Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The size of her majority will determine the sort of PM Theresa

SystemSystem Posts: 12,599
edited May 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The size of her majority will determine the sort of PM Theresa May can be and what sort of Brexit and other radicalism we might see, or not see from her

Despite all the light and heat generated with recent polling, I still expect the Tories to win a majority, unless Nick Timothy decides to add another Nimitz class sized barnacle to the Tory boat between now and June 8th

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,536
    edited May 2017
    First!

    Everything points to the midterm for the incoming Tory government being brutal. There is enough grief hardwired into the things it will have to do, and considerable risk from external events, particularly the likelihood of economic downturn.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    FPT:
    IanB2 said:

    Tory 're-launch' today cancelled!

    What do you mean by that?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Sion Simon....hmm rings a bell
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,536
    RobD said:

    FPT:

    IanB2 said:

    Tory 're-launch' today cancelled!

    What do you mean by that?
    See below. I notice now it was a Friday story, so probably discussed on PB already. But there were posters yesterday still talking about today's relaunch.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservatives-election-campaign-relaunch-party-lead-polls-cut-labour-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-a7756976.html
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Luton airport is just plain wrong...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    I think the government has benefitted from its competent response to Manchester bombing. Without it, I think we'd have seen poll leads of 0-10%, rather than 6-14%.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    The header should factor in Theresa May's age. She is what, 60 now, so by the end of the next term will be 65 which is the age at which Margaret Thatcher left office. This probably means that whatever the majority and however successful her policies, ministers will be jockeying for position with an eye to succession mid-term.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    IanB2 said:

    RobD said:

    FPT:

    IanB2 said:

    Tory 're-launch' today cancelled!

    What do you mean by that?
    See below. I notice now it was a Friday story, so probably discussed on PB already. But there were posters yesterday still talking about today's relaunch.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservatives-election-campaign-relaunch-party-lead-polls-cut-labour-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-a7756976.html
    Those posters were probably talking about the Times lead story?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,782
    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,536
    edited May 2017
    The key is that the Tory share has hardly taken a hit, which puts them in an unassailable position.

    It would be interesting to know however how much the pollsters are adjusting the Tory share upwards to allow for the shy factor? People like to back a winner, and with such a one-sided contest it is possible the shy factor isn't as strong this year as previously? Similarly the Labour share is being downdialled for likelihood to vote, which could be confounded if Corbyfandom beats Milifandom (evidence for the latter even having existed being somewhat sparse).
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Sean_F said:

    I think the government has benefitted from its competent response to Manchester bombing. Without it, I think we'd have seen poll leads of 0-10%, rather than 6-14%.

    Every single poll shows Jeremy Corbyn to be a net liability for Labour. That's what is keeping the Tories in front. Crushingly mediocre beats toxically catastrophic every single time.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    With regards to the voter suppression debate on the previous thread, isn't that what the Tories are planning for the next Parliament?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,752
    https://twitter.com/stephenjrobin/status/868669362202456065

    Interesting.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    SouthamObserver said:

    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.

    I think Labour will likely win in 2022 - provided they get a decent leader.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    SouthamObserver said:

    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.

    SouthamObserver said:

    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.

    I am as unimpressed as you are by Mrs May's recent performance. But practically everyone would at least at some time look out of his depth in the job of PM. It's not making mistakes that matters, but the capacity to learn from those mistakes. On that a final judgement on Mrs May is surely premature if not unfair.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Sean_F said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.

    I think Labour will likely win in 2022 - provided they get a decent leader.

    It's a big caveat, but I tend to agree. Wiser Labour members should reflect that whatever else the polls say they all show Corbyn is a drag on the party's vote. Problem is that there are not that many wise Labour members. It will come down to the unions, I suspect.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Hm, 200 seat majority, or Nick Timothy out on his arse? A tough one.. :D
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    But arguably a majority of that size (particularly towards the higher end) WOULD vindicate him, wouldn't it? Surely nobody is arguing that the Social Care policy was put forward as a vote winner? It was put forward as a proposal that the Conservatives could afford to make because May had political capital to spend and it was an explicit trade off between size of majority and room to manoeuvre in the next Parliament. Same with abandoning the triple lock and the tax lock.

