Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We shouldn’t look much past Lindsay Hoyle as next Speaker

SystemSystem Posts: 12,128
edited September 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We shouldn’t look much past Lindsay Hoyle as next Speaker

The last few weeks seem to have been filled with as many attempts to defy convention and accepted norms of rules and behaviour within Westminster as possible. There’s a certain irony, therefore, that in the election to replace John Bercow as Speaker, a convention many MPs may feel bound to respect a convention – that the Speakership should alternate between the main parties – which is of recent innovation and which came about primarily by happenstance, albeit a happenstance overlaid by a perceived fairness.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    First like Hoyle (hopefully).
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,214
    I have my doubts that Cummings, Boris or the ERG care much about convention. I'd have thought they'd be fuming about Bercow and would be keen to get a proper Tory in.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    rkrkrk said:

    I have my doubts that Cummings, Boris or the ERG care much about convention. I'd have thought they'd be fuming about Bercow and would be keen to get a proper Tory in.

    Take Back Control?
  • Morning all and as usual an excellent piece by David.

    Why on earth would MPs look past Hoyle other than he may be TOO fair and unwilling to break/bend the conventions as little Berk-ow has done. I like Eleanor Laing and knew her when she was involved in Scottish politics. Hoyle would still get my vote if I had one.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.
  • iirc HYUFD put up Eleanor Laing though I cannot quite recall if it was a prediction (aka tip) or just a recommendation of a fellow Essex-based Conservative.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    edited September 2019
    rkrkrk said:

    I have my doubts that Cummings, Boris or the ERG care much about convention. I'd have thought they'd be fuming about Bercow and would be keen to get a proper Tory in.

    Pretty clearly though, BoZo and the ERG do not command majority support in the House.

    I have no particular feeling for who gets the post, but I expect it to be someone willing to stand up for the Commons interest against the Executive.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    I think this article should be re-titled 'I don't like Harriet Harman.' ;)

    Lindsay Hoyle strikes me as a little bit weak and bumbling for these troubled times. We need a strong centrist speaker who is able to control an increasingly rowdy and angry HoC. I'm far from convinced that Hoyle is the right person for the job at the moment.

    It certainly wouldn't be tokenism to appoint a female. It would send an important signal about gender balance, and David's remarks about this, whilst well intentioned, do come across as rather male oriented and failing to grasp the significance of the issue.

    A female speaker would be a good move. But it needs to be someone really strong. Harriet Harman is an obvious choice.

    For the record, I haven't bet on this market so I'm stating this from a relatively objective perspective.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    But listen, Tory mooks – I’m here to help. While you’re getting a tiki torch and standing a post, let me tell you what a “people vs parliament” election ultimately means for you. First, if you whip up an angry mob, why do you assume they won’t end up angry with you? Do you think the mob is going to come upon an MP and go, “Wait, wait – this is so-and-so. He voted for Meaningful Votes 2 and 3, so we should, you know, definitely not put our pitchforks up his arse”? Eventually, you’re going to get a pitchfork up your arse either way.

    If you go to the country in a people v parliament election, you may indeed get elected and be part of a triumphant Tory majority. But when you have been elected, and when you’ve “got Brexit done” – which is to say, when you’ve either taken the UK off the no-deal cliff, or opened up the next however many painful years of trade negotiations fuckery-pokery, which is never going to solve the problems it is magically supposed to – you, then, are “parliament”.

    The even angrier people are then versus YOU. That’s when they come for you, because you asked them to. You invited them in. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard this line “the revolution devours its children”? That’s you, babe.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/27/tories-dominic-cummings-people-v-parliament-election
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    If there is a feeling that the House should begin the process of healing the ruptures, then that should assist Hoyle.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,214
    edited September 2019
    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I have my doubts that Cummings, Boris or the ERG care much about convention. I'd have thought they'd be fuming about Bercow and would be keen to get a proper Tory in.

    Pretty clearly though, BoZo and the ERG do not command majority support in the House.

    I have no particular feeling for who gets the post, but I expect it to be someone willing to stand up for the Commons interest against the Executive.
    Fair point. I'd have thought he could get pretty close on this issue though. And if Boris backs a female candidate, presumably he will get Harriet Harman's vote?

