I genuinely hope so! Lashings of humble pie to be consumed by Trump after a Biden win.
He will have to get used to joining Jimmy Carter, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison and John Adams as the only US Presidents to fail to win re election after only 1 term of their party in the White House if he does.
Cleveland did come back to beat Harrison in the 1892 election and get a delayed second term but he had won the popular vote in 1888
Putting John Adams on this list is VERY questionable, as he was was Federalist seen as continuation of Washington administration.
Washington was technically an Independent and moderated between the Federalists and Democratic Republicans in his Cabinet.
He was succeeded by John Adams, the first official Federalist President, who lost his battle for re election in 1800 to Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican.
The Whigs (the ancestral party of today's Republican Party) also held the Presidency for only one term from 1840 to 1844 and 1848 to 1852 but neither William Harrison or Zachary Taylor sought re election
Your analysis of Washington as an independent moderator is NOT correct for his SECOND term, the one that preceded election of John Adams.
Read up re: Flexner, Malone and many other authorities based on primary sources.
Washington was never a member of the Federalist Party and did not stand for the party in either of his elections in 1788 and 1792, he stood above party, Adams was the first Federalist Party presidential candidate and won only a single term
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
Agree with your 1st paragraph. As per endgame for Chamberlain & Eden.
Partly agree with 2nd para, and mostly re: 3rd para. Because while political linkage and electoral dependency of MPs with/to PM has increased, they still retain keen instinct to look out for #1 as opposed to #10.
Thatcher is the Poster Maiden for the ability of even the New Model Tory Party to chuck a beloved leader overboard IF and WHEN it become clear that NOT doing so is more dangerous to their own dingy.
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
Agree with your 1st paragraph. As per endgame for Chamberlain & Eden.
Partly agree with 2nd para, and mostly re: 3rd para. Because while political linkage and electoral dependency of MPs with/to PM has increased, they still retain keen instinct to look out for #1 as opposed to #10.
Thatcher is the Poster Maiden for the ability of even the New Model Tory Party to chuck a beloved leader overboard IF and WHEN it become clear that NOT doing so is more dangerous to their own dingy.
The Conservative Party is an absolute monarchy moderated by regicide.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
All the Conservatives were kicked out by BoZo during Cummings first purge (there will be another along shortly)
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
I still think there is a fair chance Boris will walk. He does not seem to be enjoying the job, and while he is not a wealthy man, will have seen how much even Theresa May is trousering on the rubber chicken circuit. Churchill, as Boris will know, was also often insolvent in office (despite, like Boris, receiving a constant stream of book revenues) and needed to be bailed out by rich friends.
I do though share some of your doubts about Boris being forced out against his will. Paradoxically, although the rise and rise of Rishi Sunak makes it easier for backbenchers and even new backbenchers to replace one poll-winner with another, the likelihood it will be the Chancellor who wins the leadership election makes it less likely that any ambitious senior minister (that rhymes with mauve) or ex-minister (that rhymes with, erm, let's say hunt) will move against the PM.
What we do know from Conley's briefing is that he had a fever on Thursday but continued with his engagements into the evening. Conley's denial that he had received oxygen today or yesterday obviously suggests he even needed oxygen that day. In the clips of him speaking on THursday, he sounds hoarse and congested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27lmd1fnoBk
Oh well, perhaps as an irreducibly lower middle class person, I will need to find a new home, although I'm not too certain where, in partisan or political, terms that will be.
As an adherent of electoral reform, on which I decided long before any partisan choice, where do I go?
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
In Thatcher's case, that took a long time and despite the fact a large proportion disliked her for her "common" background. I don't think the new intake will give him that long. I also disagree they need BoJo - yes, BoJo was a factor but only because he was prepared to say "let's get Brexit done" straight out. Another major factor was many ex-Labour voters feeling left behind by Labour. BoJo has little to do with that.
