them.

    It may be true that this is not Darroch's fault. The leaks of his cables are a disgrace that someone will hopefully be prosecuted for. It may be true also that Trump is a petulant bully who disrespects anyone, close ally or not. It is also true that ultimately who our ambassador is is a matter for us. But he is not doing, cannot do his job.

    In these circumstances is a potential PM really wrong to suggest that Darroch needs to be moved on? None of us like bullies and standing up to them is always going to be more popular than not. But it seems to me that Boris' approach is ultimately more consistent with our national interest than some cheap Love Actually headlines.

    It is in the national interest to ensure that the UK is not seen to allow foreign powers to dictate who should represent us.

    I agree but that is not an answer to my points.

    It is. There is a judgement to be made about whether the national interest is best served by demonstrating the UK will not be told who its representatives should be or whether it is more important for ministers to have meetings with Trump administration officials while the US President has a hissy fit.

    The guy leaves office in September
    December. His replacement should have been announced months ago.....
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Blimey.. India 5 for 2 after 3 overs. Kohli and Rohit out for 1 each

    5 for 3!!! Rahul also out for 1
    These conditions were always likely to prove tricky for India.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,565
    Interesting discussion on taxing airline travel. I reckon it has to be simple if we are going to do anything. For example I once flew Stansted -> Shannon for work. Shannon -> Munich to see my girlfriend (now wife) Munich -> Stansted home. I put the first 2 legs of the triangle on expenses and paid for the third. How would you tax that?

    I don't see how we get to change behaviours if we say that 1 holiday per year is ok and we only tax more - the holiday flight doesn't have any fewer emissions than the other ones so why should it escape a green tax?

    Seems to me that you are far smarter putting green taxes on per flight as it's the plane which causes the emissions not the passengers. Would make it even more economical to fill airplanes and not have 2 half empty flights where 1 would do.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    What is an ambassador for? Surely he is there to represent our interests, to build contacts and increase our influence in the administration that he or she is dealing with. The extent to which you might be able to do this will of course vary. I suspect that our ambassador in Tehran has very little scope but the ambassador to our closest ally really has to work at this both with the current administration and future possible administrations.

    An ambassador who has fallen out with the incumbent President to the extent that he is being disinvited to events and meetings, such as Fox's meeting yesterday, are cancelled because of his attendance is not able to do his job. Rather than improving and smoothing relationships he is aggravating them.

    It may be true that this is not Darroch's fault. The leaks of his cables are a disgrace that someone will hopefully be prosecuted for. It may be true also that Trump is a petulant bully who disrespects anyone, close ally or not. It is also true that ultimately who our ambassador is is a matter for us. But he is not doing, cannot do his job.

    In these circumstances is a potential PM really wrong to suggest that Darroch needs to be moved on? None of us like bullies and standing up to them is always going to be more popular than not. But it seems to me that Boris' approach is ultimately more consistent with our national interest than some cheap Love Actually headlines.

    It is in the national interest to ensure that the UK is not seen to allow foreign powers to dictate who should represent us.

    I agree but that is not an answer to my points.

    It is. There is a judgement to be made about whether the national interest is best served by demonstrating the UK will not be told who its representatives should be or whether it is more important for ministers to have meetings with Trump administration officials while the US President has a hissy fit.

    The guy leaves office in September
    December. His replacement should have been announced months ago.....
    then announce it and send a deputy.

    The fault isnt his but currently he;s about as much use as a Stormont MLA
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    A comprehensive character assassination of Johnson by John Major on radio 4. Who'd have thought.....

    Yeterday we had an even more surprising interview when William Hague revealed himself to be more impresive than all the current Tory MPs put together. He thinks Johnson is a liar incompetent and unsuitable (my precis)

    It seems the only serious Tory who still hinks Boris has any qualities is our very own HYUFD.

    HYUFD will claim that Major and Hague are not “real” Tories.
    No, they are Remainer establishment Tories who lost 2 general elections out of 3 between them 2 by landslide defeats.

    Much like Bush Snr, Romney and McCain who between them lost 3 out of 4 presidential elections they fought dismissed Trump before he actually won the presidential election
    Comedy gold
    Far be it for me to stick up for @HYUFD but where is he factually wrong on any of that assessment?
    I didn't say that it was factually incorrect, but that it is comedic for him to use phrases like "remainer establishment Tories" (esp when he is a remainer himself) and to try and use the unavoidable '97 loss against Major (esp given his surprise success in '92). HY is sadly willing to twist or misuse any passing fact without shame.
    The difference is I respect the Leave vote unlike John Major who seems to have sadly become a diehard Remainer even prepared to use a JR to stop Brexit
    To stop a NO DEAL Brexit achieved by shutting down parliament.