    As an aside, if Bercowe steps down on 31st Oct, but there's a new election in Nov/Dec, would the current parliament choose the speaker? Or would it make more sense to wait until the new parliament assembles?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited September 2019
    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    rkrkrk said:

    Foxy said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I have my doubts that Cummings, Boris or the ERG care much about convention. I'd have thought they'd be fuming about Bercow and would be keen to get a proper Tory in.

    Pretty clearly though, BoZo and the ERG do not command majority support in the House.

    I have no particular feeling for who gets the post, but I expect it to be someone willing to stand up for the Commons interest against the Executive.
    Fair point. I'd have thought he could get pretty close on this issue though. And if Boris backs a female candidate, presumably he will get Harriet Harman's vote?

    As an aside, if Bercowe steps down on 31st Oct, but there's a new election in Nov/Dec, would the current parliament choose the speaker? Or would it make more sense to wait until the new parliament assembles?
    I really don't think that a Prime Ministerial endorsement would help any candidate, indeed the reverse.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    I hope Hoyle gets it.

    Rainy and dark this morning. On a happier note, pleasantly surprised my article went up so quickly. Thanks to those generous enough to leave kind comments.

    FPT: Mr. Meeks, increasing defence budgets and altering the way a multi-lateral approach to defence works are different things.

    FPT: Mr. Woolie, lots of people would cite Manzikert, and it was needless folly, however, that happened in 1054. After this, the Comneni (particularly Alexius and John) helped to stabilise and strengthen the Eastern Roman Empire in the late 11th and 12th centuries. In short, recovery and success was happening.

    The disastrous Angeli dynasty weakened the Empire substantially and helped enable the Fourth Crusade to succeed. It was after that that, in my view, decline and defeat (without Western help, which was not forthcoming) was inevitable.

    FPT: Dr. Foxy, you're right that in the classical era the East was richer than the West, although it's worth noting the mega-rich were clustered in Rome, for obvious reasons.

    FPT: Mr. Soup, there was a plan for Russia to get Constantinople (Istanbul) after the First World War was won. Unfortunately for them, they were, er, otherwise occupied. It was unfortunate too for Montenegro, which was shafted by its allies and swallowed by Serbia.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited September 2019
    Order .. Order .. OORRRDDDDDEEEEERRRR !!!!!!!

    Yes you Dr @Foxy .... calm down man. Your aspirations to be a statesman of some eminence are in danger. Take some soothing medication to restrain yourself.

    I must advise the House that I find Mr Herdson's intervention entirely in order and recommend to Honourable and Right Honourable members that on this matter they follow the recommendations of the Right Honourable member for Wakefield North and Yorkshire Rural South.

    We now move on to a petition from the member for Bedford Riverside on the thorny subject of the taxation of wig powders. I call Sir Michael Smithson.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584

    I think this article should be re-titled 'I don't like Harriet Harman.' ;)

    Lindsay Hoyle strikes me as a little bit weak and bumbling for these troubled times. We need a strong centrist speaker who is able to control an increasingly rowdy and angry HoC. I'm far from convinced that Hoyle is the right person for the job at the moment.

    It certainly wouldn't be tokenism to appoint a female. It would send an important signal about gender balance, and David's remarks about this, whilst well intentioned, do come across as rather male oriented and failing to grasp the significance of the issue.

    A female speaker would be a good move. But it needs to be someone really strong. Harriet Harman is an obvious choice.

    For the record, I haven't bet on this market so I'm stating this from a relatively objective perspective.

    I’d hoped we’d have moved beyond pathetic identity politics for choosing a speaker. Betty Boothroyd smashed it as speaker - sex is a non issue.

    The speaker needs to be competent and balanced this time - Hoyle seems to tick both boxes.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Worst possible choice anyone could make
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    JackW said:

    Order .. Order .. OORRRDDDDDEEEEERRRR !!!!!!!

    Yes you Dr @Foxy .... calm down man. Your aspirations to be a statesman of some eminence are in danger. Take some soothing medication to restrain yourself.