I think he is out next year. My money is on someone who appeals to the "authoritarian" side like Priti Patel. Rishi is too City-linked.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
I still think there is a fair chance Boris will walk. He does not seem to be enjoying the job, and while he is not a wealthy man, will have seen how much even Theresa May is trousering on the rubber chicken circuit. Churchill, as Boris will know, was also often insolvent in office (despite, like Boris, receiving a constant stream of book revenues) and needed to be bailed out by rich friends.
I do though share some of your doubts about Boris being forced out against his will. Paradoxically, although the rise and rise of Rishi Sunak makes it easier for backbenchers and even new backbenchers to replace one poll-winner with another, the likelihood it will be the Chancellor who wins the leadership election makes it less likely that any ambitious senior minister (that rhymes with mauve) or ex-minister (that rhymes with, erm, let's say hunt) will move against the PM.
There's an awful lot of truth in the comment of whoever it was who said that Johnson has always wanted to become PM, and has always wanted to have been PM... but really can't be bothered with the bit in the middle.
But I don't think he'll walk. A one year Premiership (or two, or three, or four) would simply be seen as a failure by posterity, and he knows that. I could see him walking if he gets another term, but struggle to see it earlier.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
I`m hoping that @Isam had read yet another superb Matthew Parris article in The Times today.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
The time when the Tories switched from being a party which got the largest share of its support from the upper middle class to getting the largest share of its support from the skilled working class was 2017 to 2019 (in 2017 its voteshares were tied amongst those groups and by 2019 it got a higher share from the skilled working class than the upper middle class).
I note TSE you started voting LD in 2017 and 2019 as it is a party which still gets its highest share of the vote from the upper middle class, clearly you could not possibly vote for a party mainly supported by plebs!
Trumps doc is supposed to be making an update soon
"Dr Conley who trained as an osteopath ..."
How do we get out of this dystopia?
Osteopaths are more known for their "bedside manner", aren't they?
It’s not uncommon for doctors here in the US to train as DO rather than MD as the course is a bit shorter and cheaper.
DOs tend also to approach treatment more holistically than do MDs.
Forgive my comment if ill-informed. Osteopath always conjurs up Profumo Affair for me.
The Profumo Affair's osteopath, Dr Stephen Ward, actually was a man who'd qualified in America with one of these DO degrees. The GMC did not recognise the American medical qualification, though, which is why Ward could call himself a doctor but not practise as one (unless he'd returned to America, of course).
It may well be the reason Ward was such a good osteopath (treating a fair slice of the British Establishment) was precisely that he did have full medical knowledge so could advise and even refer patients when appropriate.
I genuinely hope so! Lashings of humble pie to be consumed by Trump after a Biden win.
He will have to get used to joining Jimmy Carter, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison and John Adams as the only US Presidents to fail to win re election after only 1 term of their party in the White House if he does.
Cleveland did come back to beat Harrison in the 1892 election and get a delayed second term but he had won the popular vote in 1888
Putting John Adams on this list is VERY questionable, as he was was Federalist seen as continuation of Washington administration.
Washington was technically an Independent and moderated between the Federalists and Democratic Republicans in his Cabinet.
He was succeeded by John Adams, the first official Federalist President, who lost his battle for re election in 1800 to Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican.
The Whigs (the ancestral party of today's Republican Party) also held the Presidency for only one term from 1840 to 1844 and 1848 to 1852 but neither William Harrison or Zachary Taylor sought re election
Your analysis of Washington as an independent moderator is NOT correct for his SECOND term, the one that preceded election of John Adams.
Read up re: Flexner, Malone and many other authorities based on primary sources.
Washington was never a member of the Federalist Party and did not stand for the party in either of his elections in 1788 and 1792, he stood above party, Adams was the first Federalist Party presidential candidate and won only a single term
"Techically" Washington never joined the "Federalist Party" which IIRC never did getting around to issuing party membership cards. AND you are correct that he saw his role AND historic significance as being above politics.
