politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Leadsom candidacy is reminder that those seeking high o

System · July 2016

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Leadsom candidacy is reminder that those seeking high office must expect intensive scrutiny

Her views on social issues might not be mainstream but could well have appealed to large parts of the older middle class men who make up much of the party membership base. She’s also personable and quite a good communicator.

Read the full story here

CarlottaVance · July 2016

First! Like Theresa....

Lowlander · July 2016

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?

The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.

DecrepitJohnL · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
First! Like Theresa....

Is Theresa primus inter pares yet? Sid's not paid out on Cameron ceasing to be Tory leader in 2016 so maybe there will be a recount.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Agree:

I thought her pull out yesterday lunchtime was highly dignified and will hold her in good stead in the future.

And in fairness to Leadsom, a lot of the damage was done by her 'supporters' - like Jenkin, who took a minor piece embroidery and turned it into a whole tapestry, and IDS and his 'black ops'......

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Tom Harris: A @SkyNews poll puts Theresa May as preferred PM by 62%, Don't Know - 20% and, in third place, Jeremy Corbyn at 18%.

Corbynistas replying that 'its because of turmoil in the Labour party & things will improve once that stops...'

MarqueeMark · July 2016

Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.

fitalass · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
First! Like Theresa....

JennyFreeman · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
Tom Harris: A @SkyNews poll puts Theresa May as preferred PM by 62%, Don't Know - 20% and, in third place, Jeremy Corbyn at 18%.

Corbynistas replying that 'its because of turmoil in the Labour party & things will improve once that stops...'

But you swore undying support for David Cameron and said he would be in office until at least September and that 'we should never underestimate him.'

Oooops.

Brexit means Brexit. Doubly oops for Carlotta.

fitalass · July 2016

MarqueeMark said:
Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.

Absolutely agree. I made a similar point yesterday about the problem of her supporters seeing Leadsom's candidacy solely though her Brexit credentials rather than her suitability as a party Leader and PM. It should also be noted that Leadsom never did get around to publishing her tax returns, which was surely going to become the next big issue in her error strewn campaign. I still maintain that the shrewd May campaign team always realised that Gove would have been the far more risky opponent on the that final ballot sent out to the members.

RobD · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
First! Like Theresa....

Just rejoice at that news

CarlottaVance · July 2016

JennyFreeman said:

CarlottaVance said:
Tom Harris: A @SkyNews poll puts Theresa May as preferred PM by 62%, Don't Know - 20% and, in third place, Jeremy Corbyn at 18%.

Corbynistas replying that 'its because of turmoil in the Labour party & things will improve once that stops...'
But you swore undying support for David Cameron and said he would be in office until at least September and that 'we should never underestimate him.'

Oooops.

Brexit means Brexit. Doubly oops for Carlotta.

Broken record - you are Louise Mensch & I claim my £5 'Handbrake Turn'.....how's Andrea doing?

fitalass · July 2016

Daily Mirror - Jeremy Corbyn promised Labour leaders would face election every year to avoid 'personality' leadership

"Jeremy Corbyn promised to make Labour leaders face mandatory elections every year to avoid the party struggling with a 'personality' leader.

He said it would "bring back democracy into the Labour Party and the Labour movement."

But the embattled Labour leader seems to have radically changed his mind since he unexpectedly became leader of the party last September."

CarlottaVance · July 2016

fitalass said:

MarqueeMark said:
Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.
It should also be noted that Leadsom never did get around to publishing her tax returns.

She published a summary of one year - which led to the inevitable questions about Years 2-4......

CarlottaVance · July 2016

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
First! Like Theresa....
Just rejoice at that news

Yes, there's some remarkably sore losers still around, aren't there?

RobD · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
First! Like Theresa....
Just rejoice at that news

Yes, there's some remarkably sore losers still around, aren't there?

All my toys would have been out of the pram had EICIPM actually happened

Indigo · July 2016

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.

Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.

RobD · July 2016

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.

We need to invent those stun baton things from demolition man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EGEj6xEWM

JohnLoony · July 2016

AndyJS said:

JohnLoony said:
When Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, the UK was the 5th country in the world to have a woman prime minister.

When Theresa May becomes Prime Minister, the U.K. will be the 11th country to have had 2 women prime ministers.

((There are 2 countries to have had 3 women prime ministers (Peru and Poland))).

(Not counting a few women who were briefly acting prime minister in various countries).
How many countries have had female prime ministers for longer periods of time than the UK?

five:

Bangladesh: Sheikh Hasina 12y 220d + Khaleda Zia 10y 60d = 22y 280d
Sri Lanka: Sirimavo Bandaranaike 17y 278d + Chandrika Kumaratunga 87d = 18y 0d
India: Indira Gandhi 16y 15d
Dominica: Eugenia Charles 14y 328d
Norway: Gro Harlem Brundtland 10y 39d + Erna Solberg 2y 269d = 12y 308d
UK: Margaret Thatcher 11y 208d
New Zealand: Helen Clark 8y 350d + Jenny Shipley 2y 0d = 10y 350d
Germany: Angela Merkel 10y 232d

JohnLoony · July 2016

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_or_appointed_female_heads_of_government

fitalass · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

fitalass said:

MarqueeMark said:
Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.
It should also be noted that Leadsom never did get around to publishing her tax returns.
She published a summary of one year - which led to the inevitable questions about Years 2-4......

