Sad it has come to this, I suspect I’ll be joining you on the 31st of October.
The truly tragic thing is that we’re ensuring a Corbyn Premiership with Johnson’s approach.
Precisely the opposite, failing to deliver Brexit would have ensured a Corbyn minority government propped up by the SNP and LDs by splitting the Tory vote with the Brexit Party or even led to a Farage premiership
You really don't understand the situation.
Sustained No Deal = A Corbyn Premiership
Leaving in an orderly fashion in say March 2020 = Should ensure the Tories remain the largest party in Parliament, do you honestly think in May 2022 Leavers will be upset that we didn't Leave in October 2019 that they'll vote Brexit party.
We're not ready for No Deal in October, we need to pass a dozen bills including a trade bill and financial services bill and we do not have the time to do so. On November 1st government revenues are going to fall of a cliff.
Don't worry the financial services sector doesn't contribute that much to the Exchequer.
If we don't leave in October we never will leave as MPs will always prefer extension or revoke over No Deal while also still refusing to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement unless the backstop is removed from the PD. That likely means the Brexit Party overtakes the Tories as the main party of the right at the next general election.
In any case on current polls the main beneficiaries of No Deal would be the LDs as more Remainers are voting LD with Yougov today than for Corbyn Labour
In which case I think we have to let that happen. Or to hold and win a general election, get a mandate and get the deal passed that way. There is, simply, no other way out of this impasse as far as I can see. Or finally yes crash out no deal and fuck the economy but my guess is that Boris, for all today's speech will resile from that.
Rightly so. Britain Trump has little useful experience, no skills beyond writing, he demonstrates no wisdom, and he has a poor track record in office. On top of that he's a dishonest serial-adulterer who is either extremely gaffe prone or a bigot. Is he really the best person the Tory Party could find to run the country? And I wonder how many of his fans would want him as a colleague or boss?
Sad it has come to this, I suspect I’ll be joining you on the 31st of October.
The truly tragic thing is that we’re ensuring a Corbyn Premiership with Johnson’s approach.
Precisely the opposite, failing to deliver Brexit would have ensured a Corbyn minority government propped up by the SNP and LDs by splitting the Tory vote with the Brexit Party or even led to a Farage premiership
You really don't understand the situation.
Sustained No Deal = A Corbyn Premiership
Leaving in an orderly fashion in say March 2020 = Should ensure the Tories remain the largest party in Parliament, do you honestly think in May 2022 Leavers will be upset that we didn't Leave in October 2019 that they'll vote Brexit party.
We're not ready for No Deal in October, we need to pass a dozen bills including a trade bill and financial services bill and we do not have the time to do so. On November 1st government revenues are going to fall of a cliff.
Don't worry the financial services sector doesn't contribute that much to the Exchequer.
If we don't leave in October we never will leave as MPs will always prefer extension or revoke over No Deal while also still refusing to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement unless the backstop is removed from the PD. That likely means the Brexit Party overtakes the Tories as the main party of the right at the next general election.
In any case on current polls the main beneficiaries of No Deal would be the LDs as more Remainers are voting LD with Yougov today than for Corbyn Labour
In your opinion.
So I can plan my holidays can you let me know when Boris will be scheduling the NI referendum?
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
Thanks, its great to see you alienate so many people who used to think that they were Tories, Now they know they are Liberals, they will probably vote for them.
Maybe you are too young to remember Portillo, but I am really, *really* looking forward to "were you still up for Boris?"
Richard Nabavi, this is a heart-rending thread and you have as much empathy as I can extend across the ether. I am taking the liberty of sharing it with some Conservative friends of mine.
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
Thanks, its great to see you alienate so many people who used to think that they were Tories, Now they know they are Liberals, they will probably vote for them.
Maybe you are too young to remember Portillo, but I am really, *really* looking forward to "were you still up for Boris?"
Does not bother me given 52% of 2017 Tories voted Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections and only 12% voted LD.