Hence he was drafted as Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army (without salary, though with a generous expense account) and after the war never announced or campaigned for President of the United States.
BUT beyond that, your assertions of his non-Federalism are swimming against the high tide of historical evidence.
Which is not to say that the Father of His Country was a political hack. Far from it. And like most of the rest of the Founding Fathers, GW has a strong aversion to "faction" based on British & colonial experience.
But when, despite his own & other efforts, American politics polarized during his presidency between Federalists (Adams) and Republicans (Jefferson) there was ZERO doubt as to what side he was on.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Any chance of a proper link?
Heard of copy and paste?
The link seems to be to a file on your hard drive.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
The time when the Tories switched from being a party which got the largest share of its support from the upper middle class to getting the largest share of its support from the skilled working class was 2017 to 2019 (in 2017 its voteshares were tied amongst those groups and by 2019 it got a higher share from the skilled working class than the upper middle class).
I note TSE you started voting LD in 2017 and 2019 as it is a party which still gets its highest share of the vote from the upper middle class, clearly you could not possibly vote for a party mainly supported by plebs!
As if I'm a member of the upper middle classes.
My votes in 2017 and 2019 were to stop a Corbynite becoming my MP, nothing more, nothing less.
I`m hoping that @Isam had read yet another superb Matthew Parris article in The Times today.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
I can't agree more.
As a voter my first MP was the wonderfully patrician Peter Temple-Morris. A modest yet intellectual feudal Tory, who of course bravely and heroically crossed the floor to rid himself of all those grammar school upstarts.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
I can't agree more.
As a voter my first MP was the wonderfully patrician Peter Temple-Morris. A modest yet intellectual feudal Tory, who of course bravely and heroically crossed the floor to rid himself of all those grammar school upstarts.
Never mind grammar school, they even let former comprehensive school pupils become Tory MPs these days, I note the Malvern College educated Temple Morris defected to Labour, then led by the Fettes educated Blair, when the Tories had Hague as their leader, the first Tory leader who went to comprehensive school
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
I`m hoping that @Isam had read yet another superb Matthew Parris article in The Times today.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
I still think there is a fair chance Boris will walk. He does not seem to be enjoying the job, and while he is not a wealthy man, will have seen how much even Theresa May is trousering on the rubber chicken circuit. Churchill, as Boris will know, was also often insolvent in office (despite, like Boris, receiving a constant stream of book revenues) and needed to be bailed out by rich friends.
I do though share some of your doubts about Boris being forced out against his will. Paradoxically, although the rise and rise of Rishi Sunak makes it easier for backbenchers and even new backbenchers to replace one poll-winner with another, the likelihood it will be the Chancellor who wins the leadership election makes it less likely that any ambitious senior minister (that rhymes with mauve) or ex-minister (that rhymes with, erm, let's say hunt) will move against the PM.
There's an awful lot of truth in the comment of whoever it was who said that Johnson has always wanted to become PM, and has always wanted to have been PM... but really can't be bothered with the bit in the middle.
But I don't think he'll walk. A one year Premiership (or two, or three, or four) would simply be seen as a failure by posterity, and he knows that. I could see him walking if he gets another term, but struggle to see it earlier.
Churchill was a one-term PM (no-one remembers the 50s). By next summer Boris will have ticked off Brexit, vanquished Covid-19 (as new vaccines and drugs will be coming into use), rescued the economy and begun the reconstruction of Britain. Ideal time to walk away.
Go out at the top before Brexit is seen as a failure (and whether this is because all our food and toilet rolls are stuck in a Kent lorry park or because the eventual deal is attacked as BINO by Farage and the ERG does not matter for this purpose); leave before the bills fall due.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Stop it!
What about Michael Ancram?
And Douglas Hogg.
Ancram & Hogg were MPs the same time they were hereditaries.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
I can't agree more.
As a voter my first MP was the wonderfully patrician Peter Temple-Morris. A modest yet intellectual feudal Tory, who of course bravely and heroically crossed the floor to rid himself of all those grammar school upstarts.