    Why can’t you just be straight about facts?
    Just a reminder a No Deal Brexit doesn't respect democracy, as Gove told the cabinet.


    Yes but Michael was probably off his tits on icing sugar.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    148grss said:

    eek said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Re the frequent flyer tax.

    How would that work for people like me, I travel 20-30 times a year for my employer and once or twice a year for holidays. I'd basically be facing a super tax just to have a week in the sun and go home to see family at Xmas because my employer wants me in a lot of meetings.

    In this new world you can't let facts and reality impact an insane plan...
    The facts and reality point to climate catastrophe if we don't have world wide culture change. The insane plan is that we can keep going as we currently do.
    I agree but do you believe there will ever be the global political will to take the difficult measures required? Even if there is money and corrupt politicians all over the world will find a way around it.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    stodge said:

    kinabalu said:

    Feeling very bleak about the state of politics this morning. Has it ever been lower?

    Not that I can recall.
    If 40% vote Liberal Democrat we can say Billhooks to Brexit, Bye Bye to Boris, Ciao to Corbyn and Fudge Off to Farage and life can get back to something approaching normal.

    It might only need 28%. I'd also be overjoyed to see a government say F*** FPTP. As Francis Pym said, large majorities don't make for good government, but forced cross-party cooperation might be even better; Finland has a 5-party govt.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    wow

    Merkel once again hit by shaking

    something definitely wrong
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "China’s surveillance technology is terrifying – and on show in London
    Everything we do and say can now be monitored and stored for future reference

    Chris Daw QC" (£)

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/07/chinas-surveillance-technology-is-terrifying-and-on-show-in-london/
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    A comprehensive character assassination of Johnson by John Major on radio 4. Who'd have thought.....

    Yeterday we had an even more surprising interview when William Hague revealed himself to be more impresive than all the current Tory MPs put together. He thinks Johnson is a liar incompetent and unsuitable (my precis)

    It seems the only serious Tory who still hinks Boris has any qualities is our very own HYUFD.

    HYUFD will claim that Major and Hague are not “real” Tories.
    No, they are Remainer establishment Tories who lost 2 general elections out of 3 between them 2 by landslide defeats.

    Much like Bush Snr, Romney and McCain who between them lost 3 out of 4 presidential elections they fought dismissed Trump before he actually won the presidential election
    Comedy gold
    Far be it for me to stick up for @HYUFD but where is he factually wrong on any of that assessment?
    I didn't say that it was factually incorrect, but that it is comedic for him to use phrases like "remainer establishment Tories" (esp when he is a remainer himself) and to try and use the unavoidable '97 loss against Major (esp given his surprise success in '92). HY is sadly willing to twist or misuse any passing fact without shame.
    The difference is I respect the Leave vote unlike John Major who seems to have sadly become a diehard Remainer even prepared to use a JR to stop Brexit
    To stop a NO DEAL Brexit achieved by shutting down parliament.

    Why can’t you just be straight about facts?
    A no deal Brexit can't be achieved by shutting down Parliament. No laws are changed while Parliament is shut so unless Parliament has already voted for a no deal Brexit to occur on a certain date shutting it down achieves nothing.

    No Deal is the de facto outcome on 31st October unless there is an agreement or Parliament mandates the PM to seek an extension. Shutting down Parliament ensures that MPs - elected by voters who gave their majority backing to parties rejecting a No Deal at the last election - are unable to force the PM to seek such an extension.

    How is it that some people are so completely ignorant of the basics?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,217
    Best thing for NZ would be rain arriving just after over 20, India are a mile behind on DLS at the moment.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 4,155
    OllyT said:

    148grss said:

    eek said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Re the frequent flyer tax.

    How would that work for people like me, I travel 20-30 times a year for my employer and once or twice a year for holidays. I'd basically be facing a super tax just to have a week in the sun and go home to see family at Xmas because my employer wants me in a lot of meetings.

    In this new world you can't let facts and reality impact an insane plan...
    The facts and reality point to climate catastrophe if we don't have world wide culture change. The insane plan is that we can keep going as we currently do.
    I agree but do you believe there will ever be the global political will to take the difficult measures required? Even if there is money and corrupt politicians all over the world will find a way around it.
    I mean, if there isn't the global political will then we're all screwed and might as well just be hedonists until this small blue dot looks like Mars. Or we can try and create the political will.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362
    matt said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    In any case given Darroch has total wrecked the relationship of the current government with the administration

    Darroch leaked the messages did he?