I will certainly be up to see Boris win the next general election
I'll be honest, maybe I'm stupid (I am pretty stupid) but I don't get why, for a lifelong stalwart Tory member, Boris becoming leader is any more depressing than May becoming leader?
I thought May was massively unsuited to leadership. Not unsuited to a cabinet role, but very much unsuited to leading a political party in modern times.
My instinct is that Boris will be much better at it. A better delegator, communicator and listener.
The circumstances in which both of them have had to operate as PM are obviously very tough, but May was a disastrous pick from the start for me. I just couldn't get my head round it.
Boris drives some people absolutety crackers...
It is rather strange. Thatcher was a cold fish so easy to cast as a hate figure but Boris is funny, genial and socially liberal yet remainers react as if he is the blond Nick Griffin.
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
And meanwhile you are a Remoaning remaining enemy and should also leave the party. If you think you are welcome in the current Conservative party you are labouring under a huge misapprehension.
Anyone who accepts the Leave vote and does not want to stop Brexit is welcome in the Boris led Tory Party, however they voted in 2016
I'm torn. I and most of my close family voted remain and Tory. I cannot do so any longer. However I cannot vote Labour and nor am I happy to vote LD as I continue to believe in a moderate Brexit in order to respect the result. Looks like I'll have to abstain
A perfectly honourable position as long as it is done properly. By which I mean that you still vote but spoil or refuse to provide a preference. I think this fulfils the important act of voting to sustain our democracy whilst refusing to accept any of the choices given. I disagree with those who say 'don't vote' and those who say you must pick the least worst of the alternatives - as someone has just told you to do on this thread.
I won't respond individually except that I want to address this point (and implicitly the question about why I'm not giving Boris a chance to prove himself as PM):
I'll be honest, maybe I'm stupid (I am pretty stupid) but I don't get why, for a lifelong stalwart Tory member, Boris becoming leader is any more depressing than May becoming leader?
I thought May was massively unsuited to leadership. Not unsuited to a cabinet role, but very much unsuited to leading a political party in modern times.
My instinct is that Boris will be much better at it. A better delegator, communicator and listener.
The circumstances in which both of them have had to operate as PM are obviously very tough, but May was a disastrous pick from the start for me. I just couldn't get my head round it.
I'm not leaving the party simply because I think it has made a poor choice of leader, I'm leaving because of the reasons it has done so. MPs and party members have gone for Boris because he's selling them fairy dust, and what's more they know perfectly well that he's selling them fairy dust. That's what they want; they want to be told that Brexit is easy, the EU will fold by October, and if it doesn't a no-deal crash out won't have any significant ill effects as long as they 'believe in Britain'. That is fantasy, which would be OK for a minor opposition party, but it's not OK for a party which is not only in government, but whose entire history is supposed to be about being the natural party of government.
I should know this but is there a minimum period between a GE being called and polling day?
The reason I ask is that we are abroad for about 6 weeks in September/October and I have just discovered that I cannot appoint a proxy without knowing the date of the election I want it for.
The problem is I could well be abroad by the time I know a date and talking to the Electoral Registration office trying to do it whilst abroad sounds a bit hit and miss to say the least. It's a bit of a Catch-22. Anybody got any suggestions?
So you might end of being disenfrainshed for an election - just deal with - do you know the odds on your one vote actually making a difference?
I asked if anyone knew the minimum timetable for a GE not whether you are bothered whether I lose my vote or not.
I always hated Penny Mordaunt for her lies about Turkey in the referendum campaign and her refusal to apologise - Cameron should have sacked her on the spot - but actually disappointed she's going today, she seemed like a grown up in a group of kids.
I don't think I can properly comment on the wisdom of your decision, Richard, as my motives would be suspect, but it must be painful and I think we all respect your honesty and commitment to the national interest. Perhaps you'll enjoy the luxury of judging each development from an independent position?
I won't respond individually except that I want to address this point (and implicitly the question about why I'm not giving Boris a chance to prove himself as PM):
I'll be honest, maybe I'm stupid (I am pretty stupid) but I don't get why, for a lifelong stalwart Tory member, Boris becoming leader is any more depressing than May becoming leader?
