politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From Ladbrokes and ConHome two factors that should raise a
Comments
-
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.HurstLlama said:
Mr Thrak., If I had a vote on our next PM (and in my opinion it is a scandal that so few do) then I would follow you. However that is beside the point.Thrak said:
Well I'm a floating voter, as it were. When Conservatives went too far right I voted for Blair, when they screwed up and started to go left I voted for Cameron. I can't possibly vote for Corbyn, I equally couldn't vote for Leadsom (experience wise but moreso on policy). So there's a ground there that would be left completely open (although reports of a labour split might fill that). I'd vote for May though, absolutely.
Between, for example, the voters of the South Wales valleys, those of the inner cities and the rural shires there is considerable agreement on a lot of fundamentals. Hack out the tribalism and you will find that an awful lot agree of the fundamentals. That is what I mean by the common ground.
It may well be that keeping that tribalism going and preventing people from realising that they have a lot in common is actually a key part of political parties' strategy. Some of us on here moan about identity politics, but it seems actually to have become the norm. It is in all parties' interests to emphasise the differences.
The problem, perhaps, comes when we have a vote like the referendum. Then everyone has a vote that counts and the unemployed C2DE finds that they have common cause with the ABC1. Then the parties, as are, lose control.
What happens if a party taps into that "Common Ground"?
I reckon that party would clean up.0 -
It's a sort of desperate attempt to apply some of that Thatcher magic to Leadsom, and it's bizarre.MaxPB said:The comparisons of Leadsom to Thatcher are also grossly unfair to Thatcher. Leadsom isn't even in the same league as Thatcher.
Mrs Thatcher was at the intellectual vanguard of her party, alongside Keith Joseph and Nicholas Ridley. She was a woman who fought her way to the top of politics, when it genuinely was a struggle. She made it onto a post-doctoral course at Oxford, when such things were incredibly rare. And she was ramrod honest.
Andrea Leadsom is a woman with a middling City career, who repeated "we must take back control" a few times in a TV debate. And who has only a passing acquaintance with truth.
Other than being women, being Christian, and believing in climate change, what do they have in common?0 -
Mr. F, Attlee's an amateur compared to Farage when it comes to losing elections but having an impact
0 -
Careful steering advisory !Richard_Nabavi said:
Not if they themselves are in the pile-up, though.Pulpstar said:
Yeah but everybody loves to watch a good car crash even if it slows them down !AlastairMeeks said:@Sean_F There will need to be a new political system. The current structures on both sides of the House are being razed to the ground.
Everything that we have seen so far suggests that the new system will be vastly inferior to the old system, will lead to worse outcomes for every stratum of society and will lead to a diminished place for what is left of the country in world affairs.
The value of administrative competence will, I'm sure, become much more apparent after the event.0 -
Very little indeed. It is the lamentable identity politics of today that has made everyone draw that false comparison. Conservative, woman and fairly right wing = Mrs T. Apparently.rcs1000 said:
It's a sort of desperate attempt to apply some of that Thatcher magic to Leadsom, and it's bizarre.MaxPB said:The comparisons of Leadsom to Thatcher are also grossly unfair to Thatcher. Leadsom isn't even in the same league as Thatcher.
Mrs Thatcher was at the intellectual vanguard of her party, alongside Keith Joseph and Nicholas Ridley. She was a woman who fought her way to the top of politics, when it genuinely was a struggle. She made it onto a post-doctoral course at Oxford, when such things were incredibly rare. And she was ramrod honest.
Andrea Leadsom is a woman with a middling City career, who repeated "we must take back control" a few times in a TV debate. And who has only a passing acquaintance with truth.
Other than being women, being Christian, and believing in climate change, what do they have in common?0 -
An exagerrated sense of their self importance? And hubris becoming nemesis?rcs1000 said:
It's a sort of desperate attempt to apply some of that Thatcher magic to Leadsom, and it's bizarre.MaxPB said:The comparisons of Leadsom to Thatcher are also grossly unfair to Thatcher. Leadsom isn't even in the same league as Thatcher.
Mrs Thatcher was at the intellectual vanguard of her party, alongside Keith Joseph and Nicholas Ridley. She was a woman who fought her way to the top of politics, when it genuinely was a struggle. She made it onto a post-doctoral course at Oxford, when such things were incredibly rare. And she was ramrod honest.
Andrea Leadsom is a woman with a middling City career, who repeated "we must take back control" a few times in a TV debate. And who has only a passing acquaintance with truth.
Other than being women, being Christian, and believing in climate change, what do they have in common?0 -
.0 -
Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
I saw that clip. She was OK.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
I think it all depends where you stand. For people like me, in the 1920's, the replacement of Con v Lib with Con v Lab was a disaster. For left-wingers, it was excellent news.AlastairMeeks said:@Sean_F There will need to be a new political system. The current structures on both sides of the House are being razed to the ground.
Everything that we have seen so far suggests that the new system will be vastly inferior to the old system, will lead to worse outcomes for every stratum of society and will lead to a diminished place for what is left of the country in world affairs.
The value of administrative competence will, I'm sure, become much more apparent after the event.
0 -
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.HurstLlama said:
Mr Thrak., If I had a vote on our next PM (and in my opinion it is a scandal that so few do) then I would follow you. However that is beside the point.Thrak said:
Well I'm a floating voter, as it were. When Conservatives went too far right I voted for Blair, when they screwed up and started to go left I voted for Cameron. I can't possibly vote for Corbyn, I equally couldn't vote for Leadsom (experience wise but moreso on policy). So there's a ground there that would be left completely open (although reports of a labour split might fill that). I'd vote for May though, absolutely.
Between, for example, the voters of the South Wales valleys, those of the inner cities and the rural shires there is considerable agreement on a lot of fundamentals. Hack out the tribalism and you will find that an awful lot agree of the fundamentals. That is what I mean by the common ground.
It may well be that keeping that tribalism going and preventing people from realising that they have a lot in common is actually a key part of political parties' strategy. Some of us on here moan about identity politics, but it seems actually to have become the norm. It is in all parties' interests to emphasise the differences.
The problem, perhaps, comes when we have a vote like the referendum. Then everyone has a vote that counts and the unemployed C2DE finds that they have common cause with the ABC1. Then the parties, as are, lose control.
What happens if a party taps into that "Common Ground"?