    How do you know>
    Darroch should have been more careful what he wrote down
    In a battle between you as spinner for Johnson and Carlotta as spinner for May (can’t let it go) could you both lose, please.
    Carlotta has already lost, she could not spot a complete donkey right under her nose
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038

    If you want to increase taxes on flying (presumably to discourage it), then why not just make the airlines pay duty on the fuel they consume? It's barmy that planes don't pay any fuel duty, whilst long-distance coaches and trains do,

    (I understand why they don't; it just seems a barmy situation.)

    Yes, that is certainly what should be done and it's a weakness of the global climate talks that they haven't managed to change that treaty, or even tried to as far as I can tell.

    The current taxes on flying make no distinction between planes with different fuel efficiency.
    It doesn't make much difference to air fares though. If the return train fare to Copenhagen is say £250, and the flight is £125, fuel could quadruple and I think the air fare would still be cheaper.

    High-speed train tracks have proved very expensive too, much higher than those designed for 150-200 km/h maximum (like Paddington to Cardiff). So there isn't a HST route from here to say Copenhagen or Stockholm, only to Brussels or Paris.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    OllyT said:

    Streeter said:

    There is also the question of loyalty to consider. Loyalty is earned, not bestowed. If everyone knows that the Prime Minister is going to let anyone swing in the wind rather than spend political capital backing up even the most senior professional colleagues, who is going to go out on a limb for him?

    What I have found utterly depressing is the craven toadying of politicians I have known and liked for many years who have signed up to the manifestly unfit Johnson, presumably in the hope of preferment.
    Mildly amusing to see another Tory ramper (paging Big G) from who’s eyes the scales have fallen.
    You need to review the posts more widely, Streeter. There are many regular and respected posters here on the left and right who have about had it with the two main Parties.

    I am one of them but we are in Catch-22 - We need to move to a fairer voting system but that would require electing a government in favour of doing so but we will never elect a government in favour of doing so because FPTP is propping up the old duopoly and it will never be in their interests to change it.
    A Labour/LD coalition might do it, especially if the LDs held out for it as a price for lending support.

    I wouldn't hold my breath though. Blair was quite open to the idea of PR, until he got elected.
    .... with a big majority.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2019
    India 24 / 4 vs NZ.

    Kiwis very popular on Pakistani twitter feeds at the moment.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679
    Oh Lordy what a catch.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Scott_P said:
    Pretty explosive stuff. But EU will do nothing to defend democracy in Hungary, so I'm not expecting anything to happen in Italy.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    AndyJS said:

    India 24 / 4 vs NZ.

    Kiwis very popular on Pakistani twitter feeds at the moment.

    This fine piece of jinxing appeared on the BBC website two minutes beforehand...
    https://twitter.com/BBCVikas/status/1148905605517627393
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,217
    Pant and Pandya are great when you need to add a quick 30 to the scoreline.... Dhoni will probably need a ton from here I think.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    edited July 2019
    It's a f***ing national disgrace this guy has been thrown under the bus for Trump/Boris matey moments.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Truly this country is plunging over the edge.

    Take Back Control? Don't make me laugh.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869

    If you want to increase taxes on flying (presumably to discourage it), then why not just make the airlines pay duty on the fuel they consume? It's barmy that planes don't pay any fuel duty, whilst long-distance coaches and trains do,

    (I understand why they don't; it just seems a barmy situation.)

    Yes, that is certainly what should be done and it's a weakness of the global climate talks that they haven't managed to change that treaty, or even tried to as far as I can tell.

    The current taxes on flying make no distinction between planes with different fuel efficiency.
    It doesn't make much difference to air fares though. If the return train fare to Copenhagen is say £250, and the flight is £125, fuel could quadruple and I think the air fare would still be cheaper.

    High-speed train tracks have proved very expensive too, much higher than those designed for 150-200 km/h maximum (like Paddington to Cardiff). So there isn't a HST route from here to say Copenhagen or Stockholm, only to Brussels or Paris.
    Second class return via Brussels would be about £150
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
  • Will Boris be PM ,If he needs to be Elected PM and not just leader of the Conservative Party .Watch the DUP same sex unions and Abortion wont wash with their voters .Now that Corbyn is a Remainer the DUP might bring down the Government to protect the Status Quo .They have absolutely nothing to lose in a general election they all have safe seats .
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Will May appoint a new ambassador before Boris gets in?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,133
    Nigelb said:

    AndyJS said:

    India 24 / 4 vs NZ.

