What’s the legal structure of the Tory party and its assets these days? Is it still a “federation” of local associations or something more centralized?
My point being, could a Remainer Tory MP in a Remain constituency with a largely-Remainer association rebel, be expelled but take their association with them so to speak? Or is it all organized now that the central party retains ownership of the association’s assets even if the association leaves the party en masse
When i was involved with the Tories within the last 5 years. The association was in charge and had ownership of the assets. They pais CCHQ for services and a one off fee. It may have changed but i have no reason to see why it might have been adjusted.
When the Liberals split in the last century they had competing blocks. I cannot see why a Remain Tory could not be returned in a Remain area in the 'forthcoming election'.
To whom does the data belong? the Association or the Central Party?
I dont know the answer to that but if Tories in a Remain area all changed to a Remain Tory party platform. The foot soldiers who canvassed for instance might have a good idea of supporters.
Raab was suggesting that proroguation cover the whole of September and October until the start of November so Parliament literally couldn't sit or vote at all prior to Brexit until it was too late.
Boris has scheduled a normal Queen's Speech prorogation, straddling an annual recess as there is precedence for, over a period of 4 sitting days and Parliament is literally sitting both before and after that prior to Brexit.
That's literally two very different things.
Why do you keep repeating this nonsense about 4 sitting days, as if prostration is equivalent to a Commons recess? The House of Lords would have continued sitting and committees in both Houses would have carried on.
Why is it that some Remainers such as yourself consider that it would be an unprecedented constitutional outrage if the prorogation of the longest sitting parliament on record is not postponed for even longer than it has already been postponed?
The fact is that we have had a new PM and a nearly entire turnover of cabinet, with a different approach to Brexit. That new PM has faced Parliament for a single day, and not for any substantive business. Axing the majority of the remaining time is the move of an autocrat who is afraid of Parliamentary scrutiny.
We have a new PM who has not had the opportunity to set out his programme to Parliament. Why should he not be allowed to do that?
So prorogue Parliament on Monday and introduce a new Queen's speech on Wednesday.
Queen's still in Balmoral.
That's Boris's problem (and potentially the monarchy's in the medium term).
Not at all. He had the courtesy to wait for her to return before expecting her to give an important speech
Asking her to come to London for a day in return for the £bns the crown has received from the Government over her reign isn't asking much.
Heck it doesn't even need to be the Queen a substitute (Charles, William, Harry) would do.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
Faced with a shortage of storage space available to retailers, how typical of this brainless lot to try to stop people making use of storage space at home!
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
Raab was suggesting that proroguation cover the whole of September and October until the start of November so Parliament literally couldn't sit or vote at all prior to Brexit until it was too late.
Boris has scheduled a normal Queen's Speech prorogation, straddling an annual recess as there is precedence for, over a period of 4 sitting days and Parliament is literally sitting both before and after that prior to Brexit.
That's literally two very different things.
Why do you keep repeating this nonsense about 4 sitting days, as if prostration is equivalent to a Commons recess? The House of Lords would have continued sitting and committees in both Houses would have carried on.
Why is it that some Remainers such as yourself consider that it would be an unprecedented constitutional outrage if the prorogation of the longest sitting parliament on record is not postponed for even longer than it has already been postponed?
The fact is that we have had a new PM and a nearly entire turnover of cabinet, with a different approach to Brexit. That new PM has faced Parliament for a single day, and not for any substantive business. Axing the majority of the remaining time is the move of an autocrat who is afraid of Parliamentary scrutiny.
We have a new PM who has not had the opportunity to set out his programme to Parliament. Why should he not be allowed to do that?
So prorogue Parliament on Monday and introduce a new Queen's speech on Wednesday.
Queen's still in Balmoral.
That's Boris's problem (and potentially the monarchy's in the medium term).
Not at all. He had the courtesy to wait for her to return before expecting her to give an important speech
Asking her to come to London for a day in return for the £bns the crown has received from the Government over her reign isn't asking much.
Heck it doesn't even need to be the Queen a substitute (Charles, William, Harry) would do.
What's the hurry. There's usually a recess of about this long
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
But you've said you do as well. So you are still drawing that comparison...
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
But you've said you do as well. So you are still drawing that comparison...
More akin to Disraeli - 'If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity.'