    At the last election Cameron and Osborne made a whole load of manifesto promises that were widely seen as bargaining chips to be given away in coalition negotiations. When they ended up with a majority they had a massive headache to deal with, and this is in part an explanation why we are where we are. Of course the Conservatives could have done this again, and made a load of populist promises, but they took a risk for longer term gain. If they get a comfortable majority then I think they will be happy with that.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Agree - I'd be perfectly happy with that - enough to govern with but a salutary reminder for any ideologues that Tories and ideology usually ends in tears...
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    There is also an argument that a majority on the "comfortable but not landslide" level would be ideal. Too small a majority and May is in the hands of the awkward squad. Too large a majority and the Tories will feel that they can do what they want as the next election is in the bag. And ironically that may make her more vulnerable to back bench rebellion.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    alex. said:

    There is also an argument that a majority on the "comfortable but not landslide" level would be ideal. Too small a majority and May is in the hands of the awkward squad. Too large a majority and the Tories will feel that they can do what they want as the next election is in the bag. And ironically that may make her more vulnerable to back bench rebellion.

    Francis Pym was right in his comment about landslides. They have produced some right shocking disasters in the last 86 years. It is vital for the country that May doesn't get one, but as she is being opposed by an ideologue, a liar and an idiot she probably still will.

    It's a shame Pym doubled down with his private, unpleasant and unnecessary remarks about Thatcher's personality. He would have acted as a more effective counterbalance to Thatcher and Lawson than the plodding Howe or mercurial Heseltine.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,782
    edited May 2017
    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    CarlottaVance said:

    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Agree - I'd be perfectly happy with that - enough to govern with but a salutary reminder for any ideologues that Tories and ideology usually ends in tears...

    As it is now obvious to everyone but a yet to be determined number of Labour members that it is Corbyn who is delivering the Tories their victory, a White Cliffs of Dover, We Will Never Surrender, Rule Britannia, it's all the EU's fault no Brexit deal narrative will be much harder to sell to the public than the Tories were clearly hoping would be the case. That will create some very interesting political dynamics over the coming five years and put a lot more pressure on May to deliver on her promises.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    After the polling scare any reasonable majority is ok. As others have said , large majorities tend to have bad outcomes, but May needs a good enough majority to sort the loons in her party. I guess 60-80 would be optimal.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2017
    ... and we need a Marginal's poll. I haven't seen one this election.???
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,097
    Morning all. So how was Mega Polling Saturday for you?

    Meanwhile, nothing much changed, Spreadex still put the majority over a hundred at 378 seats, and Betfair have the majority at 1.14.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Roger said:

    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....

    May's support is predicated on Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party. That much is now clear. But she will be entering her delivery phase having failed to cement the strong and stable, mother of the nation narrative she was aiming for. That will make the next five years extremely challenging for her whatever majority she gets. Like you, I am expecting it to be pretty big, if not huge.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,536
    SouthamObserver said:

    Sean_F said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Whatever majority she gets May will continue to be what this campaign has confirmed that she is: utterly mediocre; at best. In less than a month she will start negotiating Brexit. God help us.

    I think Labour will likely win in 2022 - provided they get a decent leader.

    It's a big caveat, but I tend to agree. Wiser Labour members should reflect that whatever else the polls say they all show Corbyn is a drag on the party's vote. Problem is that there are not that many wise Labour members. It will come down to the unions, I suspect.

    That last point being one of the key reasons why the Labour Party as currently constituted is becoming less and less relevant.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    SquareRoot said:

    ... and we need a Marginal's poll. I haven't seen one this election.???

    Possibly because it's much harder to determine which constituencies are 'marginal'?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Hm, 200 seat majority, or Nick Timothy out on his arse? A tough one.. :D
    Despite all the bedwetting antics of some PB Tories, the ten fundamentals of the election haven't changed a deal from the off and will not all the way to 10pm on June 8th.

    Whilst the polls have shown all the calm of TSE left unattended at a designer outlet during the sales and various "events dear boy events" have as usual added to the colour and gaiety of the campaign ,we are really only circling around a countdown to a Conservative landslide.

    Did I forget to mention the ten fundamentals to the backdrop to this inevitability. Ooopps .... sorry :

    Nine of them are Jeremy Corbyn and the final one is that Mrs May isn't the most recent MP for Islington North.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    SouthamObserver said:

    Roger said:

    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....

    May's support is predicated on Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party. That much is now clear. But she will be entering her delivery phase having failed to cement the strong and stable, mother of the nation narrative she was aiming for. That will make the next five years extremely challenging for her whatever majority she gets. Like you, I am expecting it to be pretty big, if not huge.