I reckon that party would clean up.0 -
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
0 -
Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.0
-
I am sure someone must have pointed this out but Con Home cannot claim it to be a vote of Con party members, so its tripe at best, voodoo at worst and should be absolutely ignored.0
-
Eyes are going fuzzy, so I'm off.0
-
Yes. Farage has had a remarkable impact.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. F, Attlee's an amateur compared to Farage when it comes to losing elections but having an impact
No, Blair wanted us to be at the heart of Europe. He failed. Utterly.foxinsoxuk said:
And Tony Blair.nunu said:
Like ThatcherSean_F said:
The greatest politicians pull the centre ground towards them.HurstLlama said:
Good post, Mr565, though I am not to sure about the last paragraph.Danny565 said:FPT:
But hasn't the EU Referendum showed that the so-called "centre-ground" voters are really not that centrist at all?MikeL said:
The problem with that is that winning a GE is about winning seats, not votes.williamglenn said:
I don't think it's obvious at all. May is not a proven campaigner and Leadsom is likely to win a large chunk of the UKIP vote (and would-be UKIP switchers from Labour) which will provide a buffer in many marginals.MikeL said:So no surprise if the activists again choose the person who they love but is at the same time unelectable. They may think that doesn't matter as she'll beat Corbyn but if Labour get a decent leader it's blindingly obvious that May would be far stronger at the next GE
And you maximise seats by winning the middle ground floating voters - which is why Blair had such a brilliant votes to seats conversion rate and why Cameron has now got Con into a much
Picking up the old buffer UKIP vote won't gain net seats if floating votes are lost directly over to Lab - which they will be with Leadsom's social policies.
If the centre ground means anything, it's the likes of Basildon, Nuneaton, Cannock Chase, Worcester, Bury. All of them (and most of the other typical bellwether constituenices in general elections) delivered heavy Leave wins. They seem to quite like "social conservative" policies, while they also placed no store at all in what the Establishment considers to be "economic credibility" or in the opinions of big businesses.
Though that's not to say Leadsom would do better for the Tories than May (it's less their policies but the fact that May looks and sounds like a natural leader, whereas Leadsom still seems clearly out of her depth.)
This business and fascination with the centre ground on this site never ceases to amaze me. Many posters on here seem to be sure that the centre ground exists and it is where they are or at least can be found by triangulation. The idea, first proposed many years ago, that the whole idea of the centre ground is rubbish and it is the common ground that matters seems to have passed them by.
0 -
Ms May is no great shakes in the liberalism department, that's for sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
The only problem is that I have absolutely no idea if Leadsom is any better.0 -
A long contest favours May as Leadsom will need to keep the momentum up for longer without a major slip up.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
0 -
Mr. O, just out of interest, are you a member of the Conservative party who actually has a vote for who our next prime minister will be?HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.0 -
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, through off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.HurstLlama said:
Mr Thrak., If I had a vote on our next PM (and in my opinion it is a scandal that so few do) then I would follow you. However that is beside the point.Thrak said:
Well I'm a floating voter, as it were. When Conservatives went too far right I voted for Blair, when they screwed up and started to go left I voted for Cameron. I can't possibly vote for Corbyn, I equally couldn't vote for Leadsom (experience wise but moreso on policy). So there's a ground there that would be left completely open (although reports of a labour split might fill that). I'd vote for May though, absolutely.
Between, for example, the voters of the South Wales valleys, those of the inner cities and the rural shires there is considerable agreement on a lot of fundamentals. Hack out the tribalism and you will find that an awful lot agree of the fundamentals. That is what I mean by the common ground.
It may well be that keeping that tribalism going and preventing people from realising that they have a lot in common is actually a key part of political parties' strategy. Some of us on here moan about identity politics, but it seems actually to have become the norm. It is in all parties' interests to emphasise the differences.
The problem, perhaps, comes when we have a vote like the referendum. Then everyone has a vote that counts and the unemployed C2DE finds that they have common cause with the ABC1. Then the parties, as are, lose control.
What happens if a party taps into that "Common Ground"?
I reckon that party would clean up.
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.0 -
Nope, I have considered it but those ideas came far too late for the current run off.HurstLlama said:
Mr. O, just out of interest, are you a member of the Conservative party who actually has a vote for who our next prime minister will be?HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.0 -
When Mrs Thatcher progressed from hubris to nemesis, she had changed modern Britain.foxinsoxuk said:
An exagerrated sense of their self importance? And hubris becoming nemesis?rcs1000 said:
It's a sort of desperate attempt to apply some of that Thatcher magic to Leadsom, and it's bizarre.MaxPB said:The comparisons of Leadsom to Thatcher are also grossly unfair to Thatcher. Leadsom isn't even in the same league as Thatcher.
Mrs Thatcher was at the intellectual vanguard of her party, alongside Keith Joseph and Nicholas Ridley. She was a woman who fought her way to the top of politics, when it genuinely was a struggle. She made it onto a post-doctoral course at Oxford, when such things were incredibly rare. And she was ramrod honest.
Andrea Leadsom is a woman with a middling City career, who repeated "we must take back control" a few times in a TV debate. And who has only a passing acquaintance with truth.
Other than being women, being Christian, and believing in climate change, what do they have in common?0 -
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.0 -
No Blair didn't move the centre towards him he simply moved his party to where he thought it was. A key difference.foxinsoxuk said:
And Tony Blair.nunu said:
Like ThatcherSean_F said:
The greatest politicians pull the centre ground towards them.HurstLlama said:
Good post, Mr565, though I am not to sure about the last paragraph.Danny565 said:FPT:
But hasn't the EU Referendum showed that the so-called "centre-ground" voters are really not that centrist at all?MikeL said:
The problem with that is that winning a GE is about winning seats, not votes.williamglenn said:
I don't think it's obvious at all. May is not a proven campaigner and Leadsom is likely to win a large chunk of the UKIP vote (and would-be UKIP switchers from Labour) which will provide a buffer in many marginals.MikeL said:So no surprise if the activists again choose the person who they love but is at the same time unelectable. They may think that doesn't matter as she'll beat Corbyn but if Labour get a decent leader it's blindingly obvious that May would be far stronger at the next GE
And you maximise seats by winning the middle ground floating voters - which is why Blair had such a brilliant votes to seats conversion rate and why Cameron has now got Con into a much more favourable votes to seats conversion rate than Lab.
Picking up the old buffer UKIP vote won't gain net seats if floating votes are lost directly over to Lab - which they will be with Leadsom's social policies.
If the centre ground means anything, it's the likes of Basildon, Nuneaton, Cannock Chase, Worcester, Bury. All of them (and most of the other typical bellwether constituenices in general elections) delivered heavy Leave wins. They seem to quite like "social conservative" policies, while they also placed no store at all in what the Establishment considers to be "economic credibility" or in the opinions of big businesses.
Though that's not to say Leadsom would do better for the Tories than May (it's less their policies but the fact that May looks and sounds like a natural leader, whereas Leadsom still seems clearly out of her depth.)
