politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Important to remember that the role of CON MPs is to decide the shortlist – not who becomes next leader
The CON race has moved on fast following tonight’s first round of MP voting and the decision of Crabb to drop out and back May. The next stage is Thursday’s second round of MP voting to decide the shortlist of two that will go to the members.
Interesting tweet from The Sun's political editor.
The more I think about it, Stephen Crabb is the ideal candidate for working class Tories like myself that really warmed to David Cameron's One Nation Toryism
@tnewtondunn: Final thought on @scrabbmp: a thoroughly decent man who fought the right One Nation campaign and goes with dignity. He will be PM one day.
I suspect the Tories will want to avoid doing a Corbyn, and letting the members choose a candidate that lacks Parliamentary party support, but I'm more hopeful of a May v Gove final two
Interesting tweet from The Sun's political editor.
The more I think about it, Stephen Crabb is the ideal candidate for working class Tories like myself that really warmed to David Cameron's One Nation Toryism
@tnewtondunn: Final thought on @scrabbmp: a thoroughly decent man who fought the right One Nation campaign and goes with dignity. He will be PM one day.
He probably won't ever be PM.
Let's face it, there's more people spoken about in terms of "one day" they will be PM compared to the tiny number of people who actually do become PM...
As May and Gove have published their tax returns can we expect Andrea Leadsom's in the next 24 hours . Also I really cannot get around the thought of an ex banker as a conservative pm, it would be a gift wrapped in gold ribbon to labour
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
Virtually everyone buys lots of goods in dollars. It's what oil is priced in.
The cost of the average supermarket shop does not depend on the value of the dollar
ISTR we import most of our food.
Well that may encourage us to buy more British meat and fruit and vegetables again, no bad thing!
I've noticed I've spent most of the night responding to your posts, so I'll desist lest it be thought personal. But before I go, I need to point out that even during WWII, with the UK-resident population less than half what it is today, rationing, enormous investment in allotments, and a population well used to growing food in the garden, we were nowhere near food self-sufficiency.
On that last comment, we need to note that basic farm productivity has more than doubled since WW2, and therefore roughly kept pace with the population.
I just don't buy that given a choice May will decide she wants to go up against an experienced, heavyweight intellectual who was wildly popular amongst the membership until lay Tgursday rather than Andra Leadsom. Surely she believes she could destroy her.
Fed up with the Tory leadership contest? Can't believe how crazy leavers/remainers* are?
[*Delete as appropriate]
Here's a soothing article from a source more crazy than anything the above can offer. Even The Tap (pbuh) would wonder at its barking lunacy.
Sample quote: "Of course, official Washington will never admit that oil is non-biologic and that Earth is continually replenishing her supply, for that would produce a tsunami wave of repercussions, forcing the Illuminati to alter a great number of their coveted goals, some of which they are very close to completing."
EDIT: It finishes with "Copying and distributing this article in violation of the above notice is also a violation of God's moral law." Which is just awesome.
As May and Gove have published their tax returns can we expect Andrea Leadsom's in the next 24 hours . Also I really cannot get around the thought of an ex banker as a conservative pm, it would be a gift wrapped in gold ribbon to labour
I was surprised to how little May earns - she appears to have no other financial interests beyond Home Sec
The thread does presume that Leadsom is willing to publish all those tax returns....
I think she said she would if she got to the last two.
If you were her, weighing up the odds versus the grief, would you really?
/edit and, in answer to your point, no, she tried to play for time but didn't have the skills to evade the pressure from Marr, so got pushed into an unwilling yes. And at the time she probably imagined it just meant last year's.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
Virtually everyone buys lots of goods in dollars. It's what oil is priced in.
The cost of the average supermarket shop does not depend on the value of the dollar
ISTR we import most of our food.
Well that may encourage us to buy more British meat and fruit and vegetables again, no bad thing!
I've noticed I've spent most of the night responding to your posts, so I'll desist lest it be thought personal. But before I go, I need to point out that even during WWII, with the UK-resident population less than half what it is today, rationing, enormous investment in allotments, and a population well used to growing food in the garden, we were nowhere near food self-sufficiency.
On that last comment, we need to note that basic farm productivity has more than doubled since WW2, and therefore roughly kept pace with the population.