I thought May was massively unsuited to leadership. Not unsuited to a cabinet role, but very much unsuited to leading a political party in modern times.
My instinct is that Boris will be much better at it. A better delegator, communicator and listener.
The circumstances in which both of them have had to operate as PM are obviously very tough, but May was a disastrous pick from the start for me. I just couldn't get my head round it.
I'm not leaving the party simply because I think it has made a poor choice of leader, I'm leaving because of the reasons it has done so. MPs and party members have gone for Boris because he's selling them fairy dust, and what's more they know perfectly well that he's selling them fairy dust. That's what they want; they want to be told that Brexit is easy, the EU will fold by October, and if it doesn't a no-deal crash out won't have any significant ill effects as long as they 'believe in Britain'. That is fantasy, which would be OK for a minor opposition party, but it's not OK for a party which is not only in government, but whose entire history is supposed to be about being the natural party of government.
Isnt that simply a question of choose your lies ?
Osborne spread fairy dust and feary dust for years and you defended him tooth and nail. I really dont see why you are leaving.
I didn't want Boris for PM, would not have voted for him had I had the choice in the leadership vote and fear he will be a poor PM.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
Pathetic. Nabavi won't even give Boris a chance to show what he can do as PM.
Perhaps some people have already seen enough of what Johnson can do to have made their minds up about whether they want to be a member of a party need by him.
Not just Clark but also Fox sacked (and by implication constructive dismissal of Mordaunt). Looks as though it's not enough to be pro-Brexit for the new team, you also need to have been not pro-Hunt.
I do wonder whether we will soon see an attempt to found a successor party. There are some obvious problems:
- CHUK already tried and failed - They might be blamed for bringing down the government/letting in Corbyn - In the present situation, it's not necessary for the immediate goal of influencing the government, since a caucus can be formed within the Parliamentary conservative party.
However for the longer term, it's not obvious that the sane faction can do much within the existing party other than fight a losing battle, as they will be under threat from deselection. To provide a sane version of the conservatives, it may be necessary to 'dismiss the membership and elect another', IE, form a new party.
Some advantages: - Business, rather than the membership, has always been the major support of the party anyway. Businesses may be receptive to an alternative to Boris 'F*ck Business' Johnson. - 96,000 members may not me that hard to replace, given enough funding. - It should be fairly easy not to make the same mistakes as CHUK. Some obvious names, for example: 'Serious Conservatives' , 'Sensible Conservatives', or even 'Sane Conservatives' (Not sure what the Electoral Commission rules are exactly, but they don't seem to completely object to other parties with 'Conservative' or 'Labour' in the name). - Boris will need a coalition with someone, and may actually not mind giving up the 31st Oct date as long as someone else forces him to do so.
One thing the CHUKkers proves though, is that a few defectors is not enough. It has to be a mass exodus or nothing. How many MPs are up for it?
There is a reasonably plausible route to this happening.
Ruth Davidson stares into the electoral abyss of a Boris-led Conservative party in Scotland, and realises the only way to salvage her lifetime achievement - a successful centre-right, unionist party in Scotland - is to split.
Her fellow Scottish Conservatives go with her, forming the Union Party.
From here there are two choices:
a) Union Party welcomes members (and defectors) south of the border. Tricky given the CUK precedent but not impossible.
b) A UK alliance - more or less formal - with the Lib Dems. Not implausible and would make Swinson’s seat safer.
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
And meanwhile you are a Remoaning remaining enemy and should also leave the party. If you think you are welcome in the current Conservative party you are labouring under a huge misapprehension.
Anyone who accepts the Leave vote and does not want to stop Brexit is welcome in the Boris led Tory Party, however they voted in 2016
If you preferred coalition with the LDs to a Boris led Tory Party and are unwilling to accept the Leave vote the clear majority of Tory voters and members voted for let alone the country to regain sovereignty and control our borders and do free trade deals then you may well be better off in the LDs than the Tories.