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
Boris seems to have picked an effective backroom team.
I can see this is proving to be very upsetting to his opponents.
Both internal and external. Cummings is a loose canon and this will end badly.
He won’t be around by Xmas - he has said so himself.
Hopefully his imminent surgery will see him off.
Says far more about you than him.
Cummings had to make a proper sacrifice to take the job; Johnson talked him into cancelling a surgical procedure, serious enough to warrant general anaesthetic, which had been scheduled for three days later, when Johnson formally became PM.
He promised his wife, the journalist Mary Wakefield, that he would reschedule the operation for the week following 31 October and only after the op would he then discuss with Johnson what – if any – his future role in government would be.
I cannot judge whether Cummings will return after the surgery. I understand it depends on his health, the views of his wife, and whether he and Johnson can agree on a long-term role that would suit them both. Pimpernel-like, he may vanish again.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
Or the fact it isn't possible to drive without a seatbelt. Whereas it was de rigeur, became reckless, then illegal, then socially unacceptable as well.
The Survation numbers overnight make decent reading for supporters of the Government and of course are afforded much prominence in the main Government supporting newspaper which commissioned the poll. Clearly they also give prominence to those questions returning the strongest pro-Government or anti-Opposition responses so again we see the poll as political propaganda weapon rather than objective scientific tool.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
The pro-No Deal lobby has three main components - the BP/Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn and the Overwithers. The last named are the most numerically important - some support BP or the Tories, some may even support Labour, some are apolitical but they are a large group and the only thing they have in common is they want an end to Brexit.
They are tired, bored, impatient individuals who no longer care how about the economic damage or dislocation done to the country as long as we no longer have to talk about Brexit any more. What it is they do want to talk about is unclear but it's not Brexit. They may be waiting agog for the "tidal wave of Tory ideas" (for which read re-hashed Thatcherism) Boris is so eager to force upon us but somehow I doubt it.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
But you've said you do as well. So you are still drawing that comparison...
More akin to Disraeli - 'If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity.'
Except it seems probable Disraeli never said that, and even if he did, that's not actually saying he wanted Gladstone to drown in the Thames.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
I don’t recall that at all. Name names.
They were not named - but Molyneaux upbraided a few of them outside the Chamber.Apparently they believed Labour would descend into chaos follwing Smith's death and could not conceal their mirth at the prospect.
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
This was discussed at length on my most recent Speed Awareness course. The conclusion was that all the easy gains had now been made, and from here on it's just a question improving driving standards.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
The withering fire of retribution will be directed at those Remainers who have thwarted Operation Overwith.
Can someone explain to me what the rules are around proroguation?
Please don't tell me the PM just goes to see her Majesty and says I want to prorogue parliament. And since she has no choice but to act on the advice of her ministers, that's what she'll do. And what of time limits?
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
The Survation numbers overnight make decent reading for supporters of the Government and of course are afforded much prominence in the main Government supporting newspaper which commissioned the poll. Clearly they also give prominence to those questions returning the strongest pro-Government or anti-Opposition responses so again we see the poll as political propaganda weapon rather than objective scientific tool.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
The pro-No Deal lobby has three main components - the BP/Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn and the Overwithers. The last named are the most numerically important - some support BP or the Tories, some may even support Labour, some are apolitical but they are a large group and the only thing they have in common is they want an end to Brexit.
They are tired, bored, impatient individuals who no longer care how about the economic damage or dislocation done to the country as long as we no longer have to talk about Brexit any more. What it is they do want to talk about is unclear but it's not Brexit. They may be waiting agog for the "tidal wave of Tory ideas" (for which read re-hashed Thatcherism) Boris is so eager to force upon us but somehow I doubt it.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
Survation's data tends to be UK based - so a GB equivalent would involve adding 1% to the headline figures of the main parties - ie Con 32 Lab 25 LD 22.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
I don’t recall that at all. Name names.
Apparently they believed Labour would descend into chaos follwing Smith's death and could not conceal their mirth at the prospect.
So they were rejoicing at impending Labour chaos, rather than Smith's death?
