Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
What? Every current poll gives a Tory lead and big swings from Labour to the Tories in Coventry and Cumbria local by elections last night
Tomorrow nights polls will be a lot of fun.
Certainly will, this week might not be quite the 'disaster for Boris' the commentariat think
Yeah, polls are not so mercurial as PBers. it will be a slow burner.
The lesson of the week is that BoZo is far from a campaigning asset. Indeed he makes Tessa look like a Shakesperian orator. The Tories best electoral tactic would be to put him in a locked room with no press allowed.
Actually the QS thing is interesting. Boris needs to assure liz he can get it through, it would be a monumental political error of judgement to embarrass the queen with a failed QS
The QS is on the 14th October and it usually takes 5 days through the HOC and guess what date follows, 19th October the day for Boris to seek an extension and that is maybe one of the most important dates in recent history
What does he do, what does the opposition do, and ??????????
A vendor of question marks might make a killing in these times.
I have a large stockpile of asterisks that I'm trying to run down. Hence phrases like "Boris Johnson Is A Total F****** T***"
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases.
The Birmingham school protests were a case of rampant bigotry. The Lewes school protests are a case of dissent against (what the complainants allege to be) petty and unnecessary rules.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
What? Every current poll gives a Tory lead and big swings from Labour to the Tories in Coventry and Cumbria local by elections last night
Tomorrow nights polls will be a lot of fun.
Certainly will, this week might not be quite the 'disaster for Boris' the commentariat think
I’m sure the polls will be good for him . And terrible for Labour which makes it even less likely Labour will go for an early election .
Labour know the only way to mitigate the damage is to keep the BP relevant which means an election in November .
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases.
The Birmingham school protests were a case of rampant bigotry. The Lewes school protests are a case of dissent against (what the complainants allege to be) petty and unnecessary rules.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
And they could end up as VP in the USA god help us
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases.
The Birmingham school protests were a case of rampant bigotry. The Lewes school protests are a case of dissent against (what the complainants allege to be) petty and unnecessary rules.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
It wasn't about teaching that they exist, but that they exist *and are not routinely stoned to death*. It would be nice if your segue into teaching creationism worked, but I don't think it does.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
Well I can't see him putting HMQ in to give a QS that will fall, that would destroy him and the Tories, people wont like him embarrassing HMQ. The QS is a speech from the throne and one of the very few occasions both houses unite, it failing is a major embarrassment to the monarch. He will be up to something during prorogation to try and head this off
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases.
The Birmingham school protests were a case of rampant bigotry. The Lewes school protests are a case of dissent against (what the complainants allege to be) petty and unnecessary rules.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
And they could end up as VP in the USA god help us
I note that Pence and Netanyahu were here yesterday, pressuring the Tory government into Trumps war on Iran. Sovereignty? or what...
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
It wasn't about teaching that they exist, but that they exist *and are not routinely stoned to death*. It would be nice if your segue into teaching creationism worked, but I don't think it does.
Not sure what you're saying here it looks like you want the two penguins stoned to death to prove a point. Whereas the two penguins were gently introducing the concept of different family structures in a none threatening way
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
Well that’s fine, but they’ll have to admit that.
Personally I see little point in the government putting forward a 2/3rds majority motion on Monday, they might try their luck with a simple majority instead. It at least forces people to actually vote against it to prevent it from passing, as opposed to abstaining.
I think that is the plan. However, on reflection, expelling 21 may have been a boo boo if you want a simple majority.
- the 21 don’t have much reason to vote against it at that point. They’ve got an election before Brexit day and a legislative pledge for a PM to extend.
- Labour, the Lib Dems and the SNP et al can’t abstain and be assured that it will fail to pass. They would have to think of some tenuous reason* why a mid-October election isn’t acceptable, beyond “Oh Boris will just pull a fast one.
* I am sure they will think of something, but it will be a bit ridiculous-looking.
This is just what I’d suggest if I was advising the government.
Wait what?
The 21 have the biggest reason of all to vote against. The moment there is an election they are unemployed.
They were prepared to end in some cases decades long careers as Tory mps. They'll draw the line at no longer being an mp?