The Conservative Party is exactly that, a conservative party committed to national sovereignty, tradition etc, if you are really a globalist free trader above all you are ideologically really an Orange Book LD
And meanwhile you are a Remoaning remaining enemy and should also leave the party. If you think you are welcome in the current Conservative party you are labouring under a huge misapprehension.
Anyone who accepts the Leave vote and does not want to stop Brexit is welcome in the Boris led Tory Party, however they voted in 2016
I didn't want Boris for PM, would not have voted for him had I had the choice in the leadership vote and fear he will be a poor PM.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
Yes I agree with that, for the sake of the country I want him to succeed. But that doesn't or wouldn't detract from the fact that he is a toerag. Hence I don't hold truck with the "let's see how he gets on" mantra. He is imo unfit to be PM however he gets on but, like you, I hope he succeeds although I imagine your "succeed" and my "succeed" differs somewhat.
Not just Clark but also Fox sacked (and by implication constructive dismissal of Mordaunt). Looks as though it's not enough to be pro-Brexit for the new team, you also need to have been not pro-Hunt.
Or to look it another way, Boris has made lots of promises to get MPs to support him and there simply isn't room to keep the Hunt supporters. Mordaunt did look quite miserable yesterday at the announcement
I didn't want Boris for PM, would not have voted for him had I had the choice in the leadership vote and fear he will be a poor PM.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
I don't disagree with that, Richard, despite my assessment of Johnson.
I would be effing amazed, but would be more than happy to admit I was wrong. My or your fervent wishes, one way or another, will not affect the outcome one jot.
Not just Clark but also Fox sacked (and by implication constructive dismissal of Mordaunt). Looks as though it's not enough to be pro-Brexit for the new team, you also need to have been not pro-Hunt.
Now I can see why Richard Nabavi left the party. This is Taleban Brexit Party.
I do wonder whether we will soon see an attempt to found a successor party. There are some obvious problems:
- CHUK already tried and failed - They might be blamed for bringing down the government/letting in Corbyn - In the present situation, it's not necessary for the immediate goal of influencing the government, since a caucus can be formed within the Parliamentary conservative party.
However for the longer term, it's not obvious that the sane faction can do much within the existing party other than fight a losing battle, as they will be under threat from deselection. To provide a sane version of the conservatives, it may be necessary to 'dismiss the membership and elect another', IE, form a new party.
Some advantages: - Business, rather than the membership, has always been the major support of the party anyway. Businesses may be receptive to an alternative to Boris 'F*ck Business' Johnson. - 96,000 members may not me that hard to replace, given enough funding. - It should be fairly easy not to make the same mistakes as CHUK. Some obvious names, for example: 'Serious Conservatives' , 'Sensible Conservatives', or even 'Sane Conservatives' (Not sure what the Electoral Commission rules are exactly, but they don't seem to completely object to other parties with 'Conservative' or 'Labour' in the name). - Boris will need a coalition with someone, and may actually not mind giving up the 31st Oct date as long as someone else forces him to do so.
One thing the CHUKkers proves though, is that a few defectors is not enough. It has to be a mass exodus or nothing. How many MPs are up for it?
There is a reasonably plausible route to this happening.
Ruth Davidson stares into the electoral abyss of a Boris-led Conservative party in Scotland, and realises the only way to salvage her lifetime achievement - a successful centre-right, unionist party in Scotland - is to split.
Her fellow Scottish Conservatives go with her, forming the Union Party.
From here there are two choices:
a) Union Party welcomes members (and defectors) south of the border. Tricky given the CUK precedent but not impossible.
b) A UK alliance - more or less formal - with the Lib Dems. Not implausible and would make Swinson’s seat safer.
Trouble is that the Scottish Tory MPs include such as Ross Thomson or Colin Clark who are very pro Johnson, so any such move will lead to a horrific split in the SC&UP... Ruth is in a serious bind.
Only concern so far is we have had no "I will serve from the backbenches" Tweet from failing Grayling yet.
He's gone!
Is that a sign that HS2 or the Third runway at Heathrow are under threat? Grayling pushed both of them very strongly. Is Johnson making sure there are no protest resignations when he wields the axe on either project?