The Survation numbers overnight make decent reading for supporters of the Government and of course are afforded much prominence in the main Government supporting newspaper which commissioned the poll. Clearly they also give prominence to those questions returning the strongest pro-Government or anti-Opposition responses so again we see the poll as political propaganda weapon rather than objective scientific tool.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
The pro-No Deal lobby has three main components - the BP/Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn and the Overwithers. The last named are the most numerically important - some support BP or the Tories, some may even support Labour, some are apolitical but they are a large group and the only thing they have in common is they want an end to Brexit.
They are tired, bored, impatient individuals who no longer care how about the economic damage or dislocation done to the country as long as we no longer have to talk about Brexit any more. What it is they do want to talk about is unclear but it's not Brexit. They may be waiting agog for the "tidal wave of Tory ideas" (for which read re-hashed Thatcherism) Boris is so eager to force upon us but somehow I doubt it.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
Jeremy andbthe Otherwithers has the makings of a pop group!
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
I don’t recall that at all. Name names.
Apparently they believed Labour would descend into chaos follwing Smith's death and could not conceal their mirth at the prospect.
So they were rejoicing at impending Labour chaos, rather than Smith's death?
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
This was discussed at length on my most recent Speed Awareness course. The conclusion was that all the easy gains had now been made, and from here on it's just a question improving driving standards.
That's not easily done.
The most striking thing is the improvement in brakes. Just look at the changes in stopping distance even on a family saloon compared to fifty years ago. But improved tyres, suspension and engine systems are also significant.
But you will always get some moron who overtakes on a blind bend or doesn't pay attention. Indeed, I've had two minor shunts linked that myself (fortunately nobody hurt and no serious harm done).
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
That is a good point. How low as low as you can ever reasonably hope for? Sounds silly but it matters for Gvt policy.
Can someone explain to me what the rules are around proroguation?
Please don't tell me the PM just goes to see her Majesty and says I want to prorogue parliament. And since she has no choice but to act on the advice of her ministers, that's what she'll do. And what of time limits?
Yes it’s that, but there’s a natural time limit. You need Parliament sitting in order for Estimates to get passed (roughly every six months), and even to retain an armed forces (annual vote).
But yes - clearly our constitution is silly and must be tweaked. If someone is to have such power (question) they should have their own personal mandate.
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
That is a good point. How low as low as you can ever reasonably hope for? Sounds silly but it matters for Gvt policy.
You need to be careful about this sort of thinking. Back in the 1980s it was believed rising crime was an inevitable consequence of urbanization, and you could never hope for lowering it in population dense areas.
I did some bulk buying at Aldi this morning to be honest.
I must say my stockpiling will be more enjoyable now I've been officially told that it will make the government's task "much harder." Excellent encouragement!
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
Perhaps we've reached a plateau where the technology itself is much safer and therefore the number of deaths is due to sheer bad driving? How many accidents are now caused by burst tyres, failed brakes or ignition fires compared to stupid overtaking or drunkenness compared to 1970?
Or the fact it isn't possible to drive without a seatbelt. Whereas it was de rigeur, became reckless, then illegal, then socially unacceptable as well.
Trougher in anger at snout being removed from trough shock.
I think you’ll find the snouts of the disaster capitalists are very much still in the trough. And once again the working man pays.
Financiers in the City voted abiut two thirds for Remain. More investors lose money than gain money in a declining market.
And many of them no doubt supported Cameron in 2015 in spite of the referendum pledge. There were rumoured to be cheers on trading floors when Ed Balls lost his seat in that election thanks to a swing to UKIP. Idiots (some of them).
Digby Jones told an anecdote about speaking to young city people before the referendum. He told them about northern industrial workers intending to vote leave and one of them responded 'I don't see why something as important as this should be left to thick people in the north of England.' He was shocked by this and even more so when he realised the other youngsters in the audience were agreeing with their colleague.
I can't condone the increasingly uncivil war of our current politics but it is is many ways the result of democracy - something that wasn't working too well in Britain prior to 2016.
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
But you've said you do as well. So you are still drawing that comparison...
More akin to Disraeli - 'If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity.'
Except it seems probable Disraeli never said that, and even if he did, that's not actually saying he wanted Gladstone to drown in the Thames.
If Gladstone fell into the Thames in those days, he probably could have walked out...
I recall from the 1960s how boys of circa 15 years old -who had been regularly severely flogged by their headmaster - openly rejoiced at the news that he had dropped dead from a massive heart attack. Very similar sentiments really.