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
Well I can't see him putting HMQ in to give a QS that will fall, that would destroy him and the Tories, people wont like him embarrassing HMQ. The QS is a speech from the throne and one of the very few occasions both houses unite, it failing is a major embarrassment to the monarch. He will be up to something during prorogation to try and head this off
I don't think a QS falling will either embarrass HMQ or destroy him or the Tories.
HMQ part and the vote part is deliberately separated by days so its not like HMQ is jeered during the speech. If a vote goes down days later that's just naked politics, no different to a vote going down this week.
Boris can give him 10 minutes then, then VONC him.
Maybe then VONC him again 20 minutes later, after the pathetic games Corbyn has played with the Withdrawal Agreement over the last few months it is time for the Tories to get their revenge
That's nuts. I don't know what's happened to you lately. What's happened to "John Terry in a skirt"?
You seem to be exactly mirroring the day to day mood of Boris - the Great Man - which is odd.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
Or he got one thing absolutely spot on in a hit it out of the park, break the pavilion clock kind of way, and thinks he is a genius and can do the same thing again in a superficially similar, actually very different context. The Neil Woodford of politics.
Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
Well that’s fine, but they’ll have to admit that.
Personally I see little point in the government putting forward a 2/3rds majority motion on Monday, they might try their luck with a simple majority instead. It at least forces people to actually vote against it to prevent it from passing, as opposed to abstaining.
I think that is the plan. However, on reflection, expelling 21 may have been a boo boo if you want a simple majority.
- the 21 don’t have much reason to vote against it at that point. They’ve got an election before Brexit day and a legislative pledge for a PM to extend.
- Labour, the Lib Dems and the SNP et al can’t abstain and be assured that it will fail to pass. They would have to think of some tenuous reason* why a mid-October election isn’t acceptable, beyond “Oh Boris will just pull a fast one.
* I am sure they will think of something, but it will be a bit ridiculous-looking.
This is just what I’d suggest if I was advising the government.
Wait what?
The 21 have the biggest reason of all to vote against. The moment there is an election they are unemployed.
They were prepared to end in some cases decades long careers as Tory mps. They'll draw the line at no longer being an mp?
They'll be in no hurry to no longer be an MP. Nor can they influence politics anymore once they're not.
The rest of the rebel alliance may vote for an election if it suits them, but there's no reason it would suit the 21.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
He's a genius at bullshitting...that reconciles that.
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
And they could end up as VP in the USA god help us
I note that Pence and Netanyahu were here yesterday, pressuring the Tory government into Trumps war on Iran. Sovereignty? or what...
The visit was lost in the news storm, we really do need a way of spreading out events so people don’t miss them. His intervention was a complete and utter intrusion far beyond Obama’s. Trump is at one level of deranged Pence is completely f***** bonkers
Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
What? Every current poll gives a Tory lead and big swings from Labour to the Tories in Coventry and Cumbria local by elections last night
Tomorrow nights polls will be a lot of fun.
Certainly will, this week might not be quite the 'disaster for Boris' the commentariat think
I don't agree with a lot of your analysis, but where I do think you're right is that given there's going to be an election soon- which at the moment seems very likely- whether something is good or bad for Boris is entirely a question of whether it will improve or harm the outcome of the election. So something like losing a vote could potentially be good and vice versa
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
Well I can't see him putting HMQ in to give a QS that will fall, that would destroy him and the Tories, people wont like him embarrassing HMQ. The QS is a speech from the throne and one of the very few occasions both houses unite, it failing is a major embarrassment to the monarch. He will be up to something during prorogation to try and head this off
I don't think a QS falling will either embarrass HMQ or destroy him or the Tories.
HMQ part and the vote part is deliberately separated by days so its not like HMQ is jeered during the speech. If a vote goes down days later that's just naked politics, no different to a vote going down this week.
I think you'll find HMQ would be unamused in extremis
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Why?
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
By any reasonable definition he's a nutter, but somehow the youth of our country have embraced nutter-ism. They can't defend their views, and from what I can tell they should be more LD or Green supporting than Labour given what they say. Nonetheless they'll line up behind Corbyn, much like the police-cadets behind Boris, but they'll do so of their own choice.
Given what the young are actually saying then they should clearly be voting LD. When their schoolwork is corrected for obvious errors then it's Tory all the way of course.
Sincere apologies if you are 37 but this has a touch of Old Fart about it.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Why?