Thanks Carlotta.

AndyJS · July 2016

JohnLoony said:

AndyJS said:

JohnLoony said:
When Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, the UK was the 5th country in the world to have a woman prime minister.

When Theresa May becomes Prime Minister, the U.K. will be the 11th country to have had 2 women prime ministers.

((There are 2 countries to have had 3 women prime ministers (Peru and Poland))).

(Not counting a few women who were briefly acting prime minister in various countries).
How many countries have had female prime ministers for longer periods of time than the UK?
five:

Bangladesh: Sheikh Hasina 12y 220d + Khaleda Zia 10y 60d = 22y 280d
Sri Lanka: Sirimavo Bandaranaike 17y 278d + Chandrika Kumaratunga 87d = 18y 0d
India: Indira Gandhi 16y 15d
Dominica: Eugenia Charles 14y 328d
Norway: Gro Harlem Brundtland 10y 39d + Erna Solberg 2y 269d = 12y 308d
UK: Margaret Thatcher 11y 208d
New Zealand: Helen Clark 8y 350d + Jenny Shipley 2y 0d = 10y 350d
Germany: Angela Merkel 10y 232d

Thanks John.

dugarbandier · July 2016

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.

Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?

Tim_B · July 2016

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.

A sniper in Dallas shoots 11 cops, killing 5.

The police find him holed up, and establish communication with him. They negotiate for about 2 hours, and it's obvious he's not going to cooperate. He's asking how many cops did he get and saying that he wanted to get more - and he had bombs there.

A search of the gunman's home revealed he had plenty of supplies to make explosives. Dallas Police chief Brown said police found bomb-making materials and a journal that suggested Johnson had been practicing detonations and appeared ready to take aim at larger targets. It was enough, Brown said, to have "devastating effects on our city."

At some point when negotiations are going nowhere, a decision has to be made as to how to bring this to a conclusion. If he won't give himself up, they are going to have to go in to get him. They know he has explosives at his home and may well have some with him. That means potentially more police casualties. They already have 5 dead and 6 wounded.

When the police go in, if he attempts to detonate a bomb, or shoots at the police, they will use deadly force without any hesitation.

The decision is made by Brown and his team to send in a robot loaded with a lb of C4 and detonate it.

It ain't pretty, but the truth in all these standoffs is that if you won't give yourself up and the cops have to come get you, your chances are not good. Johnson made his choice.

Given the potential for bombs, slow acting solutions - gas etc - are not an option.

Tim_B · July 2016

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?

He has weapons and possibly bombs, so he's very dangerous. Delay increases the risk.

Once negotiations reach an impasse, it's time to move in.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

MarqueeMark said:
Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.

An inexperienced - but I think fundamentally decent - candidate surrounded by manipulative incompetents - I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Tim_B said:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?
He has weapons and possibly bombs, so he's very dangerous. Delay increases the risk.

Once negotiations reach an impasse, it's time to move in.

While it makes me uneasy too I think the Dallas cops took the least worst option.

Tim_B · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

Tim_B said:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?
He has weapons and possibly bombs, so he's very dangerous. Delay increases the risk.

Once negotiations reach an impasse, it's time to move in.
While it makes me uneasy too I think the Dallas cops took the least worst option.

There were no good options - either he comes out or they go in: Johnson's choice. Given that he's killed 5 and wounded 6 cops, says he wants to kill more, is armed and possibly has bombs, it's going to be a shootout. Using the explosive minimizes casualties and resolves the situation.

As you said - the least worst option.

justin124 · July 2016

SO said
'Thirty-five very stupid Labour MPs effectively destroyed their party by opening it up to the hard left and assorted useful idiots. They must hate themselves. I genuinely feel sorry for them.'

I don't agree with that. Those 35 MPs facillitated Corbyn's participation in the 2015 contest - they did not make it inevitable that he would win. The responsibility for that falls fairly and squarely on Harriet Harman's appaliing response to Osborne's July Budget when as Acting Leader she made the party abstain on his austerity proposals. That alone gave Corbyn the unstoppable momentum that carried him to victory. Frankly I am surprised that she can sleep at night having shown such lack of judgement.

fitalass · July 2016

Tim_B said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
A sniper in Dallas shoots 11 cops, killing 5.

The police find him holed up, and establish communication with him. They negotiate for about 2 hours, and it's obvious he's not going to cooperate. He's asking how many cops did he get and saying that he wanted to get more - and he had bombs there.

A search of the gunman's home revealed he had plenty of supplies to make explosives. Dallas Police chief Brown said police found bomb-making materials and a journal that suggested Johnson had been practicing detonations and appeared ready to take aim at larger targets. It was enough, Brown said, to have "devastating effects on our city."