This business and fascination with the centre ground on this site never ceases to amaze me. Many posters on here seem to be sure that the centre ground exists and it is where they are or at least can be found by triangulation. The idea, first proposed many years ago, that the whole idea of the centre ground is rubbish and it is the common ground that matters seems to have passed them by.0 -
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.0 -
Agreed. With May it's a case of what you see is what you get. She'll compromise on free movement to keep us in the single market and be economically relatively solid, but be fairly authoritarian. With Leadsom I don't think she would compromise and we'd end up leaving the single market or lose an election to Labour once the economy goes into a tailspin after announcing our plan to go for WTO terms. The short term hit to our liberties is probably a fair trade for staying in the single market.rcs1000 said:
Ms May is no great shakes in the liberalism department, that's for sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
The only problem is that I have absolutely no idea if Leadsom is any better.0 -
nunu said:foxinsoxuk said:
We should also remember Blair won his huge majorities on falling turnouts.nunu said:
No Blair didn't move the centre towards him he simply moved his party to where he thought it was. A key difference.Sean_F said:
And Tony Blair.HurstLlama said:
Like ThatcherDanny565 said:FPT:
The greatest politicians pull the centre ground towards them.MikeL said:
Good post, Mr565, though I am not to sure about the last paragraph.williamglenn said:
But hasn't the EU Referendum showed that the so-called "centre-ground" voters are really not that centrist at all?MikeL said:So no surprise if the activists again choose the person who they love but is at the same time unelectable. They may think that doesn't matter as she'll beat Corbyn but if Labour get a decent leader it's blindingly obvious that May would be far stronger
The problem with that is that winning a GE is about winning seats, not votes.
And you maximise seats by winning the middle ground floating voters - which is why Blair had such a brilliant votes to seats conversion rate and why Cameron has now got Con into a much more favourable votes to seats conversion rate than Lab.
Picking up the old buffer UKIP vote won't gain net seats if floating votes are lost directly over to Lab - which they will be with Leadsom's social policies.
If the centre ground means anything, it's the likes of Basildon, Nuneaton, Cannock Chase, Worcester, Bury. All of them (and most of the other typical bellwether constituenices in general elections) delivered heavy Leave wins. They seem to quite like "social conservative" policies, while they also placed no store at all in what the Establishment considers to be "economic credibility" or in the opinions of big businesses.
Though that's not to say Leadsom would do better for the Tories than May (it's less their policies but the fact that May looks and sounds like a natural leader, whereas Leadsom still seems clearly out of her depth.)
This business and fascination with the centre ground on this site never ceases to amaze me. Many posters on here seem to be sure that the centre ground exists and it is where they are or at least can be found by triangulation. The idea, first proposed many years ago, that the whole idea of the centre ground is rubbish and it is the common ground that matters seems to have passed them by.0 -
Now that it's considered a good idea to pay women's tennis the same at Wimbledon and allow woman into the infantry. Isn't it time we we got rid of the outdated segregation of men and womens sport and combine them.Danny565 said:
Serena Williams's procession to the title tomorrow will probably be even duller.MarqueeMark said:Murray two sets up.
Dull match though. Everyone seems bored, including the players.
Surely it's only fair?0 -
I thought you were referring to the sort of populist party that trades in xenophobia and generally nasty identity politics that demonises others. If I got the wrong end of the stick, my apologies. Anyway, if it was that sort of party then I would emigrate, if it was inclusive and truly centrist then I wouldn't (naturally!)HurstLlama said:
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.0 -
On the matter of EU people already here, Leadsom clearly has a more liberal approach.rcs1000 said:
Ms May is no great shakes in the liberalism department, that's for sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
The only problem is that I have absolutely no idea if Leadsom is any better.
Who would stand up to the establishment better for our privacy and civil liberties? It is hard to see anyone being worse than Mrs May. That said I think that at the moment Mrs May is the better option as PM because of the MP votes and let Mrs Leadsom lead a big department.0 -
What I challenge is the way in which Mrs May has become some form of "saviour" for the lefties in the media and they are piling the shite on Mrs Leadsom just because she was on the LEAVE side.HaroldO said:
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.
0 -
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
It isn't just because she was on the Leave side, unless you think all the other reasons - inexperience et al - they are giving are false, in which case just say they're all liars.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What I challenge is the way in which Mrs May has become some form of "saviour" for the lefties in the media and they are piling the shite on Mrs Leadsom just because she was on the LEAVE side.HaroldO said:
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.0 -
Could you ride the political currents at Westminster to get into 10 Downing Street though?matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
Err...matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
I would hope you are right about Mrs May but where is her plan for tackling new immigration in the post Brexit world? This is her back yard and yet we have nothing about changing to a contribution system or paying fees for NHS or work permit fees etc etc....... If she has nothing to address this problem she is starting to look like G. Brown one who plotted to be PM and then had no fecking clue what to do when he got it. Brown also shares May's tendency to meddle in the minutae which led to ossification in the Govt decision taking.MaxPB said:
Agreed. With May it's a case of what you see is what you get. She'll compromise on free movement to keep us in the single market and be economically relatively solid, but be fairly authoritarian. With Leadsom I don't think she would compromise and we'd end up leaving the single market or lose an election to Labour once the economy goes into a tailspin after announcing our plan to go for WTO terms. The short term hit to our liberties is probably a fair trade for staying in the single market.rcs1000 said:
Ms May is no great shakes in the liberalism department, that's for sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
The only problem is that I have absolutely no idea if Leadsom is any better.
0 -
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.HurstLlama said:
Mr Thrak., If I had a vote on our next PM (and in my opinion it is a scandal that so few do) then I would follow you. However that is beside the point.Thrak said:
Well I'm a floating voter, as it were. When Conservatives went too far right I voted for Blair, when they screwed up and started to go left I voted for Cameron. I can't possibly vote for Corbyn, I equally couldn't vote for Leadsom (experience wise but moreso on policy). So there's a ground there that would be left completely open (although reports of a labour split might fill that). I'd vote for May though, absolutely.
Between, for example, the voters of the South Wales valleys, those of the inner cities and the rural shires there is considerable agreement on a lot of fundamentals. Hack out the tribalism and you will find that an awful lot agree of the fundamentals. That is what I mean by the common ground.
It may well be that keeping that tribalism going and preventing people from realising that they have a lot in common is actually a key part of political parties' strategy. Some of us on here moan about identity politics, but it seems actually to have become the norm. It is in all parties' interests to emphasise the differences.
The problem, perhaps, comes when we have a vote like the referendum. Then everyone has a vote that counts and the unemployed C2DE finds that they have common cause with the ABC1. Then the parties, as are, lose control.
What happens if a party taps into that "Common Ground"?
I reckon that party would clean up.0 -
Fair enough. The fact she was a leaver is not a definitive black mark for me, just her ideas remind me of IDS which is a world of Tory naval gazing I don't want a centrist party to go back to.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What I challenge is the way in which Mrs May has become some form of "saviour" for the lefties in the media and they are piling the shite on Mrs Leadsom just because she was on the LEAVE side.HaroldO said:
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.