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
Well that’s an honest answer which is better than the usual Corbyn will destroy the country in nano seconds answer. I quite like your suggestion of putting Jo Swinson in though
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
Or he got one thing absolutely spot on in a hit it out of the park, break the pavilion clock kind of way, and thinks he is a genius and can do the same thing again in a superficially similar, actually very different context. The Neil Woodford of politics.
The Neil Woodford of Politics is a classic.
Boris is a bit like Wile E Coyote following Roadrunner Dom over the edge of the canyon, then realising he's in mid air with nothing supporting him.
Oh the outrage, the humanity, he used the phrase girly! The woke generation are screaming to the sky and weeping wounded tears at the horrors of it all It really didn't require an intervention Jo, fauxrage is not a vote winner
The woke generation are also locking girls out of school and calling the police on them because they want to wear skirts.
Putinist klaxon. The aim here -- which you /appear/ to be buying into -- is to portray a fascist politics as a politics of innocence, by stoking psychosexual fears in the general population. In Russia, the process is mediated through the image of western politics being inherently homosexual, but since homophobia is dying in the west, different targets are chosen. So a mixture of the "great replacement" nonsense that Orban was rambling on about has been doing the rounds the last few years, and now we're moving onto the kind of stuff you're bringing up.
It's Bannonist shite, designed to turn people to the path of fear and hatred, and to smuggle in a fascist ideology. See also Putin, Zaldostanov, Bannon, Manafort.
There's lots of (paranoid) words there, but no addressing of the issue.
Why can't these girls wear skirts in school? Politically correct dogma. Simple as that.
I think the idea is to prevent boys who identify as girls wearing skirts. Far from being woke, these rules are designed to marginalise trans children.
I actually read, no citation I’m afraid, that this all came about because they couldn’t stop the girls wearing ridiculously short skirts and shorts and the thought this would solve the problem
Skirt length (hair too) has been a school battleground since I was a nipper...
If you can see hair, the skirt is definitely too short!
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are ns wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his Corbyn as PM.
Why?
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
I disagree, Corbyn as PM to do a Neville Chamberlain and extend again and betray the Leave vote would be great for Tory poll ratings, especially as it would require the LDs and SNP to prop him up.
The Tories could run posters in Labour Leave seats with Corbyn in Juncker's pocket and posters in Tory Remain seats with Swinson in Corbyn's pocket (even if the LDs put him their temporarily).
Swinson as PM far more dangerous, she now polls better than Corbyn as preferred PM and would gain huge credibility from the role and unite Remainers behind her, most LD seats and target seats are Remain anyway so the LDs have nothing to lose electorally from extending either unlike Labour most of whose seats voted Leave
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are ns wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his Corbyn as PM.
Why?
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
I disagree, Corbyn as PM to do a Neville Chamberlain and extend again and betray the Leave vote would be great for Tory poll ratings, especially as it would require the LDs and SNP to prop him up.
The Tories could run posters in Labour Leave seats with Corbyn in Juncker's pocket and posters in Tory Remain seats with Swinson in Corbyn's pocket (even if the LD s put him their temporarily).
Swinson as PM far more dangerous, she now polls better than Corbyn as preferred PM and would gain huge credibility from the role and unite Remainers behind her most LD seats are Remain anyway so the LDs have nothing to lose electorally from extending either unlike Labour most of whose seats voted Leave
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
Declaring one's political enemies mentally ill has been standard operating procedure for the left since the time of the soviets...
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
He has visibly wilted over the past fortnight.
Much more of that and he'll get the sympathy vote.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
Or he got one thing absolutely spot on in a hit it out of the park, break the pavilion clock kind of way, and thinks he is a genius and can do the same thing again in a superficially similar, actually very different context. The Neil Woodford of politics.
The Neil Woodford of Politics is a classic.
Boris is a bit like Wile E Coyote following Roadrunner Dom over the edge of the canyon, then realising he's in mid air with nothing supporting him.
Besides, isn't Dominant Dom meant to turn into Disappearing Dom at the end of October? Pretty sure that when he was appointed it was on a short term, bish bosh, October Brexit and then he's off basis.
If he has to go, what on Earth happens to the government without his strategic genius?
So the psychological advantage that England were predicted to have over Australia turned out to be more hope than reality.