    A serious question SO. As a "Labour without Corbyn" supporter, what is your actual opinion of the Labour manifesto? Do you think the manifesto and Corbyn are all part of the same package, and therefore you wouldn't expect it to be put forward by a "better leader", or do you think it is actually an election winning package (when properly scrutinised)?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    We share his values, said cabinet minister Liam Fox:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/27/duterte-jokes-that-his-soldiers-can-rape-women-under-martial-law-in-the-philippines/
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,487
    edited May 2017
    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    alex. said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Roger said:

    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....

    May's support is predicated on Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party. That much is now clear. But she will be entering her delivery phase having failed to cement the strong and stable, mother of the nation narrative she was aiming for. That will make the next five years extremely challenging for her whatever majority she gets. Like you, I am expecting it to be pretty big, if not huge.

    A serious question SO. As a "Labour without Corbyn" supporter, what is your actual opinion of the Labour manifesto? Do you think the manifesto and Corbyn are all part of the same package, and therefore you wouldn't expect it to be put forward by a "better leader", or do you think it is actually an election winning package (when properly scrutinised)?

    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited May 2017
    SouthamObserver said:

    We share his values, said cabinet minister Liam Fox:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/27/duterte-jokes-that-his-soldiers-can-rape-women-under-martial-law-in-the-philippines/

    Whilst the Prime Minister is said to have a soft spot for Liam Fox one does wonder whether it's centred around him being soft in the head.

    Fox hunting is also part of the PM's agenda. Perhaps she now favours putting him out of his misery so that he might have more time to make interesting hotel arrangements.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    SouthamObserver said:

    alex. said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Roger said:

    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....

    May's support is predicated on Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party. That much is now clear. But she will be entering her delivery phase having failed to cement the strong and stable, mother of the nation narrative she was aiming for. That will make the next five years extremely challenging for her whatever majority she gets. Like you, I am expecting it to be pretty big, if not huge.

    A serious question SO. As a "Labour without Corbyn" supporter, what is your actual opinion of the Labour manifesto? Do you think the manifesto and Corbyn are all part of the same package, and therefore you wouldn't expect it to be put forward by a "better leader", or do you think it is actually an election winning package (when properly scrutinised)?

    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

    But you don't think that, in the event of a sizeable Conservative victory, and of a sane Labour Party concluding that Corbyn was actually the problem (which is still far from certain), that there isn't a danger that the obvious flaws in the manifesto as a serious progamme for Government will be overlooked?

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,026
    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
    Not true, surely. What if a candidate dies between now and the election?
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
    Doesn't that depend how many elected members refuse to take their seats a la Sinn Fein and are therefore counted as neither govt nor opposition?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Jeremy Corbyn blamed Britain and the West for Isis’s murder of Alan Henning, the Salford cab driver beheaded by “Jihadi John”.

    The Labour leader had said Henning’s death was “the price of jingoism” by the West when he addressed a Stop the War rally a day after the gruesome video of the killing was published online.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/jeremy-corbyn-blames-the-west-for-jihadi-john-beheading-of-aid-worker-alan-henning-dz356f92t
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    alex. said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    alex. said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Roger said:

    My guess is a majority of 100-190. On TSE's scale that gives her the abiity to rule as she thinks fit. So a flavour what to expect.

    1. She thinks nothing of gratuitously insulting our ex partners in the EU.

    2. She'll re introduce grammar schools and bring back selection in education

    3. She'll bring back fox hunting

    4. She chose to send vans around areas of London with plackards telling immigrants to 'go home'

    5. She will court and sell arms to the most destabilising and misogynist country in the world

    A lot to look forward to....

    May's support is predicated on Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party. That much is now clear. But she will be entering her delivery phase having failed to cement the strong and stable, mother of the nation narrative she was aiming for. That will make the next five years extremely challenging for her whatever majority she gets. Like you, I am expecting it to be pretty big, if not huge.

    A serious question SO. As a "Labour without Corbyn" supporter, what is your actual opinion of the Labour manifesto? Do you think the manifesto and Corbyn are all part of the same package, and therefore you wouldn't expect it to be put forward by a "better leader", or do you think it is actually an election winning package (when properly scrutinised)?

    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

    But you don't think that, in the event of a sizeable Conservative victory, and of a sane Labour Party concluding that Corbyn was actually the problem (which is still far from certain), that there isn't a danger that the obvious flaws in the manifesto as a serious progamme for Government will be overlooked?