Keep digging Justin.
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
When John Smith died suddenly in 1994 some Tory MPs could not conceal their joy - and were condemned by the UUP leader James Molyneaux.
So you're now saying that you are morally equal to Tory MPs who were so extreme that somebody with links to the UVF and who considered Thatcher a soft-willed traitor felt the need to condemn them?
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
No - my point is that if there were Tory MPs who felt that way re-John Smith, we can be pretty sure that quite a few will have similar sentiments re-Cummings.
But you've said you do as well. So you are still drawing that comparison...
More akin to Disraeli - 'If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again, that would be a calamity.'
Except it seems probable Disraeli never said that, and even if he did, that's not actually saying he wanted Gladstone to drown in the Thames.
If Gladstone fell into the Thames in those days, he probably could have walked out...
I wonder how long the one about Prince Andrew will remain up...
Apparently they had trouble finding names for the 200+ Flower class Corvettes built during the Second World War. It is alleged that they nearly called one 'HMS Pansy' before someone realised no-one wanted 'Pansy' on their caps, so it became the rather boring HMS Heartsease instead ...
Still, perhaps we ought to resurrect the name 'HMS Cockchafer' ...
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
They are pretty identical really: i.e. Survation (UK) Con 31, Lab 24, LD 21, Brexit 14, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 3, Other 3. YouGov (GB) Con 33, Lab 22, LD 21, Brexit 12, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 7, Other 1.
With Survation, Greens are down to 3% and there is next to no remaining scope for Lab (or LD) to advance by squeezing the Greens. Survation but not YouGov prompt for Greens so the difference in Green share readily explains their higher Lab share.
The combined Con/Brexit share of 45 is identical in both polls, although it would be about 46.2% on a GB basis with Survation, and the Con share would be about 0.8% higher. There is a lot of potential still for a Brexit Party squeeze to boost Con - both companies prompt still for the BP.
The Survation numbers overnight make decent reading for supporters of the Government and of course are afforded much prominence in the main Government supporting newspaper which commissioned the poll. Clearly they also give prominence to those questions returning the strongest pro-Government or anti-Opposition responses so again we see the poll as political propaganda weapon rather than objective scientific tool.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
The pro-No Deal lobby has three main components - the BP/Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn and the Overwithers. The last named are the most numerically important - some support BP or the Tories, some may even support Labour, some are apolitical but they are a large group and the only thing they have in common is they want an end to Brexit.
They are tired, bored, impatient individuals who no longer care how about the economic damage or dislocation done to the country as long as we no longer have to talk about Brexit any more. What it is they do want to talk about is unclear but it's not Brexit. They may be waiting agog for the "tidal wave of Tory ideas" (for which read re-hashed Thatcherism) Boris is so eager to force upon us but somehow I doubt it.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
Survation's data tends to be UK based - so a GB equivalent would involve adding 1% to the headline figures of the main parties - ie Con 32 Lab 25 LD 22.
No, the rule of thumb is that for every 10% of UK vote share you add about 0.25% to convert to a GB vote share. (e.g. Lab polled 40.0% in UK and 41.0% in GB at GE 2017).
So you need to add roughly as follows to get this Survation to GB shares: Con 0.8, Lab 0.6, LD 0.5, Brexit 0.3
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
They are pretty identical really: i.e. Survation (UK) Con 31, Lab 24, LD 21, Brexit 14, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 3, Other 3. YouGov (GB) Con 33, Lab 22, LD 21, Brexit 12, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 7, Other 1.
With Survation, Greens are down to 3% and there is next to no remaining scope for Lab (or LD) to advance by squeezing the Greens. Survation but not YouGov prompt for Greens so the difference in Green share readily explains their higher Lab share.
The combined Con/Brexit share of 45 is identical in both polls, although it would be about 46.2% on a GB basis with Survation, and the Con share would be about 0.8% higher. There is a lot of potential still for a Brexit Party squeeze to boost Con - both companies prompt still for the BP.
I mean YouGov but not Survation prompt for Greens.
Probably the best hope for a resolution at Stormont would be for the non sectarian, cross community Alliance Party to come a clear third and build a bridge between the Unionist and Nationalist communities.