Yet given that Smith has to have a bad game at some point then England might do well at the Oval (often a good ground for them) if they can hold out for a draw this weekend.
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
Declaring one's political enemies mentally ill has been standard operating procedure for the left since the time of the soviets...
Yeah but what's going on with that speech?
Declaring one's political enemies tired and not up to the job is everyone's prerogative.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
He's a genius at bullshitting...that reconciles that.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are ns wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his Corbyn as PM.
Why?
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
I disagree, Corbyn as PM to do a Neville Chamberlain and extend again and betray the Leave vote would be great for Tory poll ratings, especially as it would require the LDs and SNP to prop him up.
The Tories could run posters in Labour Leave seats with Corbyn in Juncker's pocket and posters in Tory Remain seats with Swinson in Corbyn's pocket (even if the LD s put him their temporarily).
Swinson as PM far more dangerous, she now polls better than Corbyn as preferred PM and would gain huge credibility from the role and unite Remainers behind her most LD seats are Remain anyway so the LDs have nothing to lose electorally from extending either unlike Labour most of whose seats voted Leave
Brilliant
Wasn’t there a piece somewhere a little while ago where Swinson DID become PM for about three months as part of a deal. She took her chances as I recall.
By any reasonable definition he's a nutter, but somehow the youth of our country have embraced nutter-ism. They can't defend their views, and from what I can tell they should be more LD or Green supporting than Labour given what they say. Nonetheless they'll line up behind Corbyn, much like the police-cadets behind Boris, but they'll do so of their own choice.
Given what the young are actually saying then they should clearly be voting LD. When their schoolwork is corrected for obvious errors then it's Tory all the way of course.
Sincere apologies if you are 37 but this has a touch of Old Fart about it.
But not Boring. So that's something.
No need to apologise at all. Say what you think you should say. For what its worth you're correct. But then I said 'the young' , and 'the youth', so obviously I'm not so young myself.
Having avoided PB and its doubtless 10,000+ comments since Monday morning I have come to the conclusion that Boris does not want No Deal.
Now if I am right and assuming Boris wins a GE what do the ERG fanatics do when the government proposes the BorisDeal.
Do they have another tantrum and try to bring down Boris as they did with May ?
Is 2019 destined to be repeated as farce ?
Remarkably also, he has reduced the threshold for letters to the 1922 down to 44 by expelling a bunch of people who would have backed him in such a circumstance.
So the psychological advantage that England were predicted to have over Australia turned out to be more hope than reality.
Yet given that Smith has to have a bad game at some point then England might do well at the Oval (often a good ground for them) if they can hold out for a draw this weekend.
If.
Bradman had very few bad games indeed. Smith is one of the few batsmen that you would even mention in the same breath.
If there is one ground in England that would suit the Aussies it is The Oval. England should draw ok at Old Trafford, but I don't see them winning the final Test. Nor do they particularly deserve to. The Aussies have been the better side.
The thing with people like him is either hes a genius or hes bullshitting, and until the endgame any seemingly awful occurrence is claimed to be part of the master strategy.
Or he got one thing absolutely spot on in a hit it out of the park, break the pavilion clock kind of way, and thinks he is a genius and can do the same thing again in a superficially similar, actually very different context. The Neil Woodford of politics.
The Neil Woodford of Politics is a classic.
Boris is a bit like Wile E Coyote following Roadrunner Dom over the edge of the canyon, then realising he's in mid air with nothing supporting him.
Besides, isn't Dominant Dom meant to turn into Disappearing Dom at the end of October? Pretty sure that when he was appointed it was on a short term, bish bosh, October Brexit and then he's off basis.
If he has to go, what on Earth happens to the government without his strategic genius?
The chat seems to be that he needs surgery/medical treatment and therefore agreed to take the post on a short term basis.
I'm sure we will all cope admirably once his galaxy brain has left Number 10.
If parents at the school are concerned about making girls wear trousers (as ridiculous a complaint as the Birmingham parents and the LGBT Lessons), then the answer is simple:
Make everyone, of whatever gender, wear skirts.
FWIW these are fundamentally different cases.
The Birmingham school protests were a case of rampant bigotry. The Lewes school protests are a case of dissent against (what the complainants allege to be) petty and unnecessary rules.
