politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris must be able to stand for the Tory leadership
Two things stand out from a quick glance at the odds for the next PM. The first is that Ed Miliband (8/11, Ladbrokes), is rated about ten times more likely to be next to get the job than anyone else. That’s not too surprising:
"Hain doesn't like to mention it much but in his activist youth in South Africa he was almost singlehandedly responsible for overthrowing the Apartheid regime and became one of Mandela's most trusted confidantes."
How popular is Boris amongst the tory grassroots? Is he really their golden boy? Does he not support gay marriage, EU membership an amnesty for illegals and the like?
How popular is Boris amongst the tory grassroots? Is he really their golden boy? Does he not support gay marriage, EU membership an amnesty for illegals and the like?
Well if you assume conhome represents an accurate view of Tory grassroots
He regularly tops their preference for next leader
Boris will be able to stand. It is unthinkable that a leadership election could take place without him, when he would be back in Parliament in short order sitting on the backbenches and depriving whoever had won the election of legitimacy. He needs to be beaten fair and square. No one who aspires to lead the Conservative party, as opposed to win the leadership election, will stand in the way of a rule change. But it won't take place until the occasion arises.
The rules themselves sound simple: “There shall be a Leader of the Party drawn from those elected to parliament.” Straightforward enough? It’s MPs only. Not necessarily. Apart from the loophole that hereditary peers are also elected (after a fashion), if the will was there, it could be interpreted to mean “drawn from those ‘who have at any time’ been elected to parliament”, which Boris has been.
Given Parliament is no longer either Sovereign or Supreme arguably it should also be open to those who represent the people at the most supreme representative level as well. After all if the Tories are so enthralled with Brussels why deny their representatives there access to the top job?
After all if UKIP can do it why would the Tories or the other establishment parties not want to?
Twitter BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 9m Cuban President Raul Castro & US President Obama shake hands - & other #MandelaMemorial photos http://bbc.in/18R19Sl pic.twitter.com/RzbVWfS5g5
How popular is Boris amongst the tory grassroots? Is he really their golden boy? Does he not support gay marriage, EU membership an amnesty for illegals and the like?
Well if you assume conhome represents an accurate view of Tory grassroots
He regularly tops their preference for next leader
How popular is Boris amongst the tory grassroots? Is he really their golden boy? Does he not support gay marriage, EU membership an amnesty for illegals and the like?
Well if you assume conhome represents an accurate view of Tory grassroots
He regularly tops their preference for next leader
And it is beyond bizarre that when Labour had the chance they ignored the second most powerful woman in Europe behind Merkel (Cathy Ashton) as their leader and instead opted for possibly the biggest misfit ever chosen as a party leader.
So much for Labour and gender politics and being on the side of women!
''Hain doesn't like to mention it much but in his activist youth in South Africa he was almost singlehandedly responsible for overthrowing the Apartheid regime.''
I remember my father telling me about those protests that used to follow the touring springboks around Wales in the 1960s.
At one match (against Swansea?) the club apparently took the measure of recruiting 'stewards' from local junior rugby clubs to ring the pitch.
There was a pitch invasion, at which point the 'stewards' went into action. Protestors (including women) were hit by full blooded no-quarter-given tackles. Some were hurled back into the terraces by their hair, according to my father.
I did wonder if it were easier, Labour would have ditched Brown in 2009 for Mandelson.
Weird thing is, I could see myself voting for Mandelson, in the same way you might vote for Machiavelli.
Mandelson is a conniving, ruthless, amoral, scheming, supersmart son-of-a-bitch, entirely without principles or scruples. In many ways he's exactly the kind of person you want as leader in a hostile world, just as long as they are good at the job.
Brown was equally conniving and amoral, but he was also pathetic, hapless, self-loathing and incompetent.
Mandelson is an amazing speaker. You can tell he's thinking of what he'll be saying a couple of sentences ahead. In contrast, when I speak I'm usually thinking about what I said twenty seconds before and cringing.
It's hard to be a Machiavelli without being a good orator. And Mandelson was one of the best the UK had.