At some point when negotiations are going nowhere, a decision has to be made as to how to bring this to a conclusion. If he won't give himself up, they are going to have to go in to get him. They know he has explosives at his home and may well have some with him. That means potentially more police casualties. They already have 5 dead and 6 wounded.

When the police go in, if he attempts to detonate a bomb, or shoots at the police, they will use deadly force without any hesitation.

The decision is made by Brown and his team to send in a robot loaded with a lb of C4 and detonate it.

It ain't pretty, but the truth in all these standoffs is that if you won't give yourself up and the cops have to come get you, your chances are not good. Johnson made his choice.

Given the potential for bombs, slow acting solutions - gas etc - are not an option.

Doesn't this latest appalling tragedy indicate once again that America's biggest enemy still remains its home grown gun laws?

dugarbandier · July 2016

fitalass said:

Tim_B said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
A sniper in Dallas shoots 11 cops, killing 5.

The police find him holed up, and establish communication with him. They negotiate for about 2 hours, and it's obvious he's not going to cooperate. He's asking how many cops did he get and saying that he wanted to get more - and he had bombs there.

A search of the gunman's home revealed he had plenty of supplies to make explosives. Dallas Police chief Brown said police found bomb-making materials and a journal that suggested Johnson had been practicing detonations and appeared ready to take aim at larger targets. It was enough, Brown said, to have "devastating effects on our city."

At some point when negotiations are going nowhere, a decision has to be made as to how to bring this to a conclusion. If he won't give himself up, they are going to have to go in to get him. They know he has explosives at his home and may well have some with him. That means potentially more police casualties. They already have 5 dead and 6 wounded.

When the police go in, if he attempts to detonate a bomb, or shoots at the police, they will use deadly force without any hesitation.

The decision is made by Brown and his team to send in a robot loaded with a lb of C4 and detonate it.

It ain't pretty, but the truth in all these standoffs is that if you won't give yourself up and the cops have to come get you, your chances are not good. Johnson made his choice.

Given the potential for bombs, slow acting solutions - gas etc - are not an option.
Doesn't this latest appalling tragedy indicate once again that America's biggest enemy still remains its home grown gun laws?

Well, maybe this guy would have just made bombs if he didn't have access to guns?

dugarbandier · July 2016

Tim_B said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tim_B said:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?
He has weapons and possibly bombs, so he's very dangerous. Delay increases the risk.

Once negotiations reach an impasse, it's time to move in.
While it makes me uneasy too I think the Dallas cops took the least worst option.
There were no good options - either he comes out or they go in: Johnson's choice. Given that he's killed 5 and wounded 6 cops, says he wants to kill more, is armed and possibly has bombs, it's going to be a shootout. Using the explosive minimizes casualties and resolves the situation.

As you said - the least worst option.

if he had actually had bombs with him they would presumably have detonated? so it sounds like they were pretty lucky that he didn't?

Tim_B · July 2016

fitalass said:

Tim_B said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
A sniper in Dallas shoots 11 cops, killing 5.

The police find him holed up, and establish communication with him. They negotiate for about 2 hours, and it's obvious he's not going to cooperate. He's asking how many cops did he get and saying that he wanted to get more - and he had bombs there.

A search of the gunman's home revealed he had plenty of supplies to make explosives. Dallas Police chief Brown said police found bomb-making materials and a journal that suggested Johnson had been practicing detonations and appeared ready to take aim at larger targets. It was enough, Brown said, to have "devastating effects on our city."

At some point when negotiations are going nowhere, a decision has to be made as to how to bring this to a conclusion. If he won't give himself up, they are going to have to go in to get him. They know he has explosives at his home and may well have some with him. That means potentially more police casualties. They already have 5 dead and 6 wounded.

When the police go in, if he attempts to detonate a bomb, or shoots at the police, they will use deadly force without any hesitation.

The decision is made by Brown and his team to send in a robot loaded with a lb of C4 and detonate it.

It ain't pretty, but the truth in all these standoffs is that if you won't give yourself up and the cops have to come get you, your chances are not good. Johnson made his choice.

Given the potential for bombs, slow acting solutions - gas etc - are not an option.
Doesn't this latest appalling tragedy indicate once again that America's biggest enemy still remains its home grown gun laws?

Like it or not, the second amendment isn't going anywhere. As I said on the last thread to change the US constitution requires

1) you need a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate
2) 3/4 of the states need to approve it.
3) There is a time limit for this to happen. Most recently it was 7 years.

I don't own a firearm of any kind so it's not important to me either way.

That's just the way it is.

Tim_B · July 2016

dugarbandier said:

Tim_B said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tim_B said:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Problem is if that person is pointing a gun at someone else, gas or spray are much too slow acting, the trigger will be pulled. Same reason marksmen in the same situation won't engage without a clear shot for a clean kill.
Was there some reason they had to stop him immediately? They had waited 2 hours. What was the reason that meant they had to disarm/disable him immediately?
He has weapons and possibly bombs, so he's very dangerous. Delay increases the risk.