One's a serious human rights case. The other's just handbags.
I get your point. However, if they're protesting about them, then they evidently don't see them as petty (i.e. trivial). And I daresay the protesters in Birmingham also see the rules that mean that differing lifestyles need teaching to children (*) are unnecessary and wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if rampant bigotry was behind some of the Lewes protests as well.
Having said all that, I do wonder if such rules actually help or hinder the children at the school who are transgender, however well-meaning the rules are meant to be. It'd be interesting to know if they were even asked about this before the rule for new pupils was introduced two years ago.
(*) IMO they should be taught.
Bigger issues in both cases. 'No Outsiders' is incoherent if it makes outsiders of significant religious traditions.
The Birmingham protests were about a programme that taught children that different kinds of people exist. The content wasn't age inappropriate, or encouraging children to experiment with being gay against what might otherwise be their inclination, or anything else. The parents simply objected because their religious objections to LGBT people meant that they didn't want their kids taught the empirical fact that we exist.
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
This may or may not all be true, but 'No Outsiders' makes no sense if it makes outsiders of groups in society.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are ns wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his Corbyn as PM.
Why?
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
I disagree, Corbyn as PM to do a Neville Chamberlain and extend again and betray the Leave vote would be great for Tory poll ratings, especially as it would require the LDs and SNP to prop him up.
The Tories could run posters in Labour Leave seats with Corbyn in Juncker's pocket and posters in Tory Remain seats with Swinson in Corbyn's pocket (even if the LD s put him their temporarily).
Swinson as PM far more dangerous, she now polls better than Corbyn as preferred PM and would gain huge credibility from the role and unite Remainers behind her most LD seats are Remain anyway so the LDs have nothing to lose electorally from extending either unlike Labour most of whose seats voted Leave
Brilliant
Wasn’t there a piece somewhere a little while ago where Swinson DID become PM for about three months as part of a deal. She took her chances as I recall.
Time to bring ‘in the thick of it’ back instead of news at ten but I’m sure you’re referring to a PB header
Genuine question, is the “notwithstanding FPTA the next election will be on X date” solution a no-go now? The rebel bill took about 4 days to go through parliament - I thought that the government could get a bill through in a day if it needed to?
If they put the date as, say, 15 October doesn’t that neutralise the “we need to be sure we will get an extension first” argument?
They don't have a majority to get anything through at all. Never mind in a day.
But what is the argument at that point? I thought the current reason for a refusal was “we don’t trust Boris to set the election date after Brexit day”.
They are enjoying seeing Boris' bluster crash and burn? While the Tory Party falls apart?
Well that’s fine, but they’ll have to admit that.
Personally I see little point in the government putting forward a 2/3rds majority motion on Monday, they might try their luck with a simple majority instead. It at least forces people to actually vote against it to prevent it from passing, as opposed to abstaining.
I think that is the plan. However, on reflection, expelling 21 may have been a boo boo if you want a simple majority.
- the 21 don’t have much reason to vote against it at that point. They’ve got an election before Brexit day and a legislative pledge for a PM to extend.
- Labour, the Lib Dems and the SNP et al can’t abstain and be assured that it will fail to pass. They would have to think of some tenuous reason* why a mid-October election isn’t acceptable, beyond “Oh Boris will just pull a fast one.
* I am sure they will think of something, but it will be a bit ridiculous-looking.
This is just what I’d suggest if I was advising the government.
Wait what?
The 21 have the biggest reason of all to vote against. The moment there is an election they are unemployed.
Yes. And frankly, they have no reason to save Boris' bacon either.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Boris never really had a majority. The decision by May to let the convict stand again in B&R meant that was almost certainly a loss. And Philip Lee was clearly waiting for the maximum impact moment to depart. He was always outside the tent.
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
He has visibly wilted over the past fortnight.
Much more of that and he'll get the sympathy vote.
Curious that his wanderings around Wakefield and the Scottish farmlands were not carefully choreographed.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Boris never really had a majority. The decision by May to let the convict stand again in B&R meant that was almost certainly a loss. And Philip Lee was clearly waiting for the maximum impact moment to depart. He was always outside the tent.