With Labour going left, it would leave a large centre ground only covered by the Lib Dems....if Charles Kennedy had been ten years younger..0 -
The experience issue is fair. But then Mrs May has only been in the Home office and none of the other 20+ departments............ Of course both of them have more Govt experience and more Management experience than Osborne or Cameron did prior to 2010.kle4 said:
It isn't just because she was on the Leave side, unless you think all the other reasons - inexperience et al - they are giving are false, in which case just say they're all liars.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What I challenge is the way in which Mrs May has become some form of "saviour" for the lefties in the media and they are piling the shite on Mrs Leadsom just because she was on the LEAVE side.HaroldO said:
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.
0 -
It does. Really. It's also a great deal easier as a transactional lawyer if you have a reputation for honesty and straight dealing.MaxPB said:
Err...matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm
0 -
No. I quite value my soul.williamglenn said:
Could you ride the political currents at Westminster to get into 10 Downing Street though?matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm0 -
She has far more business experience than IDS and is a far better communicator.HaroldO said:
Fair enough. The fact she was a leaver is not a definitive black mark for me, just her ideas remind me of IDS which is a world of Tory naval gazing I don't want a centrist party to go back to.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What I challenge is the way in which Mrs May has become some form of "saviour" for the lefties in the media and they are piling the shite on Mrs Leadsom just because she was on the LEAVE side.HaroldO said:
I meant vote Lib Dem, which wasn't too clear heh.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
Do I think May is a open liberal? Nope. But then that isn't the reason I don't like Leadsom.
With Labour going left, it would leave a large centre ground only covered by the Lib Dems....if Charles Kennedy had been ten years younger..
0 -
Sorry, Matt, are you saying that the practice of the Law requires honesty?matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm
Let us take that a little further, that Barrister does he have to honestly believe in what he is saying?0 -
But I think that what is likely to occur is just a different sort of identity politics, just based on different views of identity, and a purple type of identity at that. What I am saying, is that Nationalism is a form of identity politics.HurstLlama said:
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.HurstLlama said:
Mr Thrak., If I had a vote on our next PM (and in my opinion it is a scandal that so few do) then I would follow you. However that is beside the point.Thrak said:
Well I'm a floating voter, as it were. When Conservatives went too far right I voted for Blair, when they screwed up and started to go left I voted for Cameron. I can't possibly vote for Corbyn, I equally couldn't vote for Leadsom (experience wise but moreso on policy). So there's a ground there that would be left completely open (although reports of a labour split might fill that). I'd vote for May though, absolutely.
Between, for example, the voters of the South Wales valleys, those of the inner cities and the rural shires there is considerable agreement on a lot of fundamentals. Hack out the tribalism and you will find that an awful lot agree of the fundamentals. That is what I mean by the common ground.
It may well be that keeping that tribalism going and preventing people from realising that they have a lot in common is actually a key part of political parties' strategy. Some of us on here moan about identity politics, but it seems actually to have become the norm. It is in all parties' interests to emphasise the differences.
The problem, perhaps, comes when we have a vote like the referendum. Then everyone has a vote that counts and the unemployed C2DE finds that they have common cause with the ABC1. Then the parties, as are, lose control.
What happens if a party taps into that "Common Ground"?
I reckon that party would clean up.0 -
0
-
A barrister represents his client's interests. That may involve presenting a defence. It does not involve lying to the court. Examples otherwise, please. Otherwise it's the usual "misunderstanding" of what being counsel involves. ie Daily Mail bs.HurstLlama said:
Sorry, Matt, are you saying that the practice of the Law requires honesty?matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm
Let us take that a little further, that Barrister does he have to honestly believe in what he is saying?
I've never been in court.0 -
Mr. Thrak,Thrak said:
I thought you were referring to the sort of populist party that trades in xenophobia and generally nasty identity politics that demonises others. If I got the wrong end of the stick, my apologies. Anyway, if it was that sort of party then I would emigrate, if it was inclusive and truly centrist then I wouldn't (naturally!)HurstLlama said:
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.
No I wan't saying anything more than I said, what would happen if a political party stopped worrying about "their" people and governed in the interests of all the people?0 -
There may be some contradictions in that!matt said:
It does. Really. It's also a great deal easier as a transactional lawyer if you have a reputation for honesty and straight dealing.MaxPB said:
Err...matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm
I'd suggest that the number of lawyers worldwide that have a reputation as you describe is almost zero. I can get in a cab and the guy drives me around the corner for 100 meters and says 'no charge' - I'm not sure lawyers are so honorable.
You do to some extent sell your reputations for honesty and straight dealing. And when you sell it you diminish it a little.
The Law is a great calling in life - the difficulty is that it has to provide its practitioners with a living.0 -
Why - there is no guarantee either way and 40 days is a sensible time with holidays and campaigns to be aired and hopefully broadcast media head to heads. No one can be sure either way at this timesurbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
0 -
You're very wrong. Blair dragged the Tories and thereby the centre to the left.nunu said:
No Blair didn't move the centre towards him he simply moved his party to where he thought it was. A key difference.foxinsoxuk said:
And Tony Blair.nunu said:
Like ThatcherSean_F said:
The greatest politicians pull the centre ground towards them.HurstLlama said:
Good post, Mr565, though I am not to sure about the last paragraph.Danny565 said:FPT:
But hasn't the EU Referendum showed that the so-called "centre-ground" voters are really not that centrist at all?MikeL said:
The problem with that is that winning a GE is about winning seats, not votes.williamglenn said:
I don't think it's obvious at all. May is not a proven camaigner and Leadsom is likely to win a large chunk of the UKIP vote (and would-be UKIP switchers from Labour) which will provide a buffer in many marginals.MikeL said:So no surprise if the activists again choose the person who they love but is at the same time unelectable. They may think that doesn't matter as she'll beat Corbyn but if Labour get a decent leader it's blindingly obvious that May would be far stronger at the next GE
And you maximise seats by winning the middle ground floating voters - which is why Blair had such a brilliant votes to seats conversion rate and why Cameron has now got Con into a much more favourable votes to seats conversion rate than Lab.
Picking up the old buffer UKIP vote won't gain net seats if floating votes are lost directly over to Lab - which they will be with Leadsom's social policies.
If the centre ground anything, it's the likes of Basildon, Nuneaton, Cannock Chase, Worcester, Bury. All of them (and most of the other typical bellwether constituenices in general elections) delivered heavy Leave wins. They seem to quite like "social conservative" policies, while they also placed no store at all in what the Establishment considers to be "economic credibility" or in the opinions of big businesses.
Though that's not to say Leadsom would do better for the Tories than May (it's less their policies but the fact that May looks and sounds like a natural leader, whereas Leadsom still seems clearly out of her depth.)