    Kiwis very popular on Pakistani twitter feeds at the moment.

    This fine piece of jinxing appeared on the BBC website two minutes beforehand...
    https://twitter.com/BBCVikas/status/1148905605517627393
    Lift operator....that is still a job in the 21st century...learn something new every day.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,133

    It's a f***ing national disgrace this guy has been thrown under the bus for Trump/Boris matey moments.
    It may have become inevitable but it should never have come to this, whoever leaked the information needs to be taken to task

    Our Ambassadors must be safe to say as they find
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591

    Global Britain, walking tall in the world. Nobody is going to push us around.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,679

    NEW THREAD

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    tlg86 said:

    Will May appoint a new ambassador before Boris gets in?

    She bloody should.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    A wise decision by Darroch. He is entirely blameless in this matter but his position was untenable and unlike so many commentators has the intelligence to recognise the need to resign. Hunt comes well out of this - Boris rather less so.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    New thread
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,217

    Will Boris be PM ,If he needs to be Elected PM and not just leader of the Conservative Party .Watch the DUP same sex unions and Abortion wont wash with their voters .Now that Corbyn is a Remainer the DUP might bring down the Government to protect the Status Quo .They have absolutely nothing to lose in a general election they all have safe seats .

    The only safe seat in Belfast belongs to Sinn Fein. Granted Alliance Gain Belfast East looks a long odds shot but they won it in 2010 and if the Alliance surge is mirroring the LDs here it is possible.
    Dodds and certainly Pengelly aren't safe
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    What is an ambassador for? Surely he is there to represent our interests, to build contacts and increase our influence in the administration that he or she is dealing with. The extent to which you might be able to do this will of course vary. I suspect that our ambassador in Tehran has very little scope but the ambassador to our closest ally really has to work at this both with the current administration and future possible administrations.

    An ambassador who has fallen out with the incumbent President to the extent that he is being disinvited to events and meetings, such as Fox's meeting yesterday, are cancelled because of his attendance is not able to do his job. Rather than improving and smoothing relationships he is aggravating them.

    It may be true that this is not Darroch's fault. The leaks of his cables are a disgrace that someone will hopefully be prosecuted for. It may be true also that Trump is a petulant bully who disrespects anyone, close ally or not. It is also true that ultimately who our ambassador is is a matter for us. But he is not doing, cannot do his job.

    In these circumstances is a potential PM really wrong to suggest that Darroch needs to be moved on? None of us like bullies and standing up to them is always going to be more popular than not. But it seems to me that Boris' approach is ultimately more consistent with our national interest than some cheap Love Actually headlines.

    It is in the national interest to ensure that the UK is not seen to allow foreign powers to dictate who should represent us.

    I agree but that is not an answer to my points.

    It is. There is a judgement to be made about whether the national interest is best served by demonstrating the UK will not be told who its representatives should be or whether it is more important for ministers to have meetings with Trump administration officials while the US President has a hissy fit.

    The guy leaves office in September

    Just tell him to use up all his holidays

    most of the US will be on theirs too.
    Telling somebody to use up their holidays before they depart is I think not legal. You owe them that money, you can't just deny it to them because it's not convenient for you.You can tell them they don't have to come into the office for the remainder of their contract ("gardening leave") but you still have to pay them.

    IIRC you are an employer, so I have to ask: is this something you've done to one of your employees?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    He hit the dead centre of his resignation window, I'll give him that. Old school.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,156

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    A comprehensive character assassination of Johnson by John Major on radio 4. Who'd have thought.....

    Yeterday we had an even more surprising interview when William Hague revealed himself to be more impresive than all the current Tory MPs put together. He thinks Johnson is a liar incompetent and unsuitable (my precis)

    It seems the only serious Tory who still hinks Boris has any qualities is our very own HYUFD.

    HYUFD will claim that Major and Hague are not “real” Tories.
    No, they are Remainer establishment Tories who lost 2 general elections out of 3 between them 2 by landslide defeats.

    Much like Bush Snr, Romney and McCain who between them lost 3 out of 4 presidential elections they fought dismissed Trump before he actually won the presidential election
    But political parties are means to an end, and winning elections is only a good thing if it furthers the aims of a political project. The Conservatives' goals to me would seem to be a well run market based economy, strong defence, moderately liberal social policies and a democratic system that has wide participation and support. I am not sure that a Johnson election victory helps with any of those.
    No, half of those are LD aims not conservative aims
This discussion has been closed.