Never mind grammar school, they even let former comprehensive school pupils become Tory MPs these days, I note the Malvern College educated Temple Morris defected to Labour, then led by the Fettes educated Blair, when the Tories had Hague as their leader, the first Tory leader who went to comprehensive school
Former Paris St-Germain striker Edinson Cavani is due to fly into England on Sunday to join Manchester United.
It could be a really good signing, worth an extra 15-20 goals per season for a striker who won't complain not starting every match and brings a lot of experience with him.
Only 34% of Conservative MPs have been to Oxbridge too, in 1997 it was 51% file:///home/chronos/u-a4ac0077cff3dec12ab65f91af1476ea4829487c/MyFiles/Downloads/CBP-7483%20(1).pdf
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
This briefing paper provides data on the gender, age, ethnicity and educational backgrounds of Members of Parliament elected at the 2019 General Election and how this has changed over time.
The 2019 intake's ethnicity and so on has not changed over time; they mean, of course, how it compares with previous generations. If there is a job going for someone to sub-edit straplines on Commons research papers, I'm available.
Plenty of journalists forgetting that White House press team, and medics have been very economical with the truth when a President is ill, indisposed or incapacitated.
Reagan assassination attempt, JFK's over use of painkillers, Eisenhower's hospital operations, Wilson's stroke spring to mind. The press may be wondering what is wrong with Trump, so too are other governments.
Has HMG been close to the truth about the health of The PM? After viewing Boris Johnson's interview with a Scottish journalist from yesterday, I did wonder how far he is from a full recovery. The real medics here, may offer pointers to recovery times and side effects of CV19, but at the moment we are all like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed horse manure.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Stop it!
What about Michael Ancram?
And Douglas Hogg.
Ancram & Hogg were MPs the same time they were hereditaries.
Michael Ancram was a top bloke. I met him in Brecon, at the business premises of Andy Powell's ( he of the golf cart on the M4 fame) parents.
I`m hoping that @Isam had read yet another superb Matthew Parris article in The Times today.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
Former Paris St-Germain striker Edinson Cavani is due to fly into England on Sunday to join Manchester United.
Did Manchester United not learn the lesson when Falcao didn't rock their world?
This looks like a free transfer and I don't think he'll be on a big salary.
He's going to be on £200k a week salary according to the journos.
That's not huge in Man United terms or even modern PL terms. It seems like a good punt to me, but I'd definitely have wanted a one year with an option for a second rather than a two year deal.
Genuine question: if Trump had followed almost exactly the same policies but been polite and reasonable throughout his term, and not a performance-art c**t, would he win a second term?
Genuine question: if Trump had followed almost exactly the same policies but been polite and reasonable throughout his term, and not a performance-art c**t, would he win a second term?
In some respects Trump has done some good things, eg the economy has grown, inequality has shrunk, he has focused on reviving decaying manufacturing areas and he has not get the US involved in any new wars and reached out to Kim Jong Un to try and bring peace in Korea.
However on the negative side he has done nothing on tackling racism in the police and elsewhere, nothing about climate change and has not effectively tackled Covid so who knows
Does the US really want four more years of this bunch of clowns ?
Well only one party in the last 100 years has lost the White House after only 1 term, the Democrats in 1980 when Carter lost to Reagan, so historically the odds still favour Trump even if Biden is ahead
You have played this sleight of hand before. You exclude Ford and Bush Snr even though the former never won a presidential election and Bush lost after one term, but that to you does not count because Reagan won two elections before him.
Genuine question: if Trump had followed almost exactly the same policies but been polite and reasonable throughout his term, and not a performance-art c**t, would he win a second term?
Yes, he'd also have got more of his policies through.
Does the US really want four more years of this bunch of clowns ?