    I don't know. But if it is a sane Labour party (and that could well be different to an electorally successful one) the flaws in the current manifesto will not be overlooked.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,026
    Polruan said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
    Doesn't that depend how many elected members refuse to take their seats a la Sinn Fein and are therefore counted as neither govt nor opposition?
    Nope. I'm working on the same principle the bookies do.

    For example were the Tories to win 324 seats, 2 short of a majority but in reality a Tory majority because of SF abstentionism, the bookies would consider that a hung parliament
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,026
    alex. said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
    Not true, surely. What if a candidate dies between now and the election?
    But that seat would be eventually contested, so again the majority would be an even number.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,782
    edited May 2017
    SouthamObserver said:

    We share his values, said cabinet minister Liam Fox:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/27/duterte-jokes-that-his-soldiers-can-rape-women-under-martial-law-in-the-philippines/

    An extraordinary article even without Liam Fox's endorsement. The more outrageous Duterte's behaviour the more support he gets.

    The other day there was footage of two gay men being whipped. The crowds chanting 'more' and 'harder' was so large it would have embarrassed Old Trafford.

    It's the same in Saudi. Regular executions on Fridays which are packed and with kids sitting on their father's shoulders for a better view.

    I sometimes think the EU is one of the last bastions of civilisation which is one of the reasons why we're leaving
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    Any news on Survation?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    CarlottaVance said:

    Jeremy Corbyn blamed Britain and the West for Isis’s murder of Alan Henning, the Salford cab driver beheaded by “Jihadi John”.

    The Labour leader had said Henning’s death was “the price of jingoism” by the West when he addressed a Stop the War rally a day after the gruesome video of the killing was published online.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/jeremy-corbyn-blames-the-west-for-jihadi-john-beheading-of-aid-worker-alan-henning-dz356f92t

    So our standing up to ISIS is "jingoism" is it, Mr Corbyn?

    I hope somebody in the QT audience asks him that. Somebody from Manchester, perhaps.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Good morning, everyone.

    Good article, Mr. Eagles. The sharks may be circling sooner than she expected, although later than if Osborne hadn't run away.

    Hope you don't mind me reposting this Labour seat change list (which makes my initial assessment look a bit more realistic):
    -100 Adrianople [Malmesbury]
    -90 Cap Bon [Malmesbury’s suggestion]
    -80 Allia [another_richard’s suggestion]

    -70 Cannae
    -60 Arausio
    -50 Teutoberg Forest
    -40 Carrhae
    -30 Lake Trasimene

    If it's not too bad:
    -20 Asculum
    -10 Heraclea

    And, if Labour actually increase their seat numbers:
    +10 Zela
    +20 Tigranocerta
    +30 Zama

    Also, my pre-race ramble about Monaco is up here:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/monaco-pre-race-2017.html
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SouthamObserver said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Agree - I'd be perfectly happy with that - enough to govern with but a salutary reminder for any ideologues that Tories and ideology usually ends in tears...

    As it is now obvious to everyone but a yet to be determined number of Labour members that it is Corbyn who is delivering the Tories their victory, a White Cliffs of Dover, We Will Never Surrender, Rule Britannia, it's all the EU's fault no Brexit deal narrative will be much harder to sell to the public than the Tories were clearly hoping would be the case. That will create some very interesting political dynamics over the coming five years and put a lot more pressure on May to deliver on her promises.

    I would disagree. It seems Jezza will raise the Labour vote share, so it will not be him to blame for a May victory. Nonetheless I expect him to be replaced within a couple of years, simply due to age. He may well be an effective LOTO for a period of Brexit.

    I reckon on a Tory majority of about 75 myself (76 if that keeps TSE happy!).

    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Polruan said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Freggles said:

    What if the majority is 199 seats? :trollface:

    The majority can only be an even number.
    Doesn't that depend how many elected members refuse to take their seats a la Sinn Fein and are therefore counted as neither govt nor opposition?
    Nope. I'm working on the same principle the bookies do.

    For example were the Tories to win 324 seats, 2 short of a majority but in reality a Tory majority because of SF abstentionism, the bookies would consider that a hung parliament
    I never knew that... this is perhaps why I should avoid detailed betting.

    Creation of a new deputy speaker role?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Morning all.

    ‘A majority of 52-98 seats’ would be TMay’s ideal result, country before party and all that - the fact I could win my two largest bets on this outcome is just a coincidence…!
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    I think I can see the flaw in that cunning plan.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,782
    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    I remember when Ian Brady was fighting for the right to die the public overwhelmingly said he should be forced to live.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Mr. Roger, it is an interesting philosophical question. Is it right to force someone to live? Does it depend on their circumstance (say, terminally ill patient fully in possession of critical faculties, versus imprisoned serial killer)?