Once negotiations reach an impasse, it's time to move in.
While it makes me uneasy too I think the Dallas cops took the least worst option.
There were no good options - either he comes out or they go in: Johnson's choice. Given that he's killed 5 and wounded 6 cops, says he wants to kill more, is armed and possibly has bombs, it's going to be a shootout. Using the explosive minimizes casualties and resolves the situation.

As you said - the least worst option.
if he had actually had bombs with him they would presumably have detonated? so it sounds like they were pretty lucky that he didn't?

I don't know where exactly they got him holed up - apparently somewhere in a parking garage - or how thick the walls were etc. Nor the state of any explosives he may have had with him. I don't think those details are public yet.

felix · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

MarqueeMark said:
Andrea did the right thing. She could perhaps have pulled out earlier - those around her who were trying to rubbish The TImes article about motherhood did her no favours at all. They had clearly invested all their Brexit hopes in her - and so were willing to overlook what was politically unforgivable to the wider electorate. But Andrea was not the torch-bearer they desperately wanted.
An inexperienced - but I think fundamentally decent - candidate surrounded by manipulative incompetents - I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....</blockquote

Yup - looking at some of that crowd around her house yesterday the words nutcases and fruitloops were difficult to get out of my head.

SimonStClare · July 2016

Morning all.

“those seeking high office must expect the highest levels of scrutiny”

Indeed, I wonder for how many of the new social media generation, their future political aspirations may already be over? – On a lighter note, scanning the front pages this morning a couple of things stuck out, only the Guardian bothers reporting the Labour leadership launch yesterday on their front page, and even that’s reduced to a small square in the top left-hand corner where the 2 for I adds normally go; there’s a metaphor there somewhere? – Also Andrew Pierce for the Mail reporting on Leadsom's campaign goes with, ‘the accidental candidate’ – a PB lurker unmasked perhaps?

Paul_Bedfordshire · July 2016

Who is up for another hour of Trainspotting Live tonight, complete with Peter Snow and his Pinometer (I kid you not)

"Oh, look at that!" declaimed the veteran newsman as a rickety freight train rumbled past. "A class sixty-sixty,” he hooted. It was a rust bucket on wheels – but Snow's eagerness knew no limits. Later, his head would almost pop off when a viewer reported seeing a “flying banana” measurement engine near Cambridge. To describe his enthusiasm as infectious would be an overstatement. It was certainly striking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/07/11/trainspotting-live-review-a-sleepy-valentine-to-that-most-eccent/

Only in England.....

Malmesbury · July 2016

Morning all.

It occurs to me that in the discussions of the various groupings of voters in the referendum, one group has been left out.

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...

CarlottaVance · July 2016

The Times ruined her candidacy with the old journalistic trick of reporting faithfully precisely the words she uttered......

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/combustion-brexiteers-andrea-leadsom-eu-referendum-theresa-may

Scott_P · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....

IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...

I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'

Malmesbury · July 2016

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.

Knock out gas is for the movies - you are going to kill about 50% of the people you "knock out" when they choke on their tongues.

Tear gas at high enough concentrations to guarantee incapacitation reduces visibility to zero.

Morally, what is the difference between a pound of C4 and a rifle bullet in .308?

Emotionally, you are reacting to the issue of doing it remotely - "A weapon that denies the capacity for the enemy to show bravery" - which was the medieval philosophical objection to ranged weapons...

Within our lifetimes, the robot going in the door will be carrying a gun. Probably will have glowing red eyes for marketing.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....
IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.

'Self awareness' was never his strong suit.....(does he have a 'strong suit'? - ed.)

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Knock out gas is for the movies - you are going to kill about 50% of the people you "knock out" when they choke on their tongues.

Isn't that happened when the Russians ended that theatre siege - with many hostages dying?

Tim_B · July 2016

Malmesbury said:
Morning all.

It occurs to me that in the discussions of the various groupings of voters in the referendum, one group has been left out.

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...

Some of them are probably raising a glass to their signed photo of Neil and Glenys Kinnock, celebrating their monthly haul of EU taxpayers money.

SouthamObserver · July 2016

The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.

Malmesbury · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Knock out gas is for the movies - you are going to kill about 50% of the people you "knock out" when they choke on their tongues.

Isn't that happened when the Russians ended that theatre siege - with many hostages dying?

Yes. People forget that when you get a total anaesthetic, it is done by a trained medical professional who is standing next to you, in a medical theatre full of equipment, monitoring your vital signs constantly, with an array of gases and drugs at his/her instant command.

And people still die/are injured.

Malmesbury · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'

More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?

ToryJim · July 2016

I think Andrea managed to depart with incredible dignity. I think it was pretty obvious from the weekend that she was going to have a torrid time of it that would have holed her below the waterline even had she won.

The absolute master stroke which will stand her in good stead with the party faithful was timing her departure to take Eagle's wings off. That was a decision of low political cunning that students of Machiavelli would applaud to the rafters.