Well only one party in the last 100 years has lost the White House after only 1 term, the Democrats in 1980 when Carter lost to Reagan, so historically the odds still favour Trump even if Biden is ahead
You have played this sleight of hand before. You exclude Ford and Bush Snr even though the former never won a presidential election and Bush lost after one term, but that to you does not count because Reagan won two elections before him.
Correctly so, Ford ran for re election after 8 years of his party in the White House, Bush Snr ran after 12 years of his party in the White House, obviously neither were in the same category as a President running for re election after only 4 years of their party in the White House,
Only once since 1950 has a party won more than 8 years in the White House, that was when Bush Snr won in 1988 so the odds were against Ford and Bush Snr in all their presidential elections.
You have to go back to FDR and Truman to find a party winning more than 8 years in the White House before that
Former Paris St-Germain striker Edinson Cavani is due to fly into England on Sunday to join Manchester United.
Did Manchester United not learn the lesson when Falcao didn't rock their world?
This looks like a free transfer and I don't think he'll be on a big salary.
£210k / week
United fans are not happy, just more shit from the owners.
Don't get me wrong I wouldn't have him at Spurs, it's not a very ambitious signing. But in the race for 4th (which is where United are, they aren't in the title race) it could be exactly what is necessary.
Genuine question: if Trump had followed almost exactly the same policies but been polite and reasonable throughout his term, and not a performance-art c**t, would he win a second term?
No. There's quite a bit of truth in his attacks. The climate change lobby needed Trump in my view, but they're still asleep.
Not being quiet and reasonable is Trump's genius trick.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Stop it!
What about Michael Ancram?
And Douglas Hogg.
Ancram & Hogg were MPs the same time they were hereditaries.
Michael Ancram was a top bloke. I met him in Brecon, at the business premises of Andy Powell's ( he of the golf cart on the M4 fame) parents.
I'll just pick those names up.
Ancram plays a mean country guitar apparently. There must have been something (good) in the water drunk by that generation of Scottish Tories, what with Teddy Taylor being a huge Bob Marley fan.
I'm not a Tory supporter, and no fan of Boris Johnson, but I'm astonished by the reported hostility to Mr Johnson from within the Tory party.
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
The Tories are no longer the party of the wealthy upper middle class that is why, the upper middle class party is the LDs now, Tory MPs are increasingly from middle income backgrounds and state educated
In that case JRM is my favourite LD MP.
Well the only MP who was a hereditary Peer this century, Viscount Thurso, was a LD
Stop it!
What about Michael Ancram?
And Douglas Hogg.
Ancram & Hogg were MPs the same time they were hereditaries.
Michael Ancram was a top bloke. I met him in Brecon, at the business premises of Andy Powell's ( he of the golf cart on the M4 fame) parents.
I'll just pick those names up.
Yeah, Top Bloke. He saved our constituency from a fate worse than death (Gordon Brown) in the glorious year of 1979.
“The PM was in Exeter yesterday and was interviewed for our localTV news by an experienced political commentator. The PM was evasive, bumbling, poorly prepared and utterly unconvincing“
“Boris's dreadful performance on the Covid epidemic has let us all down badly“.
“This is just not the right time for Boris to be the PM. This calls for a skillset which even his most ardent supporters know he doesnt possess “
“Johnson is not PM material and never will be.”
“ Sadly, it is also fair to Boris whose inability to take soundings has led to this sorry state – and he is still heading farther into the quick sands. Poor country, poor people”
“ So Boris is past his shelf life. Who will replace him?”
“ don't think Boris is able to up his game. I can't believe he was promoted to prime minister”
There have always been a proportion of Conservatives who absolutely loathe Johnson as lazy, dissolute, not a real Tory, and not up to it. They are finding their voice again after being put in their box by his hefty election win, as his flaws have come to the fore in this crisis.
Now I basically agree with their analysis... but are they winning converts in the Conservative Party? I suspect not yet, and that it remains mainly people who always hated him but were temporarily silenced. The grassroots still like his style, and he's not faced any elections at which councillors lose seats, MPs get seriously nervous and so on.