BBC News director, James Harding, defended the corporation's coverage saying Mr Mandela was a man of "singular significance" and the "most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
Harding's wrong. Mandela was the most significant statesman since the Big Bang.
(Zzzzzzzzzzzz....)
Didn't he create the Big Bang? I'm sure one of his tears fell onto the floor of his prison cell, and in bursting created all matter and energy in the universe? That was the power of the man.
BBC News director, James Harding, defended the corporation's coverage saying Mr Mandela was a man of "singular significance" and the "most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
Really? No wonder the BBC is in such a mess.
Significant? Does that mean historically more important? Well, he's got Churchill, Hitler, Stalin and Mao as competition for starters.
On the night, Tom Bradby (ITV News political editor) claimed Mandela was the most significant statesman ever, I think.
Whilst a tremendously important figure, that does rather neglect the likes of Caesar, Camillus, Trajan, Hadrian, Constantine, Alexius Comnenus etc etc.
Racism and ethnicity is THE issue of the left. It trumps and excuses everything else. In this narrow space Mandela was indeed No1. But it is a self selected narrow space.
Deng undoubtedly did more to lift millions out of poverty. Gorbachov more to release people from oppression.
''Hain doesn't like to mention it much but in his activist youth in South Africa he was almost singlehandedly responsible for overthrowing the Apartheid regime.''
I remember my father telling me about those protests that used to follow the touring springboks around Wales in the 1960s.
At one match (against Swansea?) the club apparently took the measure of recruiting 'stewards' from local junior rugby clubs to ring the pitch.
There was a pitch invasion, at which point the 'stewards' went into action. Protestors (including women) were hit by full blooded no-quarter-given tackles. Some were hurled back into the terraces by their hair, according to my father.
Gruesome, but I guess these were different days.
Anyone remember Erica Roe? Now that's what I call a pitch invasion...
It is complete balderdash. It is an inverted pyramid of piffle. It is all completely untrue and ludicrous conjecture. I am amazed people can write this drivel. - Boris quoted in the Mail on Sunday, 7 November 2004.
BBC News director, James Harding, defended the corporation's coverage saying Mr Mandela was a man of "singular significance" and the "most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
Really? No wonder the BBC is in such a mess.
The BBC just don't listen nor care what the source of their funds think.
I wonder if they even polled for viewing figures when their tissue festival was going on 24/7.
...and, to keep balance, the reason Mandela was No1 in the ethnicity space was his truly great capacity to forgive. He did bad things in his youth but he became a 'Great' because he didn't let his circumstances poison him - for which he is to be admired.
Certainly up there. Did incredible job of coaxing a very reluctant super power into saving democracy.
For me the most 'significant' statesman in the last 100 years is Adolf Hitler. By a street.
He moved more mountains than all the rest put together. In the cause of evil of course, but there it is. And its also true that without him, none of it would have happened.
Bit like Satan in Paradise lost. Pure evil, but didn;t half cause some ructions.
BBC News director, James Harding, defended the corporation's coverage saying Mr Mandela was a man of "singular significance" and the "most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
Really? No wonder the BBC is in such a mess.
The BBC just don't listen nor care what the source of their funds think.
I wonder if they even polled for viewing figures when their tissue festival was going on 24/7.
The BBC's problem is bigger than that - they often perform poorly on such events. Take today. I watched it, and noted that it was on both BBC 2 and BBC News channels. Given we are all digital, having it on both seemed rather overkill, especially as they are on the same multiplex (PSB1).
The thing that was really annoying is that, given they had two channels, they appeared to be broadcasting the same feed. Anyone wanting to pay their respects by viewing got the same gurning, preening presenters orgasming at being at the event. One channel should have played the feed interrupted whilst the other had presenters giving context.
Cue the usual idiots popping up when anyone has the temerity to criticise the BBC.
Hitler was the political equivalent of J R R Tolkien; discuss.
Hitler (up to about 1941) was a lesson in good management. Build a great team, offer them help when they need it (i.e. my budget for this year is £X), stop them from aguing too much, and let them get on with it. Don't interfere in the minutiae.
I did wonder if it were easier, Labour would have ditched Brown in 2009 for Mandelson.