SimonStClare · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.

The better candidate won because the challenger was a "delusional lightweight".

SquareRoot · July 2016

It seems inconceivable that any candidate for the highest office in the land could be so unprepared for the questions asked.

Her attempt to suggest that she was a better candidate because she was a mum was frightful. What on earth was she thinking of.

Still, We still have months of fun and games with Labour. That twitter last night of Corbyn at some Cuba rally was very telling .

fitalass · July 2016

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....
IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.

I must admit that IDS intervention was certainly the point where my irony meteor exploded among much laughter.

Tim_B · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?

Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.

fitalass · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.

And who is the infamous establishment these days? The wannabe MP candidates selected by their local constituency party associations or by open primaries up and down the country? The MPs then elected by their local constituents with unfailing regularity at GE's?

SquareRoot · July 2016

fitalass said:

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....
IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.
I must admit that IDS intervention was certainly the point where my irony meteor exploded among much laughter.

When IDS got the gig, the Tories were too intent on trying to ensure Ken Clarke didn't get it and IDS was the result... A lesson hard learned as IDS was just terrible as LOTO

SouthamObserver · July 2016

SimonStClare said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
The better candidate won because the challenger was a "delusional lightweight".

Of course, May was clearly the only sane choice. But less than three weeks after a vote that was supposed to have rocked the Establishment to its core it is very much in charge with minimal damage done. Not that it was ever going to be otherwise.

PlatoSaid · July 2016

Tomorrow, Mrs May will get the keys to Downing St - the anniversary of Macmillan’s Night of the Long Knives.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/darling-buddies-rush-to-new-leaders-side-h68dwwkvl

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

The seeds of the next cycle of internal party struggles start IMHO with the next cabinet. Is Mrs May going to be an interventionist leftie?
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Malmesbury · July 2016

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.

The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.

Pulpstar · July 2016

Would Leadsom have won if it went to the members ?

Probably not - but she had a fighting chance. You need a decently thick skin to become PM - if one hostile news story spells the end of your candidacy then you wouldn't have been up to the job anyway.

I don't think it was the news story that sunk her, more enough MPs dropping hints they would immediately post a letter to Mr Brady - that is my hunch.

logical_song · July 2016

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.

Which deal, it's not specified?

Paul_Bedfordshire · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'

And when it is done and we continue to prosper they will be mightily glad it was done.

One reason the 48% is nearer the 20% and no chance of a vote ever taking us back in.

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:

SimonStClare said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
The better candidate won because the challenger was a "delusional lightweight".

Of course, May was clearly the only sane choice. But less than three weeks after a vote that was supposed to have rocked the Establishment to its core it is very much in charge with minimal damage done. Not that it was ever going to be otherwise.

Mrs May had 4 key groups behind her.
1. REMAIN
2. Establishment
3. Cameroons
4. Osborne and co.

Add in a few Leavers and that made a formidable alliance. However it skirts over the right vs centrist split.

Paul_Bedfordshire · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Knock out gas is for the movies - you are going to kill about 50% of the people you "knock out" when they choke on their tongues.

Tear gas at high enough concentrations to guarantee incapacitation reduces visibility to zero.

Morally, what is the difference between a pound of C4 and a rifle bullet in .308?

Emotionally, you are reacting to the issue of doing it remotely - "A weapon that denies the capacity for the enemy to show bravery" - which was the medieval philosophical objection to ranged weapons...

Within our lifetimes, the robot going in the door will be carrying a gun. Probably will have glowing red eyes for marketing.

And a rictus grin and mutters about 45 minutes?

Ally_B · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done.... I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate. The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.
The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.

I'll not see another referendum in the next 20 years because the people can't be trusted to vote the right way even when the consequences are spelt out to them. You would have the same problem as we had with this one if you only offered a Yes/No vote on whatever outcome was on offer. If you gave, say, four alternatives and one gets 30%, two 25% and the last 20% you will have solved nothing other than upset 70% rather than 48%.

logical_song · July 2016

Where Theresa May has stood on major issues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/36770533

Moses_ · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.
The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.

You only have to read the threads on this site to see that "everyone accepts" and a "time to move on" is probably unachievable.

RodCrosby · July 2016

The takeover is well underway - Labour's largest regional party swallowed whole by Momentum...
http://brightonandhoveindependent.co.uk/corbyn-supporters-take-control-brighton-hoves-labour-party/
https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-d9b4-Labour-right-thugs-threaten-own-side#.V4SHergrJhE

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

What weakened the right in this party's election was the starting point of their candidates. Most were outside the cabinet and had not built alliances in advance. Add in Gove's political stupidity and the right wing inevitably lost this election .

Malmesbury · July 2016

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Malmesbury said:

Lowlander said:

dugarbandier said:
the US is really getting into some freaky territory

""We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the subject was," Dallas Police Chief David Brown said at a news conference Friday morning. "Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.""

"no other option"?
The whole bomb robot seems very disturbing.