This business and fascination with the centre ground on this site never ceases to amaze me. Many posters on here seem to be sure that the centre ground exists and it is where they are or at least can be found by triangulation. The idea, first proposed many years ago, that the whole idea of the centre ground is rubbish and it is the common ground that matters seems to have passed them by.0 -
"behaving like silly children" for refusing to make hacks' lives easier with irrelevances.AndyJS said:
If the media would care more about analysis than gossip, they might be more respected and valuable. They might have started by covering the referendum as a policy crisis or decision point rather than a Tory internal spat, but we saw how that transpired.0 -
9k will not renew their membership nest year eitherJobabob said:
Under Tory rules, that 10k won't be able to vote. Duh!PlatoSaid said:
The news came as it emerged that the Tory party’s membership has swelled in size since David Cameron quit, with 10,000 new members joining in the four days after his resignation.TCPoliticalBetting said:"Steve Bell, the president of the Conservative Party’s National Convention which represents the party’s voluntary associations, said he was “expecting” Mrs Leadsom to win."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/08/mps-facing-a-wake-up-call-when-they-find-out-levels-of-support-f/0 -
40 days - Will the Tory selectorate be tempted by the Devil ?0
-
Is Leadsom related to Douglas Hurd ?EPG said:
"behaving like silly children" for refusing to make hacks' lives easier with irrelevances.AndyJS said:
If the media would care more about analysis than gossip, they might be more respected and valuable. They might have started by covering the referendum as a policy crisis or decision point rather than a Tory internal spat, but we saw how that transpired.0 -
It's also biblical enough to suit both candidates.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Why - there is no guarantee either way and 40 days is a sensible time with holidays and campaigns to be aired and hopefully broadcast media head to heads. No one can be sure either way at this timesurbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
0 -
Hard to know either way.surbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
My initial reaction was that a quick contest would favour May as Leadsom wouldn't have enough time to build her profile.
But then on the other hand it could be that there is an initial wave of enthusiasm for Leadsom which then settles down after a few weeks as people think about it a bit more soberly - which could then actually benefit May.
So maybe the precise timing won't actually make much difference either way.0 -
Fun as it may be to imagine, I don't see the DUB part. My impression is that it is a great city to live in for the average or above-average earner - but not particularly for the global top 0.1 percenters who would be more likely to find their particular desires catered to in Paris. I doubt there are as many operas, boutiques or international schools in DUB.rcs1000 said:This is pretty funny:
http://news.efinancialcareers.com/uk-en/249458/city-of-london-2030/0 -
I have.matt said:
A barrister represents his client's interests. That may involve presenting a defence. It does not involve lying to the court. Examples otherwise, please. Otherwise it's the usual "misunderstanding" of what being counsel involves. ie Daily Mail bs.HurstLlama said:
Sorry, Matt, are you saying that the practice of the Law requires honesty?matt said:
I could do as well. I'm a lawyer. I bet she couldn't do as well at law. That involves honesty.PlatoSaid said:Peter Thompson
Watch @andrealeadsom grill Bob Diamond, I agree with @faisalislam she is highly financially literate https://t.co/BAsCB7xyqm
Let us take that a little further, that Barrister does he have to honestly believe in what he is saying?
I've never been in court.
The criminal bar is a game, played to a set of rules. Truth and justice have nothing to do with it. The barrister may well present a complete pack of lies to the court and that is OK (under the rules) as long as he/she doesn't believe they are a pack of lies (yeah, right). That same rule applies equally to the prosecution and the defence.
Many years ago I attended a lecture by a rising member of the Junior Bar (he subsequently became a QC then a judge and, I think, he is still alive so I shan't name him on here) that was a real eye opener. Furthermore when I did get involved in the system nothing he said appeared to be untrue, though it was very useful.0 -
The interesting issue will be the polling on who the public want and would vote for. Leadsom had a poor poll a few days ago and comparisons on her various strength's compared to May were devastatingly poor.MikeL said:
Hard to know either way.surbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
My initial reaction was that a quick contest would favour May as Leadsom wouldn't have enough time to build her profile.
But then on the other hand it could be that there is an initial wave of enthusiasm for Leadsom which then settles down after a few weeks as people think about it a bit more soberly - which could then actually benefit May.
So maybe the precise timing won't actually make much difference either way.
If these improve over time she will benefit from them but if in 40 days they are as bad or worse than members will vote for May in the best interest of the party and Country. Leadsom's time will come but she needs testing in a cabinet role0 -
-
One way a long contest could favour May is that she has more resources at her disposal in terms of MPs and other well known people.
So a longer contest gives more time for these people to make their views known and thus potentially influence members.
She also has just about all the press on her side. She should presumably be drawing up a news grid for key announcements / endorsements to be made at strategic moments.
I'd start off with probably the two most influential heavyweights who will obviously be supporting her - ie Major and Hague - to announce their support and do TV interviews just as ballot papers go out.0 -
How will Boris's support go down though?Big_G_NorthWales said:
The interesting issue will be the polling on who the public want and would vote for. Leadsom had a poor poll a few days ago and comparisons on her various strength's compared to May were devastatingly poor.MikeL said:
Hard to know either way.surbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
My initial reaction was that a quick contest would favour May as Leadsom wouldn't have enough time to build her profile.
But then on the other hand it could be that there is an initial wave of enthusiasm for Leadsom which then settles down after a few weeks as people think about it a bit more soberly - which could then actually benefit May.
So maybe the precise timing won't actually make much difference either way.
If these improve over time she will benefit from them but if in 40 days they are as bad or worse than members will vote for May in the best interest of the party and Country. Leadsom's time will come but she needs testing in a cabinet role0 -
Sounds like you missed the whole referendum campaign. Let me fill you in ...MikeL said:
I'd start off with probably the two most influential heavyweights who will obviously be supporting her - ie Major and Hague - to announce their support and do TV interviews just as ballot papers go out.0 -
I am surprised that you seem to think May has a chance. May is establishment. The Tory party is foaming............RobD said:0 -
Nothing to do with politics this time. I am SO glad I'm middle aged. The majority of my stupidity, gaucheness and naivety is safely obscured by a pre-Internet age. I would hate to be dragging some kind of digital ball & chain behind me if I were young again.Freggles said:0 -
What if Gove comes out for May in a continuation grudge matchrottenborough said:
How will Boris's support go down though?Big_G_NorthWales said:
The interesting issue will be the polling on who the public want and would vote for. Leadsom had a poor poll a few days ago and comparisons on her various strength's compared to May were devastatingly poor.MikeL said:
Hard to know either way.surbiton said:
That guarantees a Leadsom win.AndyJS said:Michael Crick — Tory ballot papers won't go out for 40 days.
My initial reaction was that a quick contest would favour May as Leadsom wouldn't have enough time to build her profile.
But then on the other hand it could be that there is an initial wave of enthusiasm for Leadsom which then settles down after a few weeks as people think about it a bit more soberly - which could then actually benefit May.
So maybe the precise timing won't actually make much difference either way.