I should know this but is there a minimum period between a GE being called and polling day?
The reason I ask is that we are abroad for about 6 weeks in September/October and I have just discovered that I cannot appoint a proxy without knowing the date of the election I want it for.
The problem is I could well be abroad by the time I know a date and talking to the Electoral Registration office trying to do it whilst abroad sounds a bit hit and miss to say the least. It's a bit of a Catch-22. Anybody got any suggestions?
If you know the proxy well, pre-complete and sign the form and leave the date blank for them to fill in.
Or take the form with you and complete and send it to the council from abroad, as soon as you hear the news.
Or appoint a permanent proxy for all future elections and then cancel this when you get back. (Edit/ although on reflection this might fall foul of having a good reason)
Thanks Ian, I tried the permanent proxy route but they wouldn't accept it. I'll go with the first suggestion and leave the forms with friends. The reason I was wondering about the timetable was that I was trying to find out if it was possible to call an election and have the polling day all within the period that we were away.
The replies to his tweet from 'Brexiteers' include "good riddance", "sell out", "you ain't no Brexiteer" and "fake Brexiteer gone, good".
There's something interesting here, because he's also still linked to Trump and Murdoch. Johnson is taking a risk here, especially if Farage were to come into greater favour in future with these two, and Fox to fall in line with this as a link man.
I didn't want Boris for PM, would not have voted for him had I had the choice in the leadership vote and fear he will be a poor PM.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
I have never truly understood self-harm in any of its forms, including self-loathing.
I didn't want Boris for PM, would not have voted for him had I had the choice in the leadership vote and fear he will be a poor PM.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
Yes I agree with that, for the sake of the country I want him to succeed. But that doesn't or wouldn't detract from the fact that he is a toerag. Hence I don't hold truck with the "let's see how he gets on" mantra. He is imo unfit to be PM however he gets on but, like you, I hope he succeeds although I imagine your "succeed" and my "succeed" differs somewhat.
I had similar thoughts when Trump "won" in 2016. "Maybe high office will bring out a previously hidden thoughtful and pragmatic side of him?" Sadly he's turned out to be even worse than I feared.
I should know this but is there a minimum period between a GE being called and polling day?
The reason I ask is that we are abroad for about 6 weeks in September/October and I have just discovered that I cannot appoint a proxy without knowing the date of the election I want it for.
The problem is I could well be abroad by the time I know a date and talking to the Electoral Registration office trying to do it whilst abroad sounds a bit hit and miss to say the least. It's a bit of a Catch-22. Anybody got any suggestions?
So you might end of being disenfrainshed for an election - just deal with - do you know the odds on your one vote actually making a difference?
I asked if anyone knew the minimum timetable for a GE not whether you are bothered whether I lose my vote or not.
Nah - you were whining about the possibility of losing your vote for one election. My advice was the correct one - man up and deal with it.
Not just Clark but also Fox sacked (and by implication constructive dismissal of Mordaunt). Looks as though it's not enough to be pro-Brexit for the new team, you also need to have been not pro-Hunt.
Or to look it another way, Boris has made lots of promises to get MPs to support him and there simply isn't room to keep the Hunt supporters. Mordaunt did look quite miserable yesterday at the announcement
Nevertheless pandering only to one wing of his party isnt going to help him in coming weeks.
Is the Conservative Party driven by what is the best for the long-term success of the United Kingdom? Or is driven by opinion polls?
Does it do the right thing, knowing it might be electorally popular in the short-term?
Or does it do something it knows to be foolish, on the basis that it is more popular?
Do we want a party who leads? Or one who slavishly follows the latest YouGov?
This is becoming a viciously right wing government. Being a supporter of Brexit is not good enough. But I would have thought Morduant and Fox were also pretty right wing.
"17:16: Damian Hinds sacked as Education Secretary. 17:11: Chris Grayling quits as Transport Secretary. 17:00: Liam Fox sacked as International Trade Secretary. 16:59: Greg Clark sacked as Business Secretary. 16:44: Penny Mordaunt sacked as Defence Secretary. 23/7: Mark Spencer appointed Chief Whip."