    Mr. StClare, wouldn't be bad for my 350-374 seats bet, either.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    Roger said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    I remember when Ian Brady was fighting for the right to die the public overwhelmingly said he should be forced to live.
    Fickle lot, the public....
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2017
    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    foxinsoxuk said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Agree - I'd be perfectly happy with that - enough to govern with but a salutary reminder for any ideologues that Tories and ideology usually ends in tears...

    As it is now obvious to everyone but a yet to be determined number of Labour members that it is Corbyn who is delivering the Tories their victory, a White Cliffs of Dover, We Will Never Surrender, Rule Britannia, it's all the EU's fault no Brexit deal narrative will be much harder to sell to the public than the Tories were clearly hoping would be the case. That will create some very interesting political dynamics over the coming five years and put a lot more pressure on May to deliver on her promises.

    I would disagree. It seems Jezza will raise the Labour vote share, so it will not be him to blame for a May victory. Nonetheless I expect him to be replaced within a couple of years, simply due to age. He may well be an effective LOTO for a period of Brexit.

    I reckon on a Tory majority of about 75 myself (76 if that keeps TSE happy!).

    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    I guess you are not her No 1 fan.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited May 2017
    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    foxinsoxuk said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Sean_F said:

    Given the parameters that TSE has set out, I think a lead of 52-98 would be best. I don't want Nick Timothy thinking that the result vindicates him.

    Agree - I'd be perfectly happy with that - enough to govern with but a salutary reminder for any ideologues that Tories and ideology usually ends in tears...

    As it is now obvious to everyone but a yet to be determined number of Labour members that it is Corbyn who is delivering the Tories their victory, a White Cliffs of Dover, We Will Never Surrender, Rule Britannia, it's all the EU's fault no Brexit deal narrative will be much harder to sell to the public than the Tories were clearly hoping would be the case. That will create some very interesting political dynamics over the coming five years and put a lot more pressure on May to deliver on her promises.

    I would disagree. It seems Jezza will raise the Labour vote share, so it will not be him to blame for a May victory. Nonetheless I expect him to be replaced within a couple of years, simply due to age. He may well be an effective LOTO for a period of Brexit.

    I reckon on a Tory majority of about 75 myself (76 if that keeps TSE happy!).

    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    Labour's vote share may increase. But England is now a two party country once more. So the best we can say is that Corbyn perhaps will not drstroy the Labour brand completely. He has proved incapable of taking on a truly abysmal Tory leader and PM.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,026
    edited May 2017
    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after his death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Meanwhile, in Isn't Corbyn Nice? news:
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/868586048095485952

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited May 2017
    Perhaps Parliament should pass a law denying the right of suicide bombers to a (religious?) burial. Would that prevent them seeing the virgins in heaven?

    Just as a matter of interest - what do female suicide bombers get out of the deal?
  • CityunslickerCityunslicker Posts: 60
    Long way to go yet. Labour have literally given a lot of hostages to fortune re security since Friday.

    May too would have known she was trading seats for expediency- so it is unfair to say she is poor, she evidently did not feel the need for a 200 seat majority.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    IIRC, the last Home Secretary to move directly to Prime Minister was Palmerston.

    Admittedly, Asquith used it as a stepping stone to the party leadership in the 1890s, but he had a spell out of office and as CotE in between.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,754
    SouthamObserver said:


    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

    Why is renationalisation ridiculous?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited May 2017
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
    Reading up on Cromwell many yonks ago, I discovered quite a few notable characters from history were exhumed after death, in order to be punished as traitors etc. – The 17th century an odd time for that sort of thing.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    MarqueeMark said:

    Roger said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    I remember when Ian Brady was fighting for the right to die the public overwhelmingly said he should be forced to live.
    Fickle lot, the public....
    I think we expect too much from "the public" especially in terms of rational thought and analysis of complex issues. By definition half of the population has an IQ of under 100 coupled with a disinterest in things political so why should we be surprised that in "our" opinion they make irrational choices.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
    Reading up on Cromwell many yonks ago, I discovered quite a few notable characters from history were exhumed after death, in order to be punished as traitors etc. – The 17th century an odd time for that sort of thing.
    Wonderful comment on Henry V:

    'He was as impulsive as his father, but less forgiving. A friend of his who was accused of treason received a fair trial, but it took place some time after he had been hanged.'
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    The Tory campaign has been astonishingly inept and I agree with the comments about what this has shown about May's very considerable limitations. The fact is, however, that the Tory share of the vote is down 2-3% since the campaign started. UKIP continue to have no pulse and the vast majority of the Kippers remain on board.