If these improve over time she will benefit from them but if in 40 days they are as bad or worse than members will vote for May in the best interest of the party and Country. Leadsom's time will come but she needs testing in a cabinet role0 -
You think, and then you decide. Nothing has changed.John_M said:
Nothing to do with politics this time. I am SO glad I'm middle aged. The majority of my stupidity, gaucheness and naivety is safely obscured by a pre-Internet age. I would hate to be dragging some kind of digital ball & chain behind me if I were young again.Freggles said:
I'm sorry to disappoint you in this, but you're as relevant today as you ever were. That applies to me too, so things are really grim 0 -
In practice I'm struggling to discern a coherent set of policies, economic, social, cultural etc that would work in the interests and capture the allegiance of ALL the people?HurstLlama said:
Mr. Thrak,Thrak said:
I thought you were referring to the sort of populist party that trades in xenophobia and generally nasty identity politics that demonises others. If I got the wrong end of the stick, my apologies. Anyway, if it was that sort of party then I would emigrate, if it was inclusive and truly centrist then I wouldn't (naturally!)HurstLlama said:
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.
No I wan't saying anything more than I said, what would happen if a political party stopped worrying about "their" people and governed in the interests of all the people?
They voted Leave with conviction: but that apart how much in common - across even a narrow range - does an unemployed and resentful ex semi-skilled worker in Sunderland have with (let's be a little naughty), say, Robert Smithson, Max or indeed your esteemed self?
It's an important question and I'm interested in how such a transformed polity might be effected.
0 -
He did. But, he still failed in his greatest objective, placing Britain in the heart of Europe.Jonathan said:
You're very wrong. Blair dragged the Tories and thereby the centre to the left.nunu said:
No Blair didn't move the centre towards him he simply moved his party to where he thought it was. A key difference.foxinsoxuk said:
And Tony Blair.nunu said:
Like ThatcherSean_F said:
The greatest politicians pull the centre ground towards them.HurstLlama said:
Good post, Mr565, though I am not to sure about the last paragraph.Danny565 said:FPT:
But hasn't the EU Referendum showed that the so-called "centre-ground" voters are really not that centrist at all?MikeL said:
The problem with that is that winning a GE is about winning seats, not votes.williamglenn said:
I don't think it's obvious at all. May is not a proven camaigner and Leadsom is likely to win a large chunk of the UKIP vote (and would-be UKIP switchers from Labour) which will provide a buffer in many marginals.MikeL said:So no surprise if the activists again choose the person who they love but is at the same time unelectable. They may think that doesn't matter as she'll beat Corbyn but if Labour get a decent leader it's blindingly obvious that May would be far stronger at the next GE
And you maximise seats by winning the middle ground floating voters - which is why Blair had such a brilliant votes to seats conversion rate and why Cameron has now got Con into a much more favourable votes to seats conversion rate than Lab.
Picking up the old buffer UKIP vote won't gain net seats if floating votes are lost directly over to Lab - which they will be with Leadsom's social policies.
If the centre ground anything, it's the likes of no store at all in what the Establishment considers to be "economic credibility" or in the opinions of big businesses.
Though that's not to say Leadsom would do better for the Tories than May (it's less their policies but the fact that May looks and sounds like a natural leader, whereas Leadsom still seems clearly out of her depth.)
This business and fascination with the centre ground on this site never ceases to amaze me. Many posters on here seem to be sure that the centre ground exists and it is where they are or at least can be found by triangulation. The idea, first proposed many years ago, that the whole idea of the centre ground is rubbish and it is the common ground that matters seems to have passed them by.0 -
Aren't those MPs hoping that members don't find out their Remain views?MikeL said:One way a long contest could favour May is that she has more resources at her disposal in terms of MPs and other well known people.
So a longer contest gives more time for these people to make their views known and thus potentially influence members.
She also has just about all the press on her side. She should presumably be drawing up a news grid for key announcements / endorsements to be made at strategic moments.
I'd start off with probably the two most influential heavyweights who will obviously be supporting her - ie Major and Hague - to announce their support and do TV interviews just as ballot papers go out.
0 -
Talking of pile-ups, a friend of ours was twenty cars down the road from this unusual crash:Richard_Nabavi said:
Not if they themselves are in the pile-up, though.Pulpstar said:
Yeah but everybody loves to watch a good car crash even if it slows them down !AlastairMeeks said:@Sean_F There will need to be a new political system. The current structures on both sides of the House are being razed to the ground.
Everything that we have seen so far suggests that the new system will be vastly inferior to the old system, will lead to worse outcomes for every stratum of society and will lead to a diminished place for what is left of the country in world affairs.
The value of administrative competence will, I'm sure, become much more apparent after the event.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-366295400 -
In my constituency, the Association are politely asking which candidate we prefer. But I already know that all the leading members and the MP are May loyalists. they are simply hunting down the Leadsom fans, who will be exterminated at the earliest opportunity. The MP is a fanatical left wing, May fan. he has nothing in common with members, nor do the Association committee, all as left wing as Neil Kinnock essentially.
I've told all decent right winger in the party that are UKIP light to keep their heads down. Long Live Leadsom0 -
It's interesting to me that we've had a real glimpse of what our politicians actually think of us. In a word: not much.JohnO said:
It's an important question and I'm interested in how such a transformed polity might be effected.
From my side of the political fence, I would like to see a Conservative government that did more for young people, rather than merely coddling us pensioners. They assume a level of self-interest that I'm not sure exists as widely as they think, so they simply stuff our mouths with gold. That's a little tawdry.
The transformation might be as simple as trusting that the voters might have more refined sensibilities than they think, and are able to look at a bigger picture.
Part of my cynicism is due to the fact that tax rises are hidden and howled down if they're even mooted. Thatcher's reign had pretty high tax rates. Labour in particular should not be ashamed to argue for more taxation in return for better services. That taxation should be inclusive; it's no good just looking to bash the bankers.
Returning (like a dog to some particularly unlovely vomit) to the Remain campaign, Mr Cameron might have done better to just open up with (using IFS figures) "We can certainly leave the European Union. It's going to cost us around £30 billion to do so over the next three years. We'll have a surcharge to cover that initial cost of x% on income tax).
Am I being too optimistic?0 -
Mr. JohnO, dearly love to answer you, but a couple of months ago you forbade me from speaking to you. God bless.JohnO said:
In practice I'm struggling to discern a coherent set of policies, economic, social, cultural etc that would work in the interests and capture the allegiance of ALL the people?HurstLlama said:
Mr. Thrak,Thrak said:
I thought you were referring to the sort of populist party that trades in xenophobia and generally nasty identity politics that demonises others. If I got the wrong end of the stick, my apologies. Anyway, if it was that sort of party then I would emigrate, if it was inclusive and truly centrist then I wouldn't (naturally!)HurstLlama said:
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.
No I wan't saying anything more than I said, what would happen if a political party stopped worrying about "their" people and governed in the interests of all the people?