Weird thing is, I could see myself voting for Mandelson, in the same way you might vote for Machiavelli.
Mandelson is a conniving, ruthless, amoral, scheming, supersmart son-of-a-bitch, entirely without principles or scruples. In many ways he's exactly the kind of person you want as leader in a hostile world, just as long as they are good at the job.
Brown was equally conniving and amoral, but he was also pathetic, hapless, self-loathing and incompetent.
Mandy as PM would have made Francis Urquhart look like a baby sitter. But things would have got done and decisions would have been made. An interesting what if.
Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili winner of the most diligent Twentieth Century dictator award.
Communist Russia was already starting to rot on the vine before Barbarossa. The Wehrmacht effectively trained it up through the intensest competition. And then Germany crumbled, allowing Stalin to create a vast bloc.
The soviet bloc would not have happened without Hitler, or the cold war, or the EU.
Up until the 1990s, the entire world was shaped by the reaction to the monstrous evil he created.
Paradoxically by overstating Mandela's importance it diminishes what he really did achieve. What he did - by showing such grace despite what happened to him and his people and by extending forgiveness and friendship to his people's oppressors - was remarkable and rare and contributed much to South Africa's largely peaceful transition from apartheid.
The OTT statements about him being the greatest for the last century etc are so ridiculous that they detract from what made him worthy of celebration. And they're silly too - even the greatest of men have flaws and have made mistakes - and Mandela was no exception to that rule. A more intelligent appraisal would be more sensible and fitting than this rush to turn him into some sort of secular saint and the rest of us into worshippers at a shrine.
On the night, Tom Bradby (ITV News political editor) claimed Mandela was the most significant statesman ever, I think.
Whilst a tremendously important figure, that does rather neglect the likes of Caesar, Camillus, Trajan, Hadrian, Constantine, Alexius Comnenus etc etc.
Careful MD, the end of apartheid was clearly the most significant event in human history, and you ought to watch what you say before a Lib Dem reports you to the police.
1.Britain is a parliamentary democracy. 2.Boris isn't the obvious successor anyway, for a myriad of reasons which obviously includes 1.
1. So is Germany, for example, which routinely draws leaders from its regional parliaments. 2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
Hitler was the political equivalent of J R R Tolkien; discuss.
I don;t know if you've read the Ian Kershaw Hitler biog, its an amazing tome.
Kershaw keeps wanting to pour contempt on his subject, but that attitude simply does not square with the sheer scale of the evil Hitler perpetrated (which Kershaw portrays in meticulous detail).
David Smith @dsmitheconomics 4m National Institute projects a 0,8% rise in GDP in the three months to November following today's industrial production figures.
Maybe, as discussed in the leader. You're of the opinion that Obama isn't eligible to be president but it hasn't stopped him sitting in the White House these last five years. In any case, rules can (and in my opinion, should) be changed.
Paradoxically by overstating Mandela's importance it diminishes what he really did achieve. What he did - by showing such grace despite what happened to him and his people and by extending forgiveness and friendship to his people's oppressors - was remarkable and rare and contributed much to South Africa's largely peaceful transition from apartheid.
The OTT statements about him being the greatest for the last century etc are so ridiculous that they detract from what made him worthy of celebration. And they're silly too - even the greatest of men have flaws and have made mistakes - and Mandela was no exception to that rule. A more intelligent appraisal would be more sensible and fitting than this rush to turn him into some sort of secular saint and the rest of us into worshippers at a shrine.
I misread Mandela as Mandelson in your post up to "and by extending forgiveness and friendship" which was quite funny.
'Now, it’s entirely plausible to think of a high profile Labour First Minister in Wales or Scotland being considered a future UK party leader'
Just waiting for the ambulance to arrive now my sides have split.
To be PM all you have to do is command a majority in the House of Commons. You actually don't have to be in it.
I wasn't thinking about the constitutional possibility (though I think Westminster would never wear it), more that Labour sees a move to Westminster from Holyrood or Cardiff as a promotion, and anyone left behind as C List. Even considering a list of past Labour FMs in Scotland as possible UK Leaders, Dewar - extremely unlikely, McLeish - even more unlikely, McConnell - never. As for subsequent candidates Gray and Lamont, well...