Have they released the full conversation, a robot will have a camera and mic. It seems very disturbing they couldn't just spray out some pepper spray or some knock out gas.

It sounds like state sponsored murder.
Knock out gas is for the movies - you are going to kill about 50% of the people you "knock out" when they choke on their tongues.

Tear gas at high enough concentrations to guarantee incapacitation reduces visibility to zero.

Morally, what is the difference between a pound of C4 and a rifle bullet in .308?

Emotionally, you are reacting to the issue of doing it remotely - "A weapon that denies the capacity for the enemy to show bravery" - which was the medieval philosophical objection to ranged weapons...

Within our lifetimes, the robot going in the door will be carrying a gun. Probably will have glowing red eyes for marketing.

And a rictus grin and mutters about 45 minutes?

No - the people building autonomous killer robots will have *some* ethical limits

Paul_Bedfordshire · July 2016

fitalass said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
And who is the infamous establishment these days? The wannabe MP candidates selected by their local constituency party associations or by open primaries up and down the country? The MPs then elected by their local constituents with unfailing regularity at GE's?

Judging by the readership and seeming influence with some politicians of this site - as evidenced by Southam collecting MP twitter followers after his article - you could as well argue that us lot reek of establishment

Malmesbury · July 2016

Moses_ said:

Malmesbury said:

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.
The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.
You only have to read the threads on this site to see that "everyone accepts" and a "time to move on" is probably unachievable.

As with all democracy. But the point is that such a vote reduces the noise to bearable limits. Imagine if there had been no Scottish referendum (Government gets all Spanish and declares that it would illegal etc)?

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

logical_song said:
Where Theresa May has stood on major issues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/36770533

Uninspiring stuff which reveals very little. She seems to prefer the company of wets yet has illiberal leanings. Almost Blairite.

Malmesbury · July 2016

Ally_B said:

Malmesbury said:

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done.... I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate. The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.
The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.
I'll not see another referendum in the next 20 years because the people can't be trusted to vote the right way even when the consequences are spelt out to them. You would have the same problem as we had with this one if you only offered a Yes/No vote on whatever outcome was on offer. If you gave, say, four alternatives and one gets 30%, two 25% and the last 20% you will have solved nothing other than upset 70% rather than 48%.

Fair enough - I will send some soldiers to parliament to put an end to their prattling while we are at it. Can't trust the wetched voters or their wretched representatives. Much better WE make the decisions, eh?

SouthamObserver · July 2016

fitalass said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
And who is the infamous establishment these days? The wannabe MP candidates selected by their local constituency party associations or by open primaries up and down the country? The MPs then elected by their local constituents with unfailing regularity at GE's?

It's the people who control the levers of power and influence. We were told that a vote for Brexit would send them reeling and shake them up like nothing ever has before. Funnily enough, though, nothing much seems to have changed.

Malmesbury · July 2016

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

fitalass said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
And who is the infamous establishment these days? The wannabe MP candidates selected by their local constituency party associations or by open primaries up and down the country? The MPs then elected by their local constituents with unfailing regularity at GE's?
Judging by the readership and seeming influence with some politicians of this site - as evidenced by Southam collecting MP twitter followers after his article - you could as well argue that us lot reek of establishment

One of the fun things about working in the City is telling people who still have youthful lefty views that "You are The Man, now"...

DecrepitJohnL · July 2016

SquareRoot said:

fitalass said:

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....
IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.
I must admit that IDS intervention was certainly the point where my irony meteor exploded among much laughter.
When IDS got the gig, the Tories were too intent on trying to ensure Ken Clarke didn't get it and IDS was the result... A lesson hard learned as IDS was just terrible as LOTO

Terrible as LOTO in the Commons but IDS did a fair job at converting votes into councillors at elections -- something generally overlooked by those who have swallowed the "Howard saved the party" spin.

Sean_F · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:

SimonStClare said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
The better candidate won because the challenger was a "delusional lightweight".

Of course, May was clearly the only sane choice. But less than three weeks after a vote that was supposed to have rocked the Establishment to its core it is very much in charge with minimal damage done. Not that it was ever going to be otherwise.

I think it's far too early to reach that conclusion.

Moses_ · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Moses_ said:

Malmesbury said:

Tim_B said:

Malmesbury said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
More than that - (I, and I suspect many others) will not be demanding more votes, the EU (but without the EU), etc. Though I personally think there should be a referendum on whatever deal gets done....

I wonder how many full bore Euronationalists there are?
Be careful what you wish for - you've had the Brexit referendum. Assume the May government puts the EU exit 'deal' to another referendum and it gets defeated. What do you do now? The EU aren't going to renegotiate.

The deal you get is the only one in town. Accept it and move on.
The primary reason I want a referendum on such a deal is so that everyone "Accepts it and moves on". X decades of "betrayal" blah blah blah would be quite boring.
You only have to read the threads on this site to see that "everyone accepts" and a "time to move on" is probably unachievable.
As with all democracy. But the point is that such a vote reduces the noise to bearable limits. Imagine if there had been no Scottish referendum (Government gets all Spanish and declares that it would illegal etc)?