They voted Leave with conviction: but that apart how much in common - across even a narrow range - does an unemployed and resentful ex semi-skilled worker in Sunderland have with (let's be a little naughty), say, Robert Smithson, Max or indeed your esteemed self?
It's an important question and I'm interested in how such a transformed polity might be effected.0 -
Please. Don't have nightmares. Sleep well. Leadson as pm is extremely unlikely.... gulp..0
-
Where is this administrative competence of which you speak? Osborne and his bunch of 18 year olds running the treasury? No contingency planning for things we don't like? This is the least competent Government in living memory - probably in dead memory too.AlastairMeeks said:@Sean_F There will need to be a new political system. The current structures on both sides of the House are being razed to the ground.
Everything that we have seen so far suggests that the new system will be vastly inferior to the old system, will lead to worse outcomes for every stratum of society and will lead to a diminished place for what is left of the country in world affairs.
The value of administrative competence will, I'm sure, become much more apparent after the event.0 -
The way I see it is;HurstLlama said:
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.
I reckon that party would clean up.
The ABC1 kipper-leaning tories and the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites are both fighting for the bit of the pie that they believe the foreigners are currently getting. After 4 years of a May/Leadsome government sharing the spoils of the brexit bonanza - the elderly ABC1 tory/kipper client vote will get most of this extra share of the pie - at the expense of everyone else.
That in itself will cause resentment in the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites, but the big problem is when (as likely) the pie itself shrinks over that time - relative to what it would have been if we'd stayed in the EU - and relative to peoples expectations of the pie continuing to expand.
There's also the very real possibility tht the pie shrinks in absolute terms, too.
That's the tension which will undermine the kipper/leave electoral coalition going forward, IMO.0 -
If she is, let's invite May to our partyScrapheap_as_was said:Please. Don't have nightmares. Sleep well. Leadson as pm is extremely unlikely.... gulp..
0 -
May, Cameron and Osborne have never had any interest in tacking immigration. They just pretended. Hence May not being able to stop ex-EU immigration. She could control it but wouldn't. Leadsom will actually dal with it and good on her.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I would hope you are right about Mrs May but where is her plan for tackling new immigration in the post Brexit world? This is her back yard and yet we have nothing about changing to a contribution system or paying fees for NHS or work permit fees etc etc....... If she has nothing to address this problem she is starting to look like G. Brown one who plotted to be PM and then had no fecking clue what to do when he got it. Brown also shares May's tendency to meddle in the minutae which led to ossification in the Govt decision taking.MaxPB said:
Agreed. With May it's a case of what you see is what you get. She'll compromise on free movement to keep us in the single market and be economically relatively solid, but be fairly authoritarian. With Leadsom I don't think she would compromise and we'd end up leaving the single market or lose an election to Labour once the economy goes into a tailspin after announcing our plan to go for WTO terms. The short term hit to our liberties is probably a fair trade for staying in the single market.rcs1000 said:
Ms May is no great shakes in the liberalism department, that's for sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
I have read on PB several people stating this as if May is more liberal than Leadsom when the opposite is true. But do carry on believing what you do and join the illiberal statist LDs.HaroldO said:If Leadsom wins I'm going Lib Dem, sorry to say.
I wander around that centre sphere anyway but if the Tories shift to the right I'm offski, because the sight of a female Alan Partridge taking over the Tory party makes me feel queasy.
The only problem is that I have absolutely no idea if Leadsom is any better.0 -
If the committee have nothing in common with the members, how do they get elected?DaveDave said:In my constituency, the Association are politely asking which candidate we prefer. But I already know that all the leading members and the MP are May loyalists. they are simply hunting down the Leadsom fans, who will be exterminated at the earliest opportunity. The MP is a fanatical left wing, May fan. he has nothing in common with members, nor do the Association committee, all as left wing as Neil Kinnock essentially.
I've told all decent right winger in the party that are UKIP light to keep their heads down. Long Live Leadsom0 -
Anyone know how to organise a military coup?0
-
If it means so much to you - as it so demonstrably does - and as my compassion is boundless, any perceived proscription is herewith revoked: you are now in all conscience free to engage.HurstLlama said:
Mr. JohnO, dearly love to answer you, but a couple of months ago you forbade me from speaking to you. God bless.JohnO said:
In practice I'm struggling to discern a coherent set of policies, economic, social, cultural etc that would work in the interests and capture the allegiance of ALL the people?HurstLlama said:
Mr. Thrak,Thrak said:
I thought you were referring to the sort of populist party that trades in xenophobia and generally nasty identity politics that demonises others. If I got the wrong end of the stick, my apologies. Anyway, if it was that sort of party then I would emigrate, if it was inclusive and truly centrist then I wouldn't (naturally!)HurstLlama said:
Lost me on that one old boy. I think you said that if a political party did emerge that tried to play for the common ground you would emigrate, after that you lost me.Thrak said:
...and I may well emigrate (seriously).
It's interesting looking at the major two party figures on the other side of the Atlantic, a competent female career politician (mostly) plus a man not in tune with the party hierarchy who appeals to the fringe. We will probably end up with the same here and that's fine.
On the other hand, we could end up with two people not in tune with the party's hierarchy and then all bets are off, with a significant chance of a new grouping including elements split off from both parties as a result.
No I wan't saying anything more than I said, what would happen if a political party stopped worrying about "their" people and governed in the interests of all the people?
They voted Leave with conviction: but that apart how much in common - across even a narrow range - does an unemployed and resentful ex semi-skilled worker in Sunderland have with (let's be a little naughty), say, Robert Smithson, Max or indeed your esteemed self?
It's an important question and I'm interested in how such a transformed polity might be effected.0 -
Their real incompetence was holding a referendum where the superficially attractive Leave option could seriously damage the country. But I guess you don't agree with that?Luckyguy1983 said:
Where is this administrative competence of which you speak? Osborne and his bunch of 18 year olds running the treasury? No contingency planning for things we don't like? This is the least competent Government in living memory - probably in dead memory too.AlastairMeeks said:@Sean_F There will need to be a new political system. The current structures on both sides of the House are being razed to the ground.
Everything that we have seen so far suggests that the new system will be vastly inferior to the old system, will lead to worse outcomes for every stratum of society and will lead to a diminished place for what is left of the country in world affairs.
The value of administrative competence will, I'm sure, become much more apparent after the event.0 -
@MatthewSDent: @mutablejoe @PrimlyStable Weird how when Andy Murray wins Wimbledon he's "British", but when Andrea Leadsom wins Wimbledon she's "lying".0
-
Utter stitch up. MP leans on members to back the lefties on the committee claiming they are decent people. They all get elected without anyone standing against them and members nod it through. Any normal person trying to get onto committee gets the bum's rush. Utter f*cking stitch up.anotherDave said:
If the committee have nothing in common with the members, how do they get elected?DaveDave said:In my constituency, the Association are politely asking which candidate we prefer. But I already know that all the leading members and the MP are May loyalists. they are simply hunting down the Leadsom fans, who will be exterminated at the earliest opportunity. The MP is a fanatical left wing, May fan. he has nothing in common with members, nor do the Association committee, all as left wing as Neil Kinnock essentially.