His problem will be that the fundamental composition of Conservative MPs has changed, with a greater weighting from the former industrial areas. So this is not the Knights of the Shire of old who might have given BoJo a pass because he went to Eton and Oxford and with whom they felt they had something in common. As long as they get the vibes he has outlived his usefulness, he will be gone.
I actually think the reverse. The knights of the shire were loyal up to the point that they weren't. Differences were resolved in private, with public loyalty. But when patience was exhausted, the Party came first, and the leader was finished.
The new breed let off steam a bit but ultimately they owe Johnson personally, and need him even if he's tarnished - they aren't holding those seats with Jeremy Hunt or whatever, and ultimately have to lash themselves to the mast. I think when push comes to shove, that's what they'll do. Also, members have personal loyalty to him, and aren't readily going to let their MP cast him aside.
I ultimately think this "Johnson under pressure" stuff is for the birds. If he wants to - and he actually might not as he finds being PM a pain and it detracts from his social life - I think there is practically zero chance of him being eased out as party leader in the next five years. He'd either lose a general election or come under greater pressure with a reduced majority in a second full term.
I still think there is a fair chance Boris will walk. He does not seem to be enjoying the job, and while he is not a wealthy man, will have seen how much even Theresa May is trousering on the rubber chicken circuit. Churchill, as Boris will know, was also often insolvent in office (despite, like Boris, receiving a constant stream of book revenues) and needed to be bailed out by rich friends.
I do though share some of your doubts about Boris being forced out against his will. Paradoxically, although the rise and rise of Rishi Sunak makes it easier for backbenchers and even new backbenchers to replace one poll-winner with another, the likelihood it will be the Chancellor who wins the leadership election makes it less likely that any ambitious senior minister (that rhymes with mauve) or ex-minister (that rhymes with, erm, let's say hunt) will move against the PM.
There's an awful lot of truth in the comment of whoever it was who said that Johnson has always wanted to become PM, and has always wanted to have been PM... but really can't be bothered with the bit in the middle.
But I don't think he'll walk. A one year Premiership (or two, or three, or four) would simply be seen as a failure by posterity, and he knows that. I could see him walking if he gets another term, but struggle to see it earlier.
Churchill was a one-term PM (no-one remembers the 50s). By next summer Boris will have ticked off Brexit, vanquished Covid-19 (as new vaccines and drugs will be coming into use), rescued the economy and begun the reconstruction of Britain. Ideal time to walk away.
Go out at the top before Brexit is seen as a failure (and whether this is because all our food and toilet rolls are stuck in a Kent lorry park or because the eventual deal is attacked as BINO by Farage and the ERG does not matter for this purpose); leave before the bills fall due.
"Churchill was a one-term PM (no-one remembers the 50s)." That is a very bold claim. He did only win one general election though.
Plenty of journalists forgetting that White House press team, and medics have been very economical with the truth when a President is ill, indisposed or incapacitated.
Reagan assassination attempt, JFK's over use of painkillers, Eisenhower's hospital operations, Wilson's stroke spring to mind. The press may be wondering what is wrong with Trump, so too are other governments.
Has HMG been close to the truth about the health of The PM? After viewing Boris Johnson's interview with a Scottish journalist from yesterday, I did wonder how far he is from a full recovery. The real medics here, may offer pointers to recovery times and side effects of CV19, but at the moment we are all like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed horse manure.
Could also mention
> Grover Cleveland - operation for IIRC cancer that was NOT publicized
> Franklin Roosevelt - disability minimized for public, and totally misleading reports re; other health problems, including ones that ended up killing him just three months into his final term.
Genuine question: if Trump had followed almost exactly the same policies but been polite and reasonable throughout his term, and not a performance-art c**t, would he win a second term?
I`m hoping that @Isam had read yet another superb Matthew Parris article in The Times today.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
Yes, I saw that. It has been edited to make more sense, as @Chris pointed out it seemed to have some words mixed up
It also rather glosses over the opposite: that whatever happened, the anti-restrictions crowd (bearing in mind that if what we’ve had is “lockdown”, Sweden has also had lots of lockdown) would certainly say that it meant no restrictions had been necessary.