    I must advise the House that I find Mr Herdson's intervention entirely in order and recommend to Honourable and Right Honourable members that on this matter they follow the recommendations of the Right Honourable member for Wakefield North and Yorkshire Rural South.

    We now move on to a petition from the member for Bedford Riverside on the thorny subject of the taxation of wig powders. I call Sir Michael Smithson.

    Your grace always had a soft spot for powdery Whigs as I recall.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    edited September 2019
    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Worst possible choice anyone could make
    Now come on Malcolm, I don't *like* Harman but she wouldn't be a worse choice than Mark Francois, Jacob Rees-Mogg or Laura Pidcock.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584
    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Worst possible choice anyone could make
    I thought Pete Wishart was standing ? He would run HH close.

    For the worst possible choice..
  • The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.

    Possibly one of the independent Tories...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154

    The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.

    The state they're in at the moment, they'll put up a supine Labour candidate, panic over the backlash, campaign against him/her and end up asking Bercow to stay on for a bit.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Worst possible choice anyone could make
    Now come on Malcolm, I don't *like* Harman but she wouldn't be a worse choice than Mark Francois, Jacob Rees-Mogg or Laura Pidcock.
    OK, almost the worst choice, though I was really just ruminating on the names in the frame rather than the whole parcel of rogues.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    TGOHF2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Worst possible choice anyone could make
    I thought Pete Wishart was standing ? He would run HH close.

    For the worst possible choice..
    Far more talented than Harriet and he could give out autographed albums to best behaved MPs of the week
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."
  • Mr Dancer, you can’t make countries that want to cooperate not cooperate. That’s interfering with their sovereignty.
  • FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,555

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    Good point. But the way the govt carry on with its people vs. Parliament bullshit, maybe the Speaker after next will actually have to be dragged to the chair.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,178
    Seriously hope it's Hoyle. Harman doesn't bear thinking about, we might as well stick with Bercow.

    Sensible, moderate, affable, Lancastrian.

    Just like me. :-)
  • The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.

    It's precisely because Harman is being suggested as an alternative to Corbyn as PM that the Cult would see the advantage of electing her as Speaker.

    Nothing, and no-one, must stand in the way of Corbyn and Number 10.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    edited September 2019
    Scott_P said:

    But listen, Tory mooks – I’m here to help. While you’re getting a tiki torch and standing a post, let me tell you what a “people vs parliament” election ultimately means for you. First, if you whip up an angry mob, why do you assume they won’t end up angry with you? Do you think the mob is going to come upon an MP and go, “Wait, wait – this is so-and-so. He voted for Meaningful Votes 2 and 3, so we should, you know, definitely not put our pitchforks up his arse”? Eventually, you’re going to get a pitchfork up your arse either way.

    If you go to the country in a people v parliament election, you may indeed get elected and be part of a triumphant Tory majority. But when you have been elected, and when you’ve “got Brexit done” – which is to say, when you’ve either taken the UK off the no-deal cliff, or opened up the next however many painful years of trade negotiations fuckery-pokery, which is never going to solve the problems it is magically supposed to – you, then, are “parliament”.

    The even angrier people are then versus YOU. That’s when they come for you, because you asked them to. You invited them in. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard this line “the revolution devours its children”? That’s you, babe.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/27/tories-dominic-cummings-people-v-parliament-election

    Interesting. Marina Hyde is the funniest political writer currently employed by a UK newspaper. Seldom if ever off key. Apart from a fling with Piers Morgan she doesn't put a foot wrong.

    But here she sounds angry. The wit's still there but fleetingly. The organ grinder in particuar is getting under her skin. Maybe it's just too big a target? A lot of us are feeling pretty revolted and angry but that's when you want the cool political satirist to give a perspective. I look forward to normal service being resumed by next Friday
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    The Canadian climate strikes seem pretty massive, bound to alter the tenor of their election.

    From what I hear, October is going to be a busy time for Extinction Rebellion here too.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
  • Mr. Meeks, I agree.

    My point is that a schism in security isn't going to benefit Europe, and is a product of the EU's desire to centralise power to bolster the institution, rather than the continent.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited September 2019

    The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.

    It's precisely because Harman is being suggested as an alternative to Corbyn as PM that the Cult would see the advantage of electing her as Speaker.