Although presumably the amount of land used for agriculture is declining: there are simply more economic uses for land in the UK. (Pheasant shooting, that kind of thing.)
The thread does presume that Leadsom is willing to publish all those tax returns....
I think she said she would if she got to the last two.
If you were her, weighing up the odds versus the grief, would you really?
/edit and, in answer to your point, no, she tried to play for time but didn't have the skills to evade the pressure from Marr, so got pushed into an unwilling yes. And at the time she probably imagined it just meant last year's.
No, after the Marr interview she modified publishing if she was in the last two.
Looking at the media I hope Andrea Leadsom is ready for the storm of questions coming her way from a print media that seems to be pro Theresa May and for the sun, Michael Gove.
In the wider context are we really going to replace the "Bullingdon Club" with an ex Banker for PM
Fed up with the Tory leadership contest? Can't believe how crazy leavers/remainers* are?
[*Delete as appropriate]
Here's a soothing article from a source more crazy than anything the above can offer. Even The Tap (pbuh) would wonder at its barking lunacy.
Sample quote: "Of course, official Washington will never admit that oil is non-biologic and that Earth is continually replenishing her supply, for that would produce a tsunami wave of repercussions, forcing the Illuminati to alter a great number of their coveted goals, some of which they are very close to completing."
EDIT: It finishes with "Copying and distributing this article in violation of the above notice is also a violation of God's moral law." Which is just awesome.
The abiogenic theory of oil was quite popular with a certain set of 'non traditional' economists until recently.
However, the whole shale gas / tight oil discoveries of the last decade have pretty much conclusively proved it wrong. Simply, if there is a formation where the hydrocarbons are largely immobile, and the deeper parts are gas and the shallower parts oil, it pretty much proves that natural gas (yes, I know there are two different types of natural gas) is what happens to oil which has been baked too long. If oil was constantly seeping up from underground, then surely you'd see gas near the surface (as it's more mobile than oil), and oil deeper down.
To be fair to him, Carney was the only man with a plan on the morning of 24th June, as everyone else was too shell shocked at the result of the referendum!
I sent my CV in to a professional CV firm the other day, curious to see what they'd do to it. They changed "Served on the Northern Ireland Select Committee during the period of the peace process" to "Transformed the economy and political system of Northern Ireland".
If that's how people write CVs, Carney can claim to have prevented the mooted collapse of Western civilisation and World War 3.
That's a great story Nick. A little polishing on the CV is normal, but it's a little bit more difficult when the job is in the public eye as much as that of an MP!
Interesting tweet from The Sun's political editor.
The more I think about it, Stephen Crabb is the ideal candidate for working class Tories like myself that really warmed to David Cameron's One Nation Toryism
@tnewtondunn: Final thought on @scrabbmp: a thoroughly decent man who fought the right One Nation campaign and goes with dignity. He will be PM one day.
Too bad Dave never followed through on one nation Toryism. Like most other of his pronouncements.
The thread does presume that Leadsom is willing to publish all those tax returns....
I think she said she would if she got to the last two.
If you were her, weighing up the odds versus the grief, would you really?
/edit and, in answer to your point, no, she tried to play for time but didn't have the skills to evade the pressure from Marr, so got pushed into an unwilling yes. And at the time she probably imagined it just meant last year's.
No, after the Marr interview she modified publishing if she was in the last two.
OK, so my original point stands - she appears to have some, being charitable, imaginative financial arrangements in her past. Her odds of actually winning this contest appear, still, to be relatively long. And her chances of getting a top job offer from May are higher now than they will be later. Plus the country is crying out for a resolution and some leadership.
So does she go forward to the member contest, or pull out? Surely it is a no brainer?
I am with tyson on this one. All of those people may be fine sober, but get them boozed up with an oval ball about the place and they turn into twats. Rugby is like Golf, a perfectly fine game played by twats.
Depends if they're happy drunks or angry drunks.
I'd be an angry drunk if I had to live in Dubai.
It's not that bad here, honest. Especially if you can afford to get drunk at £9 a pint!
Next two days are public holidays (Eid Mubarak to @TSE and other Muslims on PB) then I'm heading out of town for a couple of weeks to escape the heat and humidity!
Thank you, I'm not looking forward to it.
Is one of the two days a year I have to pretend to be a very good, devout Muslim
I'll guess you've not been fasting for the last month then!