I've told all decent right winger in the party that are UKIP light to keep their heads down. Long Live Leadsom
The committee back MP for re-selection without any competition. Members then nod that through. Utter utter stitch up.0 -
Just like their support for Remain swung it.MikeL said:One way a long contest could favour May is that she has more resources at her disposal in terms of MPs and other well known people.
So a longer contest gives more time for these people to make their views known and thus potentially influence members.
She also has just about all the press on her side. She should presumably be drawing up a news grid for key announcements / endorsements to be made at strategic moments.
I'd start off with probably the two most influential heavyweights who will obviously be supporting her - ie Major and Hague - to announce their support and do TV interviews just as ballot papers go out.
Someone is saying that it will be six weeks before the ballot papers go out - assuming that there are still two candidates by then.
Im beginning to wonder if Gove was a May supporter all along. He saw to it that the only candidate who could have beaten May in the final two - boris - didnt get on the ballot.
0 -
Both groups can feast off the metrosexuals.Pong said:
The way I see it is;HurstLlama said:
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.
I reckon that party would clean up.
The ABC1 kipper-leaning tories and the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites are both fighting for the bit of the pie that they believe the foreigners are currently getting. After 4 years of a May/Leadsome government sharing the spoils of the brexit bonanza - the elderly ABC1 tory/kipper client vote will get most of this extra share of the pie - at the expense of everyone else.
That in itself will cause resentment in the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites, but the big problem is when (as likely) the pie itself shrinks over that time - relative to what it would have been if we'd stayed in the EU - and relative to peoples expectations of the pie continuing to expand.
There's also the very real possibility tht the pie shrinks in absolute terms, too.
That's the tension which will undermine the kipper/leave electoral coalition going forward, IMO.0 -
Mr. Pong, I think you maybe concentrating too much on money and looking at too short a timescale. Have a look at one nation conservatism a la Disraeli. That wasn't a sort of Labour-lite as we understand to today, but the forging of interests between the newly enfranchised "oiks" and those that had the dosh already.Pong said:
The way I see it is;HurstLlama said:
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.
I reckon that party would clean up.
The ABC1 kipper-leaning tories and the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites are both fighting for the bit of the pie that they believe the foreigners are currently getting. After 4 years of a May/Leadsome government sharing the spoils of the brexit bonanza - the elderly ABC1 tory/kipper client vote will get most of this extra share of the pie - at the expense of everyone else.
That in itself will cause resentment in the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites, but the big problem is when (as likely) the pie itself shrinks over that time - relative to what it would have been if we'd stayed in the EU - and relative to peoples expectations of the pie continuing to expand.
That's the tension which will undermine the kipper/leave electoral coalition going forward.
If you are interested in this set of ideas then you might like to listen to David Starkey in 2011
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj3Mtq6BlA8
0 -
If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.0 -
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.0 -
Hope you’re right. Trouble is the b*stards like Cameron and Osborne who got us into this mess will come out smelling of roses.John_M said:
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.
IT’s as the old song says “It’s the rich wot makes the trouble/It’s the poor wot gets the blame"0 -
<
Indeed. And if the remaining 95% of the wealth is spread around more evenly then most people will be better off.John_M said:
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.
I am expecting though the quality of politics to improve over the next decade. Parliament will now have real power again and not just be a glorified county council chamber. That will attract better more independent minded candidates.
0 -
I'm not omniscient, so of course I could be wrong. But I'm always interested in unpicking what people are worrying about. Pick a number. Worst case, how much smaller do you think the economy might be in, say, 3 years? Ignoring all the experts, what's your thought? In percent?OldKingCole said:
Hope you’re right. Trouble is the b*stards like Cameron and Osborne who got us into this mess will come out smelling of roses.John_M said:
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.
IT’s tas the old song says “It’s the rich wot makes the trouble/It’s the poor wot gets the blame"0 -
I think they tried that in Cambodia a while back.Sean_F said:
Both groups can feast off the metrosexuals.Pong said:
The way I see it is;HurstLlama said:
No, Dr. Sox, it is a thought, a question if you like, about what would happen if a party gave up on identity politics and tried to get elected and then govern for the benefit of all rather than just their self-perceived client groups.foxinsoxuk said:
Isn't that just Identity politics dressed in a Union Jack?HurstLlama said:
Quite. Mr Thrak, my point is what would happen if a party set out to, throw off the this identity politics rubbish that has so polluted our own political discourse (and was inherited from the USA) and went to work on the things that united the Welsh Valleys, the inner cities the rural shires, the ABC1s and the C2DEs?Thrak said:
My biggest fear is that parties coalesce around the sort of differences that the referendum showed. It doesn't do America any favours and to divide society in that way would cause many problems down the line, I feel.
I reckon that party would clean up.
The ABC1 kipper-leaning tories and the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites are both fighting for the bit of the pie that they believe the foreigners are currently getting. After 4 years of a May/Leadsome government sharing the spoils of the brexit bonanza - the elderly ABC1 tory/kipper client vote will get most of this extra share of the pie - at the expense of everyone else.
That in itself will cause resentment in the WWC C2DE kipper-leaning labourites, but the big problem is when (as likely) the pie itself shrinks over that time - relative to what it would have been if we'd stayed in the EU - and relative to peoples expectations of the pie continuing to expand.
There's also the very real possibility tht the pie shrinks in absolute terms, too.
That's the tension which will undermine the kipper/leave electoral coalition going forward, IMO.
Mixed results.0 -
That's what's so odd. People talk about modest changes in GDP as if they amounted to some form of calamity.John_M said:
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.0 -
It’s not just the economy. It’s the political situation. I fear we’re going to have some rather unpleasant characters at the top of politics over the next few years.John_M said:
I'm not omniscient, so of course I could be wrong. But I'm always interested in unpicking what people are worrying about. Pick a number. Worst case, how much smaller do you think the economy might be in, say, 3 years? Ignoring all the experts, what's your thought? In percent?OldKingCole said:
Hope you’re right. Trouble is the b*stards like Cameron and Osborne who got us into this mess will come out smelling of roses.John_M said:
Pfft. Let's keep some perspective. One of the wealthiest, most respected countries in the world might become a little bit less wealthy. The End.OldKingCole said:If I hadn’t been depressed about the country’s future before this thread .......
Things have rarely looked so bad. In peacetime anyway.
Hardly the stuff of Greek tragedy.
IT’s tas the old song says “It’s the rich wot makes the trouble/It’s the poor wot gets the blame"0
I assume you'll be betting everything on Leadsom then? 