    What has made this election more interesting than anticipated is the extraordinary success of Labour who have moved from the mid 20s to the mid 30s gathering up the vast majority of the opposition outside Scotland.

    I freely confess I did not see that coming. I expected many Labour supporters to go to the Lib Dems in despair. The flow of traffic has been the other way. I expected that the more the public saw and heard of Corbyn the less that they would like it. That is not the case. Labour look on course to get a significantly higher share of the vote than they did in 2015 reducing the swing and the loss of seats.

    I think that we are now as a result in the 52-98 seat majority and quite possibly at the lower end of that. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but it does appear that a lot of Brits have looked at the idea of a May tsunami and decided that they had to do what they could to stop it, even if that meant voting for the idiot from Islington North.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    @DavidL.. if you compare to the polls immediately before the election was called, the Tories are about a point up.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    rkrkrk said:

    SouthamObserver said:


    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

    Why is renationalisation ridiculous?
    If you think the NHS is underfunded, why would you spend umpteen billions buying back say water companies from foreign Govt. bodies that hold shares in them?

    Oh I forgot, you will be paying them with "bonds", which don't represent real money at all, do they Jeremy?

    :face-palm:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    RobD said:

    @DavidL.. if you compare to the polls immediately before the election was called, the Tories are about a point up.

    Without checking, surely they were on around 46-47% then against 42-44% now? Or was that after it was called?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after his death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
    And err, being a dictator. Given your oft expressed aspirations TSE does this concern you?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Meanwhile, in Isn't Corbyn Nice? news:
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/868586048095485952

    Diane Abbott another signatory of the EDM calling for a united Ireland
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    nichomar said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Roger said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    I remember when Ian Brady was fighting for the right to die the public overwhelmingly said he should be forced to live.
    Fickle lot, the public....
    I think we expect too much from "the public" especially in terms of rational thought and analysis of complex issues. By definition half of the population has an IQ of under 100 coupled with a disinterest in things political so why should we be surprised that in "our" opinion they make irrational choices.
    And yet, in 2010 they somehow found that small electoral sweet spot that booted out the unloved Labour under Brown but without allowing the still unloved Tories a majority. Pretty canny of the public....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Roger, it is an interesting philosophical question. Is it right to force someone to live? Does it depend on their circumstance (say, terminally ill patient fully in possession of critical faculties, versus imprisoned serial killer)?

    Mr. StClare, wouldn't be bad for my 350-374 seats bet, either.

    You can't force them to live, but the State and its agents have no right to take any active steps to help them to die.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    Back in the day, the Irish used to treat (failed) suicides as attempted murder and would hang the perpetrator
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,228
    Roger said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    We share his values, said cabinet minister Liam Fox:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/27/duterte-jokes-that-his-soldiers-can-rape-women-under-martial-law-in-the-philippines/

    An extraordinary article even without Liam Fox's endorsement. The more outrageous Duterte's behaviour the more support he gets.

    The other day there was footage of two gay men being whipped. The crowds chanting 'more' and 'harder' was so large it would have embarrassed Old Trafford.

    It's the same in Saudi. Regular executions on Fridays which are packed and with kids sitting on their father's shoulders for a better view.

    I sometimes think the EU is one of the last bastions of civilisation which is one of the reasons why we're leaving
    Cause and effect, really. If we reject a block that promotes​ liberal values and the rule of law, we throw our lot in with those that respect neither liberal values nor the law. The pool of Australias and Canadas is small.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,386
    Mr Roger,

    "I remember when Ian Brady was fighting for the right to die the public overwhelmingly said he should be forced to live."

    Surprised to hear that. Most people I know begrudged every penny spent on him.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    JackW said:

    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
    Would she really have been worse than Jacqui Smith? Appallingly incompetent and out of her depth undoubtedly but worse than Smith? That is a real challenge.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited May 2017
    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    What did she achieve as Home Sec?

    She failed to cut non EU migration - something that should worry the majority of leavers, and was rude to the Police Federation when they objected to staffing cuts.

    The reason she survived was twofold:

    1) Coalition politics made reshuffles near impossible. hardly any cabinet changes occurred, even for the real