If it's any consolation, there will be plenty of Christians posting here that get dragged to church at Easter and Christmas, think of it as doing your bit for the greater good of familial harmony.
To be fair to him, Carney was the only man with a plan on the morning of 24th June, as everyone else was too shell shocked at the result of the referendum!
I sent my CV in to a professional CV firm the other day, curious to see what they'd do to it. They changed "Served on the Northern Ireland Select Committee during the period of the peace process" to "Transformed the economy and political system of Northern Ireland".
If that's how people write CVs, Carney can claim to have prevented the mooted collapse of Western civilisation and World War 3.
That's a great story Nick. A little polishing on the CV is normal, but it's a little bit more difficult when the job is in the public eye as much as that of an MP!
Presumably they polish MP to be PM. So well done Nick!
@MrHarryCole: Uh oh. Leadsom's Wikipedia page last month Vs. it today. How odd. "Chief Investment Officer " changed to "Senior": https://t.co/QqyZfXWWr1
The thread does presume that Leadsom is willing to publish all those tax returns....
I think she said she would if she got to the last two.
If you were her, weighing up the odds versus the grief, would you really?
/edit and, in answer to your point, no, she tried to play for time but didn't have the skills to evade the pressure from Marr, so got pushed into an unwilling yes. And at the time she probably imagined it just meant last year's.
No, after the Marr interview she modified publishing if she was in the last two.
OK, so my original point stands - she appears to have some, being charitable, imaginative financial arrangements in her past. Her odds of actually winning this contest appear, still, to be relatively long. And her chances of getting a top job offer from May are higher now than they will be later. Plus the country is crying out for a resolution and some leadership.
So does she go forward to the member contest, or pull out? Surely it is a no brainer?
She clearly gave it some thought by modifying her answer to if she was in the last two. In May vs Leadsom, she has a shot at the top job.
That said, today's kerfuffle about her CV may see her MP backing shift to Gove.
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
Amusing story tonight. 108 people in England and Wales are suffering from an E.Coli outbreak as a result of eating mixed salad leaves. Only one Scottish person has been affected.
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
If there is a tie the ballot is re-run. If the same candidates tie again they are both eliminated unless that results in only one candidate remaining. In that situation the vote is re-run until there is no longer a tie. So, as there are only three candidates left, if Leadsom and Gove tie the ballot will be re-run. If it is still a tie it will be re-run repeatedly.
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
If there is a tie the ballot is re-run. If the same candidates tie again they are both eliminated unless that results in only one candidate remaining. In that situation the vote is re-run until there is no longer a tie. So, as there are only three candidates left, if Leadsom and Gove tie the ballot will be re-run. If it is still a tie it will be re-run repeatedly.
Thanks - a bit like a neverendum. Of course the most ironic outcome then would be for the leading candidate to lose so many votes to the tied candidates that she ends up finishing bottom.
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
If there is a tie the ballot is re-run. If the same candidates tie again they are both eliminated unless that results in only one candidate remaining. In that situation the vote is re-run until there is no longer a tie. So, as there are only three candidates left, if Leadsom and Gove tie the ballot will be re-run. If it is still a tie it will be re-run repeatedly.
Christ, I hate penalty shoot outs – more seriously, many thanks Mr Bridge for clarifying that.
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
They'll make up their own minds. But most of them did probably vote Leave.
Amusing story tonight. 108 people in England and Wales are suffering from an E.Coli outbreak as a result of eating mixed salad leaves. Only one Scottish person has been affected.
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
If she makes it on the ballot (not a given at this point) it only takes 51 names to depose her...
Just a small but important correction - the Conservative Party Members' Ballot for the new Leader closes on 9th September, a week later than originally announced.
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
Theresa pretty much has this sown up but if there's one thing that will do her in it's the quite obvious (and increasingly nasty) "Get Leadsom" campaign that is presumably being unleashed by Mrs May's team... Will the "establishment" over-play their hand AGAIN like they did in the referendum campaign?
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
That is my view too, hence why I backed Leadsom last night. Obviously I would be far happier with May
Ancram and Davis tied on the first vote in 2001. The chairman of the 1922 committee ordered a re-run and said that if it happened again both candidates would be eliminated. I think he was making the rules up on the hoof on that occasion:
If there is a tie the ballot is re-run. If the same candidates tie again they are both eliminated unless that results in only one candidate remaining. In that situation the vote is re-run until there is no longer a tie. So, as there are only three candidates left, if Leadsom and Gove tie the ballot will be re-run. If it is still a tie it will be re-run repeatedly.