In some ways I view the last few days for Boris Johnson as similar to when Gordon Brown was found out in that live microphone moment. The difference is of course the Brexit supporting media still have much pro-Boris output. But the ability of the Brexit supporting media to push aa pro-Boris message must be pushing onto the point where credibility of the publisher starts to fray and they will turn on BJ...
Having avoided PB and its doubtless 10,000+ comments since Monday morning I have come to the conclusion that Boris does not want No Deal.
Now if I am right and assuming Boris wins a GE what do the ERG fanatics do when the government proposes the BorisDeal.
Do they have another tantrum and try to bring down Boris as they did with May ?
Is 2019 destined to be repeated as farce ?
Agree Boris does not want No Deal. If true, much said of him is false. It does of course involve believing him. There are reasons why people don't, not only political ones.
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
Well that’s an honest answer which is better than the usual Corbyn will destroy the country in nano seconds answer. I quite like your suggestion of putting Jo Swinson in though
In 1905 the master strategist Arthur Balfour decided to let the Liberal Henry Campbell-Bannerman become Prime Minister of a minority government. Despite have a majority, he hannded over.
At the time, this was regarded as tactical genius, forcing the Liberals to fight the 1906 election from power rather than the ease of opposition.
Is that the most important news to come out of No 10 today? It makes no sense, so just business as usual, I suppose.
I wonder if those involved with him appreciate him diminishing political discourse and discussion in the use of vulgar language or use of terms from cult films that will not mean anything to vast tracks of the population. Boris to use another Pulp Fiction metaphor had better hope he can pull something better than an antique watch out of his arse as BJ is in trouble....
Yep, but one the commission doesn't seem bothered about.
Hits UK quite hard, since we have so many big gambling companies.
A while back a friend of mine who ran an online bookmaker was arrested at Schipol airport for breaking the 1804 French law of competing with a French state monopoly.
He went to the police station, concerned and called his lawyer. Before the lawyer had even been contacted, the Chief of Police at the aiport came, apologised for his men having arrested him, and let him go.
He never knew exactly why, but presumably the Chief of Police saw the charge sheet, and thought "bollocks".
Saw the package on ITV Border News re Boris' visit to Scottish Farmers. His non verbals were awful. Superficially he was the old Boris and the public wasn't hostile but he looked deflated, broken and in slightly poor health. We can know what but behind the scenes ge's obviously received a crushing psychological blow this week. They also included a few shots of Ruth Davidson's resignation and an authoritative interview with an SNP government minister. He pulled off the exasperated head teacher act very well.
We'll see but it's been a bad week for the project.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
If he's confident of winning an election then resigning may not be the worst move. But I don't think its necessary.
This is what he has been waiting for. He's not going to give it up easily on the prayer that it will be given back to him.
He's voluntarily [and correctly IMO] given up his majority already.
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Boris never really had a majority. The decision by May to let the convict stand again in B&R meant that was almost certainly a loss. And Philip Lee was clearly waiting for the maximum impact moment to depart. He was always outside the tent.
Out of interest has Philip Lee been denounced as a pig-dog traitor on PB ?
Or does that only happen to defectors who call a byelection ?
Well because unless he is confident that he would enjoy the confidence of the House for a period sufficient to serve his purposes - agree extension PLUS improve his GE chances - he could advise the Queen that she must look elsewhere. Except it would not get that far of course.
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
Well that’s an honest answer which is better than the usual Corbyn will destroy the country in nano seconds answer. I quite like your suggestion of putting Jo Swinson in though
In 1905 the master strategist Arthur Balfour decided to let the Liberal Henry Campbell-Bannerman become Prime Minister of a minority government. Despite have a majority, he hannded over.
At the time, this was regarded as tactical genius, forcing the Liberals to fight the 1906 election from power rather than the ease of opposition.
It did not end well for the Conservatives.
Given the result in 1906 I rather suspect the Conservatives were heading for heavy defeat irrespective of who was in government at the time.
So if Johnson resigns it's an election, because who else is HMQ sending for? The Tories are out because theyve just told HMQ they can't command confidence. If Boris goes to HMQ and says he cannot command the confidence of the house and does not anticipate he could pass a QS, she will have little option but to dissolve parliament, and they will need to find a legal way to do that because of Camerons wretched FTPA
Is he going to resign though? Big step to take. He's PM now. After resigning he won't be. That's the bottom line.