    Nothing, and no-one, must stand in the way of Corbyn and Number 10.
    Fair point, but I was thinking that the Cult would need her for the GNU to trigger the election that will ensure Corbyn passes into electoral obscurity put Corbyn into No.10 and see Labour wiped out establish the socialist Utopia.
  • Dr. Foxy, if only we could harvest angst for fuel.
  • On topic, I never bet on markets where lots of people have lots more important information than me.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    I see the Conference is starting well...

    https://twitter.com/AmateyDoku/status/1177644557791617025?s=19
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    Good morning, everyone.

    I hope Hoyle gets it.

    Rainy and dark this morning. On a happier note, pleasantly surprised my article went up so quickly. Thanks to those generous enough to leave kind comments.

    FPT: Mr. Meeks, increasing defence budgets and altering the way a multi-lateral approach to defence works are different things.

    FPT: Mr. Woolie, lots of people would cite Manzikert, and it was needless folly, however, that happened in 1054. After this, the Comneni (particularly Alexius and John) helped to stabilise and strengthen the Eastern Roman Empire in the late 11th and 12th centuries. In short, recovery and success was happening.

    The disastrous Angeli dynasty weakened the Empire substantially and helped enable the Fourth Crusade to succeed. It was after that that, in my view, decline and defeat (without Western help, which was not forthcoming) was inevitable.

    FPT: Dr. Foxy, you're right that in the classical era the East was richer than the West, although it's worth noting the mega-rich were clustered in Rome, for obvious reasons.

    FPT: Mr. Soup, there was a plan for Russia to get Constantinople (Istanbul) after the First World War was won. Unfortunately for them, they were, er, otherwise occupied. It was unfortunate too for Montenegro, which was shafted by its allies and swallowed by Serbia.

    In these febrile times 'I hope Hoyle gets it' might not be the wisest opening line.
  • Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Roger said:

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
    My university days suggest that minor public school types are the ones who adhere to these farcical little rituals the most.

    Where does your public school fit in to this divide, Roger?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362

    Dr. Foxy, if only we could harvest angst for fuel.

    The Angst Drive.

    (although it will never achieve quite the propulsion of the Sex Drive....)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Foxy said:
    I hope they're paying 'Nike' royalties for the logo.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    OK thanks David. It's convincing. Going to do it.
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    Roger said:

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
    My university days suggest that minor public school types are the ones who adhere to these farcical little rituals the most.

    Where does your public school fit in to this divide, Roger?
    Where does the dividing line fall?
    Yours, Tabman Major (Scumbag Comp)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    Roger said:

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
    My university days suggest that minor public school types are the ones who adhere to these farcical little rituals the most.

    Where does your public school fit in to this divide, Roger?
    It comes under the bracket of 'fee paying comprehensive'.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    edited September 2019

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,555
    Tabman said:

    Roger said:

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
    My university days suggest that minor public school types are the ones who adhere to these farcical little rituals the most.

    Where does your public school fit in to this divide, Roger?
    Where does the dividing line fall?
    Yours, Tabman Major (Scumbag Comp)
    I am still flabbergasted that MM admits he went to university. Part of liberal elite, he must feel very compromised.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    edited September 2019

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Remarkable number of people have strong opinions about who the speaker should be, based entirely on their opinion of Brexit.
    Which is stupid.
  • Mr. Roger, darr, sorry, my mistake.

    With the febrile atmosphere lately one wasn't sure.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Tabman said:

    Roger said:

    Whoever it is, can we get rid of the tired minor public school wank of dragging them, oh so reluctantly, to the Chair? One convention that should die. If they didn't want the job, they wouldn't have put their name forward. Let them stride confidently into the role, rather than have a pretendy flustered Harriet going "Me? Surely not - I've never even considered it....I wouldn't be any good, no really, you shouldn't have..."

    I would have thought rituals like dragging people to the chair were more major public school wank. They're the ones with the centuries old traditions and the wankers to keep them going
    My university days suggest that minor public school types are the ones who adhere to these farcical little rituals the most.