Thanks - a bit like a neverendum. Of course the most ironic outcome then would be for the leading candidate to lose so many votes to the tied candidates that she ends up finishing bottom.
I'm starting to think that the Tory membership will go for Loathsome - too many of them will have been indoctrinated by this 'Must be a Leaver' / 'A Remainer will represent betrayal' thought control. Many too will look with envious eyes at UKIP's brand of frivolous political purity and will want to mimic, believing that the Kippers have more fun and can get away with stuff. I fear all this will happen.
That is my view too, hence why I backed Leadsom last night. Obviously I would be far happier with May
But if you believe all the Bremorse statistics from the Remainers (and I don't) then lots of the Leave voters are repenting and will vote for a Remainer.
Comments
The more I think about it, Stephen Crabb is the ideal candidate for working class Tories like myself that really warmed to David Cameron's One Nation Toryism
@tnewtondunn: Final thought on @scrabbmp: a thoroughly decent man who fought the right One Nation campaign and goes with dignity. He will be PM one day.
https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/750442056439439360
Let's face it, there's more people spoken about in terms of "one day" they will be PM compared to the tiny number of people who actually do become PM...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/05/how-remain-failed-inside-story-doomed-campaign
twitter.com/Conn_Iggulden/status/735223052074680326
Live and learn.
[*Delete as appropriate]
Here's a soothing article from a source more crazy than anything the above can offer. Even The Tap (pbuh) would wonder at its barking lunacy.
Sample quote: "Of course, official Washington will never admit that oil is non-biologic and that Earth is continually replenishing her supply, for that would produce a tsunami wave of repercussions, forcing the Illuminati to alter a great number of their coveted goals, some of which they are very close to completing."
http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n2268.cfm
EDIT: It finishes with "Copying and distributing this article in violation of the above notice is also a violation of God's moral law." Which is just awesome.
/edit and, in answer to your point, no, she tried to play for time but didn't have the skills to evade the pressure from Marr, so got pushed into an unwilling yes. And at the time she probably imagined it just meant last year's.
http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/article_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/06/24/08/brexit-map.jpg
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers https://t.co/gaKCD5J3Zs
Is Andrea such a city hotshot?
In the wider context are we really going to replace the "Bullingdon Club" with an ex Banker for PM
However, the whole shale gas / tight oil discoveries of the last decade have pretty much conclusively proved it wrong. Simply, if there is a formation where the hydrocarbons are largely immobile, and the deeper parts are gas and the shallower parts oil, it pretty much proves that natural gas (yes, I know there are two different types of natural gas) is what happens to oil which has been baked too long. If oil was constantly seeping up from underground, then surely you'd see gas near the surface (as it's more mobile than oil), and oil deeper down.
You almost had me there
So does she go forward to the member contest, or pull out? Surely it is a no brainer?
If it's any consolation, there will be plenty of Christians posting here that get dragged to church at Easter and Christmas, think of it as doing your bit for the greater good of familial harmony.
Eid Mubarak, and good night.
*I'm assuming this is the shite pun thread
That said, today's kerfuffle about her CV may see her MP backing shift to Gove.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_2001#The_MPs.27_ballots
Still what a choice for next Tory leader, Gove, May or Leadsom. Terrifying that the field has ended up so weak.
Originally I'd assumed it was the returning officer who hadn't voted, but he must have - so presumably he doesn't get a casting vote as well.
If there is a tie the ballot is re-run. If the same candidates tie again they are both eliminated unless that results in only one candidate remaining. In that situation the vote is re-run until there is no longer a tie. So, as there are only three candidates left, if Leadsom and Gove tie the ballot will be re-run. If it is still a tie it will be re-run repeatedly.
His fate is to live on in infamy with Lord North, Neville Chamberlain and Anthony Eden...
I believe tomorrow they're publishing the report in the Iraq war. Some actions there may qualify.
Factoid of the Day. Conn Iggulden voted Leave.
Ask @rcs1000 what he would think of a potential employee at his form who claimed to be CIO when they weren't