Paradoxically by overstating Mandela's importance it diminishes what he really did achieve.
What has struck me is that the people who didn't know Mandela personally are the most over the top — I've heard people say there were blessed to be alive at the same time as Mandela — and the people who did know him have freely admitted that he wasn't really the cuddly father of the nation figure, but a wily politician willing to use all means to achieve his aims.
Harding's wrong. Mandela was the most significant statesman since the Big Bang.
(Zzzzzzzzzzzz....)
Didn't he create the Big Bang? I'm sure one of his tears fell onto the floor of his prison cell, and in bursting created all matter and energy in the universe? That was the power of the man.
I did write in my piece the other day that Mandela was, like Roman emperors of old, literally deified.
I just don't see how someone who is not an MP can be leader of his party. If Boris wants to be Tory leader he needs to become an MP and stand for election. I'm sceptical as to whether the skills that have made him a broadly successful Mayor are necessarily those needed for a party leader, let alone a PM.
But he definitely isn't suitable if he thinks that the rules should be changed simply to accommodate him.
Hitler was the political equivalent of J R R Tolkien; discuss.
Hitler (up to about 1941) was a lesson in good management. Build a great team, offer them help when they need it (i.e. my budget for this year is £X), stop them from aguing too much, and let them get on with it. Don't interfere in the minutiae.
If only we could all imprison and kill those who were not buying our products!
"the most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
This man is the BBC's news director...????
FFS.
I told you, it's like a kind of Diana-death for politicised lefties. A collective madness.
Although the irony of that, which only struck me these last few days, is that Mandela was a One Nation conservative. Sure, he worked with communists and all sorts in opposition but then when you have no rights you take what you can get. His philosophy in government on the other hand, was marked by inclusion and gradualism.
Paradoxically by overstating Mandela's importance it diminishes what he really did achieve. What he did - by showing such grace despite what happened to him and his people and by extending forgiveness and friendship to his people's oppressors - was remarkable and rare and contributed much to South Africa's largely peaceful transition from apartheid.
The OTT statements about him being the greatest for the last century etc are so ridiculous that they detract from what made him worthy of celebration. And they're silly too - even the greatest of men have flaws and have made mistakes - and Mandela was no exception to that rule. A more intelligent appraisal would be more sensible and fitting than this rush to turn him into some sort of secular saint and the rest of us into worshippers at a shrine.
I misread Mandela as Mandelson in your post up to "and by extending forgiveness and friendship" which was quite funny.
Indeed!
The odd thing is that Mandelson, behind the scenes, did a great deal to help the Omagh families in their campaign to bring the bombers to justice, even after he stopped being NI secretary. It was a noble act in its way and not something he has ever boasted about and is something which shows him in a better light than he is normally shown.
Hitler was the political equivalent of J R R Tolkien; discuss.
Hitler (up to about 1941) was a lesson in good management. Build a great team, offer them help when they need it (i.e. my budget for this year is £X), stop them from aguing too much, and let them get on with it. Don't interfere in the minutiae.
If only we could all imprison those who were not buying our products!
The BBC have those tools - yet they are still more Gordon Brown than Adolf..
I do hope your editor at the Telegraph allows your post to go online SeanT. After today's awful coverage of Mandela's death it would be very poignant.
There is no doubt that Mandela was a great man and brought about an end to a racist regime, but for the TV stations to say he was the singular best statesman of the past century is just ridiculous and belittles the achievements of all the people who defeated Nazi Germany and Marxism across Europe which was more damaging than Apartheid. I also doubt Mandela himself would claim to be at the top, given how humble he was.
It's like the news editors are all trying to outdo themselves on how respectful and upset they can be about it.
I agree with those who say that no new leader of the tories will have credibility unless she has beaten Boris. The first moment of difficulty and her leadership would be under question, particularly if Boris does decide to return to the Commons.