    Where does your public school fit in to this divide, Roger?
    Where does the dividing line fall?
    Yours, Tabman Major (Scumbag Comp)
    Mine had a maximus and minimus even though major and minor had long gone. We didn't believe in hereditary titles.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
  • Mr. Mark, maybe they were hung out to dry?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    TGOHF2 said:
    Well that’s what Johnson’s sister said yesterday as well
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,898
    It should clearly be Hoyle. He'll be noones patsy.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
    Yes but you went to university...
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,490
    Pulpstar said:

    It should clearly be Hoyle. He'll be noones patsy.

    After Bercow he'll certainly be less controversial.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    TGOHF2 said:
    Clearly Labour don't believe the disaster capitalsim line, or they'd be agreeing to a Brexit deal, just to screw with Boris's disaster capitalist chums....
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147
    All reason and sense suggests Hoyle for next Speaker. Therefore he probably won't be. If Harman were to win it the office would be doomed.
  • F1: also, Toro Rosso wants to be renamed AlphaTauri.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,477

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Calling her Harperson is just fucking childish.

    Grow up man.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
    Yes but you went to university...
    ...and a proppa Comprehensive
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,477
    felix said:

    All reason and sense suggests Hoyle for next Speaker. Therefore he probably won't be. If Harman were to win it the office would be doomed.


    Why?
  • Mr. Roger, darr, sorry, my mistake.

    With the febrile atmosphere lately one wasn't sure.

    At least you didn't say 'let him have it' (for which someone was hanged).
  • This is completely off topic but a must-read for anyone who writes in any capacity at all:

    https://twitter.com/eliasdinas/status/1177852378483236864?s=21
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,898
    Major is a bit of an odd one to go on about temperate language given he labelled some of his own party "bastards".
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    Ireland are in a game.....

  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,490

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Calling her Harperson is just fucking childish.

    Grow up man.
    it just the same a people using the phrase 'herstory' rather than 'history' I find both just as childish.

    the one thing to say about using 'Harperson' it does describe her perfectly as a nickname. she is deeply into the politics of gender, to the point that it is detrimental to her message sometimes.
  • felix said:

    All reason and sense suggests Hoyle for next Speaker. Therefore he probably won't be. If Harman were to win it the office would be doomed.

    Harriet Harman would certainly seal its fate as a thoroughly political position for the foreseeable future. I wonder if the convention of not contesting the speaker’s constituency is also gone for good? Wasn’t particularly fair on the constituents...
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106


    Grow up man.

    Don't assume someones gender.
  • Mr. Spudgfsh, point of order: 'herstory' betrays not just petty grievance but ignorance.

    The word 'history' is not, as some wrongly believe, a portmanteau of 'his' and 'story'.

    It's derived from the Latin noun 'historia'. Which is feminine.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    spudgfsh said:


    After Bercow he'll certainly be less controversial.

    The role needs someone who is calm, measured and not looking to make the job all about them.

    The last thing parliament needs is another highly partisan speaker using the role to grandstand and for that reason Harman would be a disastrous appointment.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    Mr. Spudgfsh, point of order: 'herstory' betrays not just petty grievance but ignorance.

    The word 'history' is not, as some wrongly believe, a portmanteau of 'his' and 'story'.

    It's derived from the Latin noun 'historia'. Which is feminine.

    Language evolves.
  • It’s at least clear that Philip Hammond isn’t in a hurry to recover the whip.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190
    I do feel for the Conservatives, with the exception of Weatherill we have had a Labour, or Labourlite speaker since before Georgie Thomas.

    I have seen on Betway that Boris Johnson is currently 100/1. Would this be instead of his current role or is it anticipated he would multi task? Mind you it could be worse, Owen Paterson is a mere 18/1 on Betway!
  • Off to sunny South Wales for a few days this morning. Could somebody let me know if there's any exciting news of Boris whilst away. A text will do - keep it brief - resigned/arrested/fecked will do.

    Play nicely PBers.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,490

    Mr. Spudgfsh, point of order: 'herstory' betrays not just petty grievance but ignorance.

    The word 'history' is not, as some wrongly believe, a portmanteau of 'his' and 'story'.

    It's derived from the Latin noun 'historia'. Which is feminine.