Quite, and I was not actually disagreeing with you.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?

RobD · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?

Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.

CarlottaVance · July 2016

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.

Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....

ydoethur · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.

That didn't stop Jez.

david_herdson · July 2016

On topic, I agree with Mike (apart from in his belief that Leadsom stood a fighting chance of winning - as I said in yesterday's leader).

The kind of scrutiny that Leadsom went under is the sort that any PM has to put up with as a matter of routine. Whinging that the press didn't report your comments as you meant them - as opposed to as you said them - is absurd. You simply cannot expect that sort of favour, and to believe you do suggests a disconnect with the reality of the rigours of the role.

DecrepitJohnL · July 2016

TCPoliticalBetting said:
What weakened the right in this party's election was the starting point of their candidates. Most were outside the cabinet and had not built alliances in advance. Add in Gove's political stupidity and the right wing inevitably lost this election .

The right may well have won -- we do not really know where Theresa May stands on anything, but she is probably to the right of Boris and her "one nation" speech could have been authored by Michael Gove.

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

CarlottaVance said:

Malmesbury said:

The reluctant Remainers. People, like myself, who voted remain because (even though we have no love for the political mechanism of the EU), on the balance we thought it would do too much damage to leave.

Not every Remainer is sitting there in a dark room, half way down the second bottle of brandy, the tears rolling off the signed portrait of Junker, with Ode to Joy at 11 on the stereo. In a loop...
I suspect May be the PM many of them want - 'it's done, no point in crying over spilt milk, time to get on with it....'
And when it is done and we continue to prosper they will be mightily glad it was done.

One reason the 48% is nearer the 20% and no chance of a vote ever taking us back in.

True on the size of 20%, but the 20% occupy a greater proportion of influential positions, aka the establishment.

RobD · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.
Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....

Nothing like a bit of infrastructure spending to boost the economy.

Both would definitely show that we are open for business, and the option I would prefer.

JosiasJessop · July 2016

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.
Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....
Nothing like a bit of infrastructure spending to boost the economy. Both would definitely show that we are open for business, and the option I would prefer.

We had a big inquiry to show what should be done. What's the point of having such inquiries if people just go off and 'chose' their favourite based on f/all evidence?

Heck, I think Boris Island's the long-term solution. I had given up on that as we need the infrastructure in place quickly, bit I guess now all options are open, I should evangelise for it once more.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/440316/airports-commission-final-report.pdf

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

DecrepitJohnL said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:
What weakened the right in this party's election was the starting point of their candidates. Most were outside the cabinet and had not built alliances in advance. Add in Gove's political stupidity and the right wing inevitably lost this election .
The right may well have won -- we do not really know where Theresa May stands on anything, but she is probably to the right of Boris and her "one nation" speech could have been authored by Michael Gove.

Conhome are a good judge on these matters and they tag her as a Joe Chamberlain type.

Malmesbury · July 2016

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.
Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....
Nothing like a bit of infrastructure spending to boost the economy. Both would definitely show that we are open for business, and the option I would prefer.

The best option (IMHO) would be a variation on Boris Island - a variation on concrete oil platform technology. Think a series of tables - flat top, legs with flotation chambers at the bottom. Because they are for shallow water, much lower than an oil platform. Say 350m x 50m and 50m high. Each. Build in various shipyards, float into position. You could build you airport *anywhere*.

When it is done, sell Heathrow for housing. Make money on the deal.

RobD · July 2016

JosiasJessop said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.
Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....
Nothing like a bit of infrastructure spending to boost the economy. Both would definitely show that we are open for business, and the option I would prefer.
We had a big inquiry to show what should be done. What's the point of having such inquiries if people just go off and 'chose' their favourite based on f/all evidence?

Heck, I think Boris Island's the long-term solution. I had given up on that as we need the infrastructure in place quickly, bit I guess now all options are open, I should evangelise for it once more.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/440316/airports-commission-final-report.pdf

Hah, yeah I was probably being a little too bombastic. We should commit to enacting the findings of the review (although did they ever consider doing both, I wonder)

paulyork64 · July 2016

fitalass said:
Daily Mirror - Jeremy Corbyn promised Labour leaders would face election every year to avoid 'personality' leadership

"Jeremy Corbyn promised to make Labour leaders face mandatory elections every year to avoid the party struggling with a 'personality' leader.

He said it would "bring back democracy into the Labour Party and the Labour movement."

But the embattled Labour leader seems to have radically changed his mind since he unexpectedly became leader of the party last September."

Right now i think jeremy would love to face an election, but others are trying to prevent him from doing so.

TCPoliticalBetting · July 2016

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?

If Justine Greening is in cabinet, then yes Heathrow looks off.

Ally_B · July 2016

Malmesbury said:

Fair enough - I will send some soldiers to parliament to put an end to their prattling while we are at it. Can't trust the wetched voters or their wretched representatives. Much better WE make the decisions, eh?