Comments
So I can plan my holidays can you let me know when Boris will be scheduling the NI referendum?
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1154056833012772864?s=21
Maybe you are too young to remember Portillo, but I am really, *really* looking forward to "were you still up for Boris?"
I might be on opposing sides of Brexit but she certainly deserved to keep that job .
Richard Nabavi, this is a heart-rending thread and you have as much empathy as I can extend across the ether. I am taking the liberty of sharing it with some Conservative friends of mine.
I will certainly be up to see Boris win the next general election
I won't respond individually except that I want to address this point (and implicitly the question about why I'm not giving Boris a chance to prove himself as PM): I'm not leaving the party simply because I think it has made a poor choice of leader, I'm leaving because of the reasons it has done so. MPs and party members have gone for Boris because he's selling them fairy dust, and what's more they know perfectly well that he's selling them fairy dust. That's what they want; they want to be told that Brexit is easy, the EU will fold by October, and if it doesn't a no-deal crash out won't have any significant ill effects as long as they 'believe in Britain'. That is fantasy, which would be OK for a minor opposition party, but it's not OK for a party which is not only in government, but whose entire history is supposed to be about being the natural party of government.
No regret at anyone else named yet.
There is an acre (should that be hectare ?) of space in it, which speaks volumes.
https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1154044277338415104
https://twitter.com/GregClarkMP/status/1154058645006704644?s=20
https://twitter.com/GregClarkMP/status/1154058694306467842?s=20
What does this mean?
Disqualificatory ?
https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1154061506834837504?s=21
Hunt, Cairns and Mundell
(Grayling is now gone)
Osborne spread fairy dust and feary dust for years and you defended him tooth and nail. I really dont see why you are leaving.
But in spite of that I really, truly want to be wrong. There are too many people on here almost revelling in the fact they think that he will be a disaster and will lead our country to ruin. This seems a really stupid attitude to take unless you are from another country and think badly of this country and its people and wish them harm.
So I fear a Boris premiership for all the reasons I have stated in the past but I really do fervently want him to succeed and prove me utterly wrong.
Perhaps some people have already seen enough of what Johnson can do to have made their minds up about whether they want to be a member of a party need by him.
Ruth Davidson stares into the electoral abyss of a Boris-led Conservative party in Scotland, and realises the only way to salvage her lifetime achievement - a successful centre-right, unionist party in Scotland - is to split.
Her fellow Scottish Conservatives go with her, forming the Union Party.
From here there are two choices:
a) Union Party welcomes members (and defectors) south of the border. Tricky given the CUK precedent but not impossible.
b) A UK alliance - more or less formal - with the Lib Dems. Not implausible and would make Swinson’s seat safer.
You must have him confused with Jo.
Fallon remained at Defence
5 were sacked - so it was a lot of churn but not as much as we are seeing now
I would be effing amazed, but would be more than happy to admit I was wrong. My or your fervent wishes, one way or another, will not affect the outcome one jot.
Not being a member, I cannot resign from the Conservative Party.
I would love to - especially on a day like today - but it is simply not possible.
Is the Conservative Party driven by what is the best for the long-term success of the United Kingdom? Or is driven by opinion polls?
Does it do the right thing, knowing it might be electorally popular in the short-term?
Or does it do something it knows to be foolish, on the basis that it is more popular?
Do we want a party who leads? Or one who slavishly follows the latest YouGov?
I think that is 10 out
"17:16: Damian Hinds sacked as Education Secretary.
17:11: Chris Grayling quits as Transport Secretary.
17:00: Liam Fox sacked as International Trade Secretary.
16:59: Greg Clark sacked as Business Secretary.
16:44: Penny Mordaunt sacked as Defence Secretary.
23/7: Mark Spencer appointed Chief Whip."
https://order-order.com/2019/07/24/reshuffle-live-5/
But I do believe that any incoming PM has the right to completely reshape their team. No-one should expect to stay in post