While Stormont remains suspended the next general election is likely to be the next poll on Northern Ireland and with only 1 DUP seat having a majority under 5% and only a further 2 DUP seats having majorities under 10% there are unlikely to be major changes.
As ever, the truth is rather hidden by detail and natural variations. My *guess* is that cars have been made ever-safer for the occupants, but not as much for other road users. Hence you're much less likely to be injured or killed in a car crash if you're an occupant, but only slightly less likely if you're a pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist.
Coincidentally, I was in St Neots this morning and saw an ambulance treating someone who had apparently been hit by a car ...
Says someone who probably knows as much as everyone else who isn't part of the EU or a european government (so knows no more than we do). I suspect however the EU will extend rather than change and unilateral extending would annoy Boris more.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
They are pretty identical really: i.e. Survation (UK) Con 31, Lab 24, LD 21, Brexit 14, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 3, Other 3. YouGov (GB) Con 33, Lab 22, LD 21, Brexit 12, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 7, Other 1.
With Survation, Greens are down to 3% and there is next to no remaining scope for Lab (or LD) to advance by squeezing the Greens. Survation but not YouGov prompt for Greens so the difference in Green share readily explains their higher Lab share.
The combined Con/Brexit share of 45 is identical in both polls, although it would be about 46.2% on a GB basis with Survation, and the Con share would be about 0.8% higher. There is a lot of potential still for a Brexit Party squeeze to boost Con - both companies prompt still for the BP.
I mean YouGov but not Survation prompt for Greens.
Is there - I suspect at 12% there is little Brexit vote for the Tories to squeeze.
F1: Leclerc in a league of one in qualifying. Tyre degradation and turned down engines, plus potential rain, could make the race quite interesting.
Aye, a bit more separating Le Clerc and Vettel today. Why did you have to put me off my 3/1 on Le Clerc?????? (2020 hindsight a wonderful thing, besides Ms Brisk was out so I wouldn't have been allowed anyway)
I just said to myself that if I can get evens on Le Clerc I'll take it - and after checking BFE is of course just under.
Comments
Heck it doesn't even need to be the Queen a substitute (Charles, William, Harry) would do.
https://twitter.com/UKDefJournal/status/1167148535810338816?s=20
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1167752369561624577
So Government managed Food Banks and rationing here we come.
HMS
Jacob
Rees
Mogg
Issac
Hunt
https://twitter.com/Fazzinchi/status/1167771867853271041
Comparing yourself to a 15 year boy from more than 50 years ago?
http://www.twitter.com/rockgod1970/status/1167370090825834497
Although if carried to its logical conclusion, I would feel a bit sorry for the sailors aboard the HMS Aunt Fanny.
I wonder how long the one about Prince Andrew will remain up...
There is no chance of any negotiating breakthrough this side of September 20th, or indeed of any serious negotiations taking place between Johnson and the EU till the end of September – because the likes of Tony Blair and the rebel Tory MP Dominic Grieve have persuaded EU leaders that when MPs return to the Commons on September 3rd they will find a way to block a no-deal Brexit.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/dominic-cummings-wont-blink-over-no-deal-but-will-boris-johnson/
https://twitter.com/MatthewStadlen/status/1167581719605784576?s=20
(1800 retweets in support, 6600 Likes in favour of Boris)
https://twitter.com/NorthernTubbs/status/1167767569757081600?s=20
Not visible:
"Please Bring Your Membership Card"
Can I remind you of the wise words of Denis Healey?
Edit - my autocorrect doesn't do catamites...
Amen!
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-believes-iranian-tanker-still-bound-syria-working-disrupt-oil-transfer
1970: 7499
1980: 5953
1990: 5217
2000: 3409
2010: 1857
2018: 1782
Anyone have an idea why the fall has flatlined? I haven't looked at international figures.
https://twitter.com/RupertMyers/status/1167787334756130817?s=20
"I see that Richrd Nixon has had an arsehole transplant...."
"Look at the stop-press. The arsehole rejected him...."
The Survation numbers overnight make decent reading for supporters of the Government and of course are afforded much prominence in the main Government supporting newspaper which commissioned the poll. Clearly they also give prominence to those questions returning the strongest pro-Government or anti-Opposition responses so again we see the poll as political propaganda weapon rather than objective scientific tool.