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
Well I can't see him putting HMQ in to give a QS that will fall, that would destroy him and the Tories, people wont like him embarrassing HMQ. The QS is a speech from the throne and one of the very few occasions both houses unite, it failing is a major embarrassment to the monarch. He will be up to something during prorogation to try and head this off
I don't think a QS falling will either embarrass HMQ or destroy him or the Tories.
HMQ part and the vote part is deliberately separated by days so its not like HMQ is jeered during the speech. If a vote goes down days later that's just naked politics, no different to a vote going down this week.
I think you'll find HMQ would be unamused in extremis
Perhaps or perhaps not.
Remember that Boris prior to prorogation was already calling for an election and already had no majority and had already twice put down election motions.
That Boris has no majority for a Queen's Speech and there needs to be a General Election to get a majority would not be the world's greatest surprise. If there is any embarrassment to Her Majesty it will have been called by those who refused to have an election prior to her speech.
I think we'll have 2-3 at least tomorrow night... And I predict Con will be UP!!!
Good for you making an actual prediction. HYUFD keeps referring to this weekend's polls bit is careful to be vague enough that even if the Tories lead is cut in half in all of them he can still say "well they're ahead!"
I think we'll have 2-3 at least tomorrow night... And I predict Con will be UP!!!
Good for you making an actual prediction. HYUFD keeps referring to this weekend's polls bit is careful to be vague enough that even if the Tories lead is cut in half in all of them he can still say "well they're ahead!"
I expect Con to be up. I've also put a figure on it, if there is no election agreed Monday then come the end of October* I expect the Tories to be polling around the 40% mark and I don't think it will fall after Halloween.
* Maybe not this weekend, not everything filters through immediately.
Well because unless he is confident that he would enjoy the confidence of the House for a period sufficient to serve his purposes - agree extension PLUS improve his GE chances - he could advise the Queen that she must look elsewhere. Except it would not get that far of course.
So do you think a short spell as PM would be a net negative for him? What if compared to nobody being able to form a government and there being a GE at a time of Boris' choosing?
Why would he want to win an election? Or why would he not want Jeremy Corbyn as PM?
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election. 2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet] 3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
Well that’s an honest answer which is better than the usual Corbyn will destroy the country in nano seconds answer. I quite like your suggestion of putting Jo Swinson in though
In 1905 the master strategist Arthur Balfour decided to let the Liberal Henry Campbell-Bannerman become Prime Minister of a minority government. Despite have a majority, he hannded over.
At the time, this was regarded as tactical genius, forcing the Liberals to fight the 1906 election from power rather than the ease of opposition.
It did not end well for the Conservatives.
Balfour did not make a promise not to extend Article 50 himself though but I agree putting the Liberals in would be more dangerous for the Tories than putting Corbyn Labour in (though while he lost in 1906 in the elections of January and December 1910 Balfour's Tories were just 2 and 1 seats behind the Liberals and won the popular vote both times).
Comments
The lesson of the week is that BoZo is far from a campaigning asset. Indeed he makes Tessa look like a Shakesperian orator. The Tories best electoral tactic would be to put him in a locked room with no press allowed.
And come any election voters aren’t going to switch parties over that issue .
Bozo has a choice put forward a one line bill which can be amended to an election date of the oppositions choosing or sit there and stew .
I can imagine 'Dom' telling him it's the right move, the only move, and Boris saying something like "Have you got that operation booked in yet?"
Religious objections to children being taught facts have no place in the state education system. If you allow parents to get away with forcing a school to cover up the fact that gay people exist, then before you know it the school will also be teaching them that the Earth is flat and was created in 4004 BC.
If the parents want to fill their children's heads with mumbo-jumbo at home, or in the temple of whatever religion it is they adhere to, then that's up to them. But a state school should provide the broad-based, secular education intended by Parliament. It is not a madrassa.
Ok. Pretend I'm stupid.
Labour know the only way to mitigate the damage is to keep the BP relevant which means an election in November .
All roads lead to an election now - and winning that is key. If he needs to let Ken Clarke be PM to request an extension to do so then so be it.
The only thing I can't see him wanting is Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
Where else is it blocked?
Grandchildren aren’t answering 5he phone, it being Friday!