Due to a technical issue, which has now been resolved, there has been a delay in publishing a number of COVID-19 cases to the dashboard in England. This means the total reported over the coming days will include some additional cases from the period between 24 September and 1 October, increasing the number of cases reported.
"In Scotland, the orthodox philosophy of devolution — what Henry Hill calls ‘concessionary unionism’ — has meant devolutionists creating overly autonomous institutions, losing control of them to nationalists, responding by giving those institutions more autonomy, then being baffled when nationalists use it to advance full independence."
Comments
These are not the Conservatives of old, who, very politely, made it clear that I was not of the required class, they would never have turned on one of their own (unless he went and joined Labour or the Liberals).
Partly agree with 2nd para, and mostly re: 3rd para. Because while political linkage and electoral dependency of MPs with/to PM has increased, they still retain keen instinct to look out for #1 as opposed to #10.
Thatcher is the Poster Maiden for the ability of even the New Model Tory Party to chuck a beloved leader overboard IF and WHEN it become clear that NOT doing so is more dangerous to their own dingy.
I do though share some of your doubts about Boris being forced out against his will. Paradoxically, although the rise and rise of Rishi Sunak makes it easier for backbenchers and even new backbenchers to replace one poll-winner with another, the likelihood it will be the Chancellor who wins the leadership election makes it less likely that any ambitious senior minister (that rhymes with mauve) or ex-minister (that rhymes with, erm, let's say hunt) will move against the PM.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27lmd1fnoBk
As an adherent of electoral reform, on which I decided long before any partisan choice, where do I go?
I think he is out next year. My money is on someone who appeals to the "authoritarian" side like Priti Patel. Rishi is too City-linked.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/02/biden-campaign-vp-debate-safety-concerns-425485
I’d still be concerned about adequate ventilation.
But I don't think he'll walk. A one year Premiership (or two, or three, or four) would simply be seen as a failure by posterity, and he knows that. I could see him walking if he gets another term, but struggle to see it earlier.
Nice.
Executive summary: The Conservative Party has become less conservative since they started letting plebs become MPs.
It mirrors what Isam has been posting for a while, especially this week. I recall a post of his citing Popper`s non falsifiable hypothesis (in relation to the perceived effect of lockdown).
Parris writes:
"And this week my radio tells me that there`s "early evidence" that the new rule of six may be working because (the BBC reports) a survey suggests the rate of infection may be slowing. I see. So if the spread is slowing that`s reported as an argument for lockdown, is it? And if the spread were accelerating, would that be reported as an argument for more lockdown? No. It would be reported as an argument for more lockdown. "The science" has come up with a hypothesis that can never be falsified in any future event. Honestly, we might as well be ducking witches".
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-isnt-telling-us-the-full-story-on-covid-h2xm35pmh
I note TSE you started voting LD in 2017 and 2019 as it is a party which still gets its highest share of the vote from the upper middle class, clearly you could not possibly vote for a party mainly supported by plebs!
It may well be the reason Ward was such a good osteopath (treating a fair slice of the British Establishment) was precisely that he did have full medical knowledge so could advise and even refer patients when appropriate.
Hence he was drafted as Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army (without salary, though with a generous expense account) and after the war never announced or campaigned for President of the United States.
BUT beyond that, your assertions of his non-Federalism are swimming against the high tide of historical evidence.
Which is not to say that the Father of His Country was a political hack. Far from it. And like most of the rest of the Founding Fathers, GW has a strong aversion to "faction" based on British & colonial experience.
But when, despite his own & other efforts, American politics polarized during his presidency between Federalists (Adams) and Republicans (Jefferson) there was ZERO doubt as to what side he was on.