    I bow to your greater knowledge.
  • Lindsay Hoyle is head and shoulders the best candidate but the turkeys could vote in almost anyone in their current mood.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Pulpstar said:

    Major is a bit of an odd one to go on about temperate language given he labelled some of his own party "bastards".

    In a single private conversation that happened to picked up by a nearby mic. It was both qualitatively and quantitatively different to the current constant open, loud and repeated messaging about “surrender” and “betrayal” with the implication of treason (with all that that has historically entailed) thrown in.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    Off to sunny South Wales for a few days this morning. Could somebody let me know if there's any exciting news of Boris whilst away. A text will do - keep it brief - resigned/arrested/fecked will do.

    Play nicely PBers.

    FYI it is raining cats and dogs here in the Principality.
  • Dr. Foxy, it doesn't evolve to the point of travelling back in time to destroy the etymology of words!

    You cantankerous contrarian Von Klinkerhoffen!

    Mr. Spudgfsh, it's an understandable mistake to make. But should be corrected so that the error doesn't persist.
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
    Yes but you went to university...
    ...and a proppa Comprehensive
    Was it a former Sec Mod.?
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,490

    Dr. Foxy, it doesn't evolve to the point of travelling back in time to destroy the etymology of words!

    You cantankerous contrarian Von Klinkerhoffen!

    Mr. Spudgfsh, it's an understandable mistake to make. But should be corrected so that the error doesn't persist.

    It just annoys me because it seems petty
  • Off to sunny South Wales for a few days this morning. Could somebody let me know if there's any exciting news of Boris whilst away. A text will do - keep it brief - resigned/arrested/fecked will do.

    Play nicely PBers.

    There are rain weather warnings for South Wales for the next four days.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147

    felix said:

    All reason and sense suggests Hoyle for next Speaker. Therefore he probably won't be. If Harman were to win it the office would be doomed.


    Why?
    No semblance of neutrality.
  • Hoyle seems decent, competent and even handed. So he probably has no chance from this Parliament.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,551
    Pulpstar said:

    Major is a bit of an odd one to go on about temperate language given he labelled some of his own party "bastards".

    I don't think the issue is really about intemperate language. There has always been a lot of that in politics.

    The concern is about inflammatory language that might provoke some hothead into taking violent action.

    "Bastard" is intemperate. "Traitor" is inflammatory.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147
    SunnyJim said:


    Grow up man.

    Don't assume someones gender.
    well said Jimima :)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    SunnyJim said:


    Grow up man.

    Don't assume someones gender.
    Grow up something
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    It’s at least clear that Philip Hammond isn’t in a hurry to recover the whip.

    You get the impression that there have been a few epiphanies in the last few weeks. On all sides. There's only so much swimming against the tide one can do.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    spudgfsh said:

    tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought Harriet's best chance of becoming speaker is if the Tories think she would be an electoral benefit to them as speaker.

    Harriet Harperson would be a benefit to Harriet Harperson, no one else.
    Calling her Harperson is just fucking childish.

    Grow up man.
    it just the same a people using the phrase 'herstory' rather than 'history' I find both just as childish.

    the one thing to say about using 'Harperson' it does describe her perfectly as a nickname. she is deeply into the politics of gender, to the point that it is detrimental to her message sometimes.
    She was a crap politician, I thought she had been put out to grass many years ago.
  • DougSeal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Major is a bit of an odd one to go on about temperate language given he labelled some of his own party "bastards".

    In a single private conversation that happened to picked up by a nearby mic. It was both qualitatively and quantitatively different to the current constant open, loud and repeated messaging about “surrender” and “betrayal” with the implication of treason (with all that that has historically entailed) thrown in.
    What about the chorus of the Red Flag, sung at every Labour Conference by the entire frontbench? Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer....
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    All reason and sense suggests Hoyle for next Speaker. Therefore he probably won't be. If Harman were to win it the office would be doomed.

    Why?
    No semblance of neutrality.
    Former Cabinet ministers have been Speakers and fairly recently.

    A former American president later became a Supreme Court judge.

    There is no reason why Harriet Harman could not speak for the House rather than the Labour party.
This discussion has been closed.