The Survation VI numbers are close to the YouGov numbers which many mean the period of polling volatility is easing as Boris establishes a solid lead but the vagaries of UNS or USE-less as I call it (Uniform Swing Estimation) make it harder to quantify that nice majority for which Johnson supporters are yearning.
The pro-No Deal lobby has three main components - the BP/Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn and the Overwithers. The last named are the most numerically important - some support BP or the Tories, some may even support Labour, some are apolitical but they are a large group and the only thing they have in common is they want an end to Brexit.
They are tired, bored, impatient individuals who no longer care how about the economic damage or dislocation done to the country as long as we no longer have to talk about Brexit any more. What it is they do want to talk about is unclear but it's not Brexit. They may be waiting agog for the "tidal wave of Tory ideas" (for which read re-hashed Thatcherism) Boris is so eager to force upon us but somehow I doubt it.
Yet they are a huge ally for Johnson who offers them the promise of an ending - it may be a very bad ending but it will be an ending. If he fails to deliver the ending of course, the retribution of the Overwithers will be swift.
That's not easily done.
Please don't tell me the PM just goes to see her Majesty and says I want to prorogue parliament. And since she has no choice but to act on the advice of her ministers, that's what she'll do. And what of time limits?
But you will always get some moron who overtakes on a blind bend or doesn't pay attention. Indeed, I've had two minor shunts linked that myself (fortunately nobody hurt and no serious harm done).
Trougher in anger at snout being removed from trough shock.
Yes it’s that, but there’s a natural time limit. You need Parliament sitting in order for Estimates to get passed (roughly every six months), and even to retain an armed forces (annual vote).
But yes - clearly our constitution is silly and must be tweaked. If someone is to have such power (question) they should have their own personal mandate.
Digby Jones told an anecdote about speaking to young city people before the referendum. He told them about northern industrial workers intending to vote leave and one of them responded 'I don't see why something as important as this should be left to thick people in the north of England.' He was shocked by this and even more so when he realised the other youngsters in the audience were agreeing with their colleague.
I can't condone the increasingly uncivil war of our current politics but it is is many ways the result of democracy - something that wasn't working too well in Britain prior to 2016.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Stink
Still, perhaps we ought to resurrect the name 'HMS Cockchafer' ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cockchafer_(1915)
i.e.
Survation (UK) Con 31, Lab 24, LD 21, Brexit 14, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 3, Other 3.
YouGov (GB) Con 33, Lab 22, LD 21, Brexit 12, SNP 4, Plaid 1, Green 7, Other 1.
With Survation, Greens are down to 3% and there is next to no remaining scope for Lab (or LD) to advance by squeezing the Greens. Survation but not YouGov prompt for Greens so the difference in Green share readily explains their higher Lab share.
The combined Con/Brexit share of 45 is identical in both polls, although it would be about 46.2% on a GB basis with Survation, and the Con share would be about 0.8% higher. There is a lot of potential still for a Brexit Party squeeze to boost Con - both companies prompt still for the BP.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cockchafer_(1915)
So you need to add roughly as follows to get this Survation to GB shares: Con 0.8, Lab 0.6, LD 0.5, Brexit 0.3
The EU is on the verge of giving Boris the deal he wants because Cummings is a genius.
The EU is not going to give Boris the deal he wants because Cummings is less of a genius than Blair and Grieve.
https://twitter.com/IsabelHardman/status/1167801798167605248?s=20
And a more complicated one:
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1166716364733779969?s=20
Assam NRC: What next for 1.9 million 'stateless' Indians?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-49520593
Another populist cocking everything up.
F1: Leclerc in a league of one in qualifying. Tyre degradation and turned down engines, plus potential rain, could make the race quite interesting.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/754685/quarterly-estimates-april-to-june-2018.pdf
As ever, the truth is rather hidden by detail and natural variations. My *guess* is that cars have been made ever-safer for the occupants, but not as much for other road users. Hence you're much less likely to be injured or killed in a car crash if you're an occupant, but only slightly less likely if you're a pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist.
Coincidentally, I was in St Neots this morning and saw an ambulance treating someone who had apparently been hit by a car ...
https://twitter.com/johnmcternan/status/1167795155845492736?s=20
In other news https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1167805161647071233
I just said to myself that if I can get evens on Le Clerc I'll take it - and after checking BFE is of course just under.