HMQ part and the vote part is deliberately separated by days so its not like HMQ is jeered during the speech. If a vote goes down days later that's just naked politics, no different to a vote going down this week.
You seem to be exactly mirroring the day to day mood of Boris - the Great Man - which is odd.
The rest of the rebel alliance may vote for an election if it suits them, but there's no reason it would suit the 21.
https://youtu.be/Qz-R857qXrM
Put him in, he's in, and he's going nowhere. He won't do it otherwise.
Which is why (I still think) he won't be.
I assume the former is self-explanatory, so for the latter three reasons.
1: The optics of Corbyn entering Downing Street will be great for him and give Labour a real boost, not something you want right before an election.
2: Harder to [rightly] warn of the threat of Corbyn when everyone's already agreed to let Corbyn be PM and we didn't instantly turn into Venezuela [yet]
3: The 2017 vote was a disaster as opposition to the Tories solidified to Labour. Ideally this time he'd want the opposition split between Lib Dems and Labour - Corbyn as PM and Boris as LOTO would make Labour the obvious Remain party and make it a binary vote like 2017.
Cheekiest thing Boris could do is to say if someone has to do an extension then the party most solidly for Remain should do it before the vote so he'll get the Tories to back Jo Swinson for Downing Street for the extension before taking her on at the election. Sideline Corbyn.
Magician.
But not Boring. So that's something.
Boris is a bit like Wile E Coyote following Roadrunner Dom over the edge of the canyon, then realising he's in mid air with nothing supporting him.
The Tories could run posters in Labour Leave seats with Corbyn in Juncker's pocket and posters in Tory Remain seats with Swinson in Corbyn's pocket (even if the LDs put him their temporarily).
Swinson as PM far more dangerous, she now polls better than Corbyn as preferred PM and would gain huge credibility from the role and unite Remainers behind her, most LD seats and target seats are Remain anyway so the LDs have nothing to lose electorally from extending either unlike Labour most of whose seats voted Leave
https://youtu.be/kuJHmBW_bgU
Indeed as a fifty something, recently separated male, who is subject to his lifes work collapsing before his eyes, known to be reckless and impetuous in his actions he flags up multiple risk factors. "Rather die in a ditch" and "Do or die" are futher ominous warnings.
Now if I am right and assuming Boris wins a GE what do the ERG fanatics do when the government proposes the BorisDeal.
Do they have another tantrum and try to bring down Boris as they did with May ?
Is 2019 destined to be repeated as farce ?
Hits UK quite hard, since we have so many big gambling companies.
Much more of that and he'll get the sympathy vote.
If he has to go, what on Earth happens to the government without his strategic genius?
Yet given that Smith has to have a bad game at some point then England might do well at the Oval (often a good ground for them) if they can hold out for a draw this weekend.
If.
Declaring one's political enemies tired and not up to the job is everyone's prerogative.
Who's this 'Boring' chap?
If there is one ground in England that would suit the Aussies it is The Oval. England should draw ok at Old Trafford, but I don't see them winning the final Test. Nor do they particularly deserve to. The Aussies have been the better side.
I'm sure we will all cope admirably once his galaxy brain has left Number 10.
But I do wonder if the Baker-Francois gang realise yet that they've been useful idiots for the ambition of Boris.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2019
* Does not apply in NJ I believe and possibly one or two other States.
At the time, this was regarded as tactical genius, forcing the Liberals to fight the 1906 election from power rather than the ease of opposition.
It did not end well for the Conservatives.
He went to the police station, concerned and called his lawyer. Before the lawyer had even been contacted, the Chief of Police at the aiport came, apologised for his men having arrested him, and let him go.
He never knew exactly why, but presumably the Chief of Police saw the charge sheet, and thought "bollocks".
We'll see but it's been a bad week for the project.
Or does that only happen to defectors who call a byelection ?
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1170026320446799877
Remember that Boris prior to prorogation was already calling for an election and already had no majority and had already twice put down election motions.
That Boris has no majority for a Queen's Speech and there needs to be a General Election to get a majority would not be the world's greatest surprise. If there is any embarrassment to Her Majesty it will have been called by those who refused to have an election prior to her speech.
* Maybe not this weekend, not everything filters through immediately.
I think the current impasse is electoral gold for the Tories. Long may it drag on.