If Cameron were to lose in 2015 and the country is not completely evacuated thereafter there is no reason why he could not hang on for months or up to a year to allow the leadership election to take place. Brown could have done a similar service for Labour if he was not so self obsessed. This seems to me the likely outcome if Cameron should lose. If he wins I doubt Boris will return to the Commons and he will look for some sort of international post.
Either way Boris is not the next PM. I really cannot see a path for that outcome at all.
"the most significant statesman of the last 100 years".
This man is the BBC's news director...????
FFS.
I told you, it's like a kind of Diana-death for politicised lefties. A collective madness.
Although the irony of that, which only struck me these last few days, is that Mandela was a One Nation conservative. Sure, he worked with communists and all sorts in opposition but then when you have no rights you take what you can get. His philosophy in government on the other hand, was marked by inclusion and gradualism.
"Inclusion and Gradualism"
In short, the exact opposite of this year's other notable political death. Although, that said, she did work with Ted Heath in opposition, so at least they have that have that in common.
Boris will be able to stand. It is unthinkable that a leadership election could take place without him, when he would be back in Parliament in short order sitting on the backbenches and depriving whoever had won the election of legitimacy. He needs to be beaten fair and square. No one who aspires to lead the Conservative party, as opposed to win the leadership election, will stand in the way of a rule change. But it won't take place until the occasion arises.
I agree... as if the Tories will allow red tape to stop their most popular politician being leader.
He has won London twice that should be enough anyway.. rules are for fools!
...& if he stands he will win and the Tories will shorten up to win the next GE
Bullingdon Schmullingdon, Eton Shmeton, the public love him
Purely on my spur of the moment analysis, Theresa May is surely too unattractive and evil looking to win an election? Looks like a Quentin Blake illustration....
1.Britain is a parliamentary democracy. 2.Boris isn't the obvious successor anyway, for a myriad of reasons which obviously includes 1.
1. So is Germany, for example, which routinely draws leaders from its regional parliaments. 2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
I'd love the Tories to keep electing Bullingdon chums as leader
Are there enough people in the Uk who are as rabidly and morbidly obsessed with class as you to make that an issue ?
Paradoxically by overstating Mandela's importance it diminishes what he really did achieve. What he did - by showing such grace despite what happened to him and his people and by extending forgiveness and friendship to his people's oppressors - was remarkable and rare and contributed much to South Africa's largely peaceful transition from apartheid.
The OTT statements about him being the greatest for the last century etc are so ridiculous that they detract from what made him worthy of celebration. And they're silly too - even the greatest of men have flaws and have made mistakes - and Mandela was no exception to that rule. A more intelligent appraisal would be more sensible and fitting than this rush to turn him into some sort of secular saint and the rest of us into worshippers at a shrine.
I misread Mandela as Mandelson in your post up to "and by extending forgiveness and friendship" which was quite funny.
Indeed!
The odd thing is that Mandelson, behind the scenes, did a great deal to help the Omagh families in their campaign to bring the bombers to justice, even after he stopped being NI secretary. It was a noble act in its way and not something he has ever boasted about and is something which shows him in a better light than he is normally shown.
Mandela and Mandelson have suspiciously similar names. Are they by any chance related?
I'm mildly surprised that nobody has commented yet on today's big domestic political story - the collapse of the government's attempt to privatise arms procurement. Granted, it was probably always likely to happen but the fact that it has should be noted.
1.Britain is a parliamentary democracy. 2.Boris isn't the obvious successor anyway, for a myriad of reasons which obviously includes 1.
1. So is Germany, for example, which routinely draws leaders from its regional parliaments. 2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
Believing that the constitution should be changed because William Hill make Boris favourite is a little odd.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, as Boris would no doubt say. William Hill believe the Constitution will be changed because Boris is the favourite, not the other way around. (plus some free money for them of course)
I think Theresa May will have such a lead among the MPs and cabinet she would win.
1.Britain is a parliamentary democracy. 2.Boris isn't the obvious successor anyway, for a myriad of reasons which obviously includes 1.
1. So is Germany, for example, which routinely draws leaders from its regional parliaments. 2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
I'd love the Tories to keep electing Bullingdon chums as leader
Are there enough people in the Uk who are as rabidly and morbidly obsessed with class as you to make that an issue ?
1.Britain is a parliamentary democracy. 2.Boris isn't the obvious successor anyway, for a myriad of reasons which obviously includes 1.
1. So is Germany, for example, which routinely draws leaders from its regional parliaments. 2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
I'd love the Tories to keep electing Bullingdon chums as leader
Are there enough people in the Uk who are as rabidly and morbidly obsessed with class as you to make that an issue ?
Cam being PM, Boris being mayor says not.
Tell us about Ibrox again
P15 W15.
The results in the Lidl Under 15s League aren't really relevant
Neither are the choices of school Boris went to - unless you are ridden with class envy.
It could be the 'Candle in the Wind' for all the lost souls of 2013.
Diana and Nelson enjoying a cup of tea in the afterlife, poured of course by the blessed Margaret. That's enough to bring warmth to the coldest of hearts.
I'm mildly surprised that nobody has commented yet on today's big domestic political story - the collapse of the government's attempt to privatise arms procurement. Granted, it was probably always likely to happen but the fact that it has should be noted.
I'm mildly surprised that nobody has commented yet on today's big domestic political story - the collapse of the government's attempt to privatise arms procurement. Granted, it was probably always likely to happen but the fact that it has should be noted.
"THE Guardian newspaper has launched its annual appeal to make you feel dreadful about Christmas.
Unveiling a miserable George Monbiot article about how having nice things is bad, editor Alan Rusbridger pledged to ‘gnaw at our readers’ consciences like they will gnaw at the bones of horribly abused poultry’.
The paper is lining up a series of nasty, depressing yuletide features including excerpts from Jonathan Freedland’s new book It is Not a Wonderful Life, Polly Toynbee’s Guide to Turning a Nice Christmas Dinner into an Argument About Universal Benefits and a Nick Cohen article about reactionary toys made by lovely, tiny dogs.
Rusbridger said: “The only good thing capitalism has ever done is to turn Christmas into a secular indulgence instead of a credulous rehashing of manipulative, Iron Age fairy stories.
“We’re going to put that on a tea towel that you can give to your gran.”"
"THE Guardian newspaper has launched its annual appeal to make you feel dreadful about Christmas.
Unveiling a miserable George Monbiot article about how having nice things is bad, editor Alan Rusbridger pledged to ‘gnaw at our readers’ consciences like they will gnaw at the bones of horribly abused poultry’.
The paper is lining up a series of nasty, depressing yuletide features including excerpts from Jonathan Freedland’s new book It is Not a Wonderful Life, Polly Toynbee’s Guide to Turning a Nice Christmas Dinner into an Argument About Universal Benefits and a Nick Cohen article about reactionary toys made by lovely, tiny dogs.
Rusbridger said: “The only good thing capitalism has ever done is to turn Christmas into a secular indulgence instead of a credulous rehashing of manipulative, Iron Age fairy stories.
“We’re going to put that on a tea towel that you can give to your gran.”"
Plus revelations that the intelligence services have been intercepting emails and letters to Santa.
I know everyone is proud of their kids but please ,as a new year resolution , could we all resolve to post less photographs and stories about our offspring on Facebook!! When I was about 8 , the last thing I would have wanted was for my photo of me being in some daft school play to be put on the internet for my mum's friends to 'like' and make comments like 'how sweet' RANT OVER
Comments
I see the Tele allowed James Delingpole to do a Mandela blog but not SeanT...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100249908/peter-hain-mp-mandela-owed-him-everything/
"Hain doesn't like to mention it much but in his activist youth in South Africa he was almost singlehandedly responsible for overthrowing the Apartheid regime and became one of Mandela's most trusted confidantes."
https://history.blog.gov.uk/2013/04/24/prime-ministers-in-the-house-of-lords/
He regularly tops their preference for next leader
From July 2012
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2012/07/boris-johnson-emerges-as-grassroots-early-favourite-to-be-next-tory-leader.html
From August 2013
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2013/08/gove-now-almost-level-with-boris-as-party-members-favourite-for-next-tory-leader.html
Given Parliament is no longer either Sovereign or Supreme arguably it should also be open to those who represent the people at the most supreme representative level as well. After all if the Tories are so enthralled with Brussels why deny their representatives there access to the top job?
After all if UKIP can do it why would the Tories or the other establishment parties not want to?
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 9m
Cuban President Raul Castro & US President Obama shake hands - & other #MandelaMemorial photos http://bbc.in/18R19Sl pic.twitter.com/RzbVWfS5g5
We're the ones who elected IDS*, so anything is possible.
*I voted for Ken Clarke.
So much for Labour and gender politics and being on the side of women!
I remember my father telling me about those protests that used to follow the touring springboks around Wales in the 1960s.
At one match (against Swansea?) the club apparently took the measure of recruiting 'stewards' from local junior rugby clubs to ring the pitch.
There was a pitch invasion, at which point the 'stewards' went into action. Protestors (including women) were hit by full blooded no-quarter-given tackles. Some were hurled back into the terraces by their hair, according to my father.
Gruesome, but I guess these were different days.
Leaving with only two central midfielders for a while, Lucas and Joe Allen.
Happy Days for Spurs on Sunday.
He ain't eligible.
Douglas-Home became PM in 1963, btw...
HuffPostUKPolitics @HuffPostUKPol 3m
DCMS announces the first same-sex weddings will be able to take place on Saturday 22 March 2014.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/which-constituency-will-boris-johnson-stand-in
It's hard to be a Machiavelli without being a good orator. And Mandelson was one of the best the UK had.
Really? No wonder the BBC is in such a mess.
(Zzzzzzzzzzzz....)
De Gaulle, Gorbachov, Kohl, Thatcher, Lloyd George, Reagan, Adenhauner, Deng, Ataturk...where does the list stop.
Harding needs to read more.
This man is the BBC's news director...????
FFS.
- Boris quoted in The Independent, 17 June 2004.
Whilst a tremendously important figure, that does rather neglect the likes of Caesar, Camillus, Trajan, Hadrian, Constantine, Alexius Comnenus etc etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Furius_Camillus
Deng undoubtedly did more to lift millions out of poverty. Gorbachov more to release people from oppression.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xht9hz_vintage-streaker-erica-roe_redband
It is complete balderdash. It is an inverted pyramid of piffle. It is all completely untrue and ludicrous conjecture. I am amazed people can write this drivel.
- Boris quoted in the Mail on Sunday, 7 November 2004.
(only kidding David H!)
I wonder if they even polled for viewing figures when their tissue festival was going on 24/7.
But doesn't make him the greatest statesman.
Certainly up there. Did incredible job of coaxing a very reluctant super power into saving democracy.
For me the most 'significant' statesman in the last 100 years is Adolf Hitler. By a street.
He moved more mountains than all the rest put together. In the cause of evil of course, but there it is. And its also true that without him, none of it would have happened.
Bit like Satan in Paradise lost. Pure evil, but didn;t half cause some ructions.
The thing that was really annoying is that, given they had two channels, they appeared to be broadcasting the same feed. Anyone wanting to pay their respects by viewing got the same gurning, preening presenters orgasming at being at the event. One channel should have played the feed interrupted whilst the other had presenters giving context.
Cue the usual idiots popping up when anyone has the temerity to criticise the BBC.
Just waiting for the ambulance to arrive now my sides have split.
That is a properly bonkers statement by Harding.
Communist Russia was already starting to rot on the vine before Barbarossa. The Wehrmacht effectively trained it up through the intensest competition. And then Germany crumbled, allowing Stalin to create a vast bloc.
The soviet bloc would not have happened without Hitler, or the cold war, or the EU.
Up until the 1990s, the entire world was shaped by the reaction to the monstrous evil he created.
The OTT statements about him being the greatest for the last century etc are so ridiculous that they detract from what made him worthy of celebration. And they're silly too - even the greatest of men have flaws and have made mistakes - and Mandela was no exception to that rule. A more intelligent appraisal would be more sensible and fitting than this rush to turn him into some sort of secular saint and the rest of us into worshippers at a shrine.
Where exactly in "Marxism" does it advocate reducing other races to "untermench" ?
2. Yes, he is. And you and Labour are well aware of his electoral record in London, which is, I imagine, one reason why you don't want him anywhere near the leadership of the Tories. Of course, it could go spectacularly wrong for Boris were he to be leader but then it could go the other way too.
I don;t know if you've read the Ian Kershaw Hitler biog, its an amazing tome.
Kershaw keeps wanting to pour contempt on his subject, but that attitude simply does not square with the sheer scale of the evil Hitler perpetrated (which Kershaw portrays in meticulous detail).
David Smith @dsmitheconomics 4m
National Institute projects a 0,8% rise in GDP in the three months to November following today's industrial production figures.
But he definitely isn't suitable if he thinks that the rules should be changed simply to accommodate him.
Maybe an MEP could be PM. What a shit storm that would cause!
The odd thing is that Mandelson, behind the scenes, did a great deal to help the Omagh families in their campaign to bring the bombers to justice, even after he stopped being NI secretary. It was a noble act in its way and not something he has ever boasted about and is something which shows him in a better light than he is normally shown.
There is no doubt that Mandela was a great man and brought about an end to a racist regime, but for the TV stations to say he was the singular best statesman of the past century is just ridiculous and belittles the achievements of all the people who defeated Nazi Germany and Marxism across Europe which was more damaging than Apartheid. I also doubt Mandela himself would claim to be at the top, given how humble he was.
It's like the news editors are all trying to outdo themselves on how respectful and upset they can be about it.
If Cameron were to lose in 2015 and the country is not completely evacuated thereafter there is no reason why he could not hang on for months or up to a year to allow the leadership election to take place. Brown could have done a similar service for Labour if he was not so self obsessed. This seems to me the likely outcome if Cameron should lose. If he wins I doubt Boris will return to the Commons and he will look for some sort of international post.
Either way Boris is not the next PM. I really cannot see a path for that outcome at all.
In short, the exact opposite of this year's other notable political death. Although, that said, she did work with Ted Heath in opposition, so at least they have that have that in common.
He has won London twice that should be enough anyway.. rules are for fools!
...& if he stands he will win and the Tories will shorten up to win the next GE
Bullingdon Schmullingdon, Eton Shmeton, the public love him
Purely on my spur of the moment analysis, Theresa May is surely too unattractive and evil looking to win an election? Looks like a Quentin Blake illustration....
Cam being PM, Boris being mayor says not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25321111
I think Theresa May will have such a lead among the MPs and cabinet she would win.
As the Conservatives are 9-4 next mayor winning party that makes him an implied 17/20 on to run again in 2015 for mayor.
For one thing it sounds creepy now he is dead
John Prescott @johnprescott 7m
So Twitter. Shall we try and make Free Nelson Mandela the Xmas No 1? http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/whats-on/music-nightlife-news/watch-free-nelson-mandela-running-6390513 …
Diana and Nelson enjoying a cup of tea in the afterlife, poured of course by the blessed Margaret. That's enough to bring warmth to the coldest of hearts.
"THE Guardian newspaper has launched its annual appeal to make you feel dreadful about Christmas.
Unveiling a miserable George Monbiot article about how having nice things is bad, editor Alan Rusbridger pledged to ‘gnaw at our readers’ consciences like they will gnaw at the bones of horribly abused poultry’.
The paper is lining up a series of nasty, depressing yuletide features including excerpts from Jonathan Freedland’s new book It is Not a Wonderful Life, Polly Toynbee’s Guide to Turning a Nice Christmas Dinner into an Argument About Universal Benefits and a Nick Cohen article about reactionary toys made by lovely, tiny dogs.
Rusbridger said: “The only good thing capitalism has ever done is to turn Christmas into a secular indulgence instead of a credulous rehashing of manipulative, Iron Age fairy stories.
“We’re going to put that on a tea towel that you can give to your gran.”"
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers 3m
Michelle O looking properly unimpressed by the Dave/Barack/Helle selfie #mandela http://twitpic.com/do92rk
When I was about 8 , the last thing I would have wanted was for my photo of me being in some daft school play to be put on the internet for my mum's friends to 'like' and make comments like 'how sweet' RANT OVER