Better our elected representatives make the decisions we elected them to do. They can explain to the masses why they are not doing what we might want come election time. Some issues are too emotive to be left to rational decision making by the proletariat.

Sean_F · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:

fitalass said:

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.
And who is the infamous establishment these days? The wannabe MP candidates selected by their local constituency party associations or by open primaries up and down the country? The MPs then elected by their local constituents with unfailing regularity at GE's?

It's the people who control the levers of power and influence. We were told that a vote for Brexit would send them reeling and shake them up like nothing ever has before. Funnily enough, though, nothing much seems to have changed.

Brexit has put a bomb under Labour. If there's now a huge realignment on the Left, then inevitably, that will have a big impact on the Right. It's also demonstrated to lots of people that their votes do actually count. And crucially, it's altered the trajectory of British foreign policy; the UK can never now be at the heart of Europe.

JosiasJessop · July 2016

RobD said:

JosiasJessop said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:
Paul Goodman: Heathrow expansion looks dead in the water now

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/07/may-joe-chamberlain-in-kitten-heels-who-will-serve-in-her-interventionist-cabinet-and-deliver-brexit.html

Apart from May's constituency being Maidenhead - has she said anything on this?
Surely she should just get it out of the way ASAP. Say that the government will carry out the findings of the independent review.
Or do something bold like Heathrow and Gatwick.....
Nothing like a bit of infrastructure spending to boost the economy. Both would definitely show that we are open for business, and the option I would prefer.
We had a big inquiry to show what should be done. What's the point of having such inquiries if people just go off and 'chose' their favourite based on f/all evidence?

Heck, I think Boris Island's the long-term solution. I had given up on that as we need the infrastructure in place quickly, bit I guess now all options are open, I should evangelise for it once more.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/440316/airports-commission-final-report.pdf
Hah, yeah I was probably being a little too bombastic. We should commit to enacting the findings of the review (although did they ever consider doing both, I wonder)

From memory (faulty atm) I think the did and it was rejected at an early stage - perhaps the interim report where BI was taken off the list of options. The cost is obviously much greater than either Gatwick or Heathrow alone.

Also, expanding both Gatwick and Heathrow go against the 'hub' airport concept that ISTR was central to the commission.

If the commission report can be attacked anywhere, it is on the basis they worked - the need for a hub airport being an example. I think the report itself was very good within that basis.

The interim report:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/271231/airports-commission-interim-report.pdf

RodCrosby · July 2016

Corbyn's day of destiny...
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-582d-Corbyn-should-have-NEC-vote-wrapped-up#.V4SOcbgrJhE

ydoethur · July 2016

DecrepitJohnL said:

SquareRoot said:

fitalass said:

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:
I hope IDS enjoys his long spell on the back benches.....
IDS complaining to journalists about betrayal, black ops and treachery was the high point of yesterday.
I must admit that IDS intervention was certainly the point where my irony meteor exploded among much laughter.
When IDS got the gig, the Tories were too intent on trying to ensure Ken Clarke didn't get it and IDS was the result... A lesson hard learned as IDS was just terrible as LOTO
Terrible as LOTO in the Commons but IDS did a fair job at converting votes into councillors at elections -- something generally overlooked by those who have swallowed the "Howard saved the party" spin.

IDS also did some useful reorganisation and changed the mood music so the Tories were not so hard right - Clarke and Portillo could not have done that.

The problem was nobody was listening and he didn't understand how to make them listen. He didn't have Howard's energy or intellectual force.

SimonStClare · July 2016

Polly’s lament.

Despite Corbyn’s denials, Labour’s council election results were the worst since 1982, the first time an opposition has had net losses in a non-general election year. No opposition has ever won power without reaching a 20% lead. Corbyn scores “the worst ratings of any opposition leader ever” among swing voters, says Britain Thinks. Nearly a third of Labour supporters who voted Brexit say they will not return.

This is a party in freefall, but those facts make no impression on Labour’s new members. Professor Tim Bale has surveyed them and finds 77% who joined after Corbyn became leader believe he will win the next general election. Denial, delusion, magical thinking, call it what you will, they believe it. Worse, I’ve heard many say winning is shoddy Westminster elite stuff: conviction matters more, say some Trots but mainly ardent believers.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/12/tories-labour-angela-eagle-labour-corbyn-party-membership

SquareRoot · July 2016

TCPoliticalBetting said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:
What weakened the right in this party's election was the starting point of their candidates. Most were outside the cabinet and had not built alliances in advance. Add in Gove's political stupidity and the right wing inevitably lost this election .
The right may well have won -- we do not really know where Theresa May stands on anything, but she is probably to the right of Boris and her "one nation" speech could have been authored by Michael Gove.
Conhome are a good judge on these matters and they tag her as a Joe Chamberlain type.

Con Home are about as accurate as their voodoo polls.

Alanbrooke · July 2016

SouthamObserver said:
The Establishment won because the challenger was a delusional lightweight.

what happens in Labour where boih candidates are ?

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Leadsom candidacy is reminder that those seeking high o

Comments