My votes in 2017 and 2019 were to stop a Corbynite becoming my MP, nothing more, nothing less.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVcPTAbrSAY
Upon further research one does not need to be a member of the House of Representatives to be the Speaker.
Now if Nancy Pelosi stands down it is possible for Hillary Clinton to be second in the line of succession.
As a voter my first MP was the wonderfully patrician Peter Temple-Morris. A modest yet intellectual feudal Tory, who of course bravely and heroically crossed the floor to rid himself of all those grammar school upstarts.
So Tories largest party but Starmer PM with SNP and LD support
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=39+&LIB=8&Brexit=2&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=20.5&SCOTLAB=17.4&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTBrexit=1.1&SCOTGreen=1.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=53.5&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019
https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6196985246001
Amazingly it has been the Dems look g to pass one and the GOP blocking.
Former Paris St-Germain striker Edinson Cavani is due to fly into England on Sunday to join Manchester United.
Go out at the top before Brexit is seen as a failure (and whether this is because all our food and toilet rolls are stuck in a Kent lorry park or because the eventual deal is attacked as BINO by Farage and the ERG does not matter for this purpose); leave before the bills fall due.
Ancram & Hogg were MPs the same time they were hereditaries.
Despite his annoying bluster he's had his good moments.
The world would be a poorer place without him, and I hope he gets better.
The 2019 intake's ethnicity and so on has not changed over time; they mean, of course, how it compares with previous generations. If there is a job going for someone to sub-edit straplines on Commons research papers, I'm available.
Reagan assassination attempt, JFK's over use of painkillers, Eisenhower's hospital operations, Wilson's stroke spring to mind. The press may be wondering what is wrong with Trump, so too are other governments.
Has HMG been close to the truth about the health of The PM? After viewing Boris Johnson's interview with a Scottish journalist from yesterday, I did wonder how far he is from a full recovery. The real medics here, may offer pointers to recovery times and side effects of CV19, but at the moment we are all like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed horse manure.
51.7% disapprove
45.0% approve
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/
I'll just pick those names up.
United fans are not happy, just more shit from the owners.
However on the negative side he has done nothing on tackling racism in the police and elsewhere, nothing about climate change and has not effectively tackled Covid so who knows
You exclude Ford and Bush Snr even though the former never won a presidential election and Bush lost after one term, but that to you does not count because Reagan won two elections before him.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/09/23/covid-19-vaccine-protocols-reveal-that-trials-are-designed-to-succeed/#581153545247
Only once since 1950 has a party won more than 8 years in the White House, that was when Bush Snr won in 1988 so the odds were against Ford and Bush Snr in all their presidential elections.
You have to go back to FDR and Truman to find a party winning more than 8 years in the White House before that
Not being quiet and reasonable is Trump's genius trick.
That is a very bold claim. He did only win one general election though.
> Grover Cleveland - operation for IIRC cancer that was NOT publicized
> Franklin Roosevelt - disability minimized for public, and totally misleading reports re; other health problems, including ones that ended up killing him just three months into his final term.
Infections up? “Restrictions don’t work, cancel them.”
Infections down? “Restrictions weren’t necessary, it would have come down without them, prove it wouldn’t, cancel them.”
We had fifty years of similar arguments around smoking.
Cleveland.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382795/President-Grover-Cleveland-secret-cancer-surgery-sea.html
Due to a technical issue, which has now been resolved, there has been a delay in publishing a number of COVID-19 cases to the dashboard in England. This means the total reported over the coming days will include some additional cases from the period between 24 September and 1 October, increasing the number of cases reported.
"In Scotland, the orthodox philosophy of devolution — what Henry Hill calls ‘concessionary unionism’ — has meant devolutionists creating overly autonomous institutions, losing control of them to nationalists, responding by giving those institutions more autonomy, then being baffled when nationalists use it to advance full independence."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/douglas-ross-the-union-should-not-be-an-afterthought-
'I'm not supposed to use the c-word but he's a c*nt who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.'
Disappointing he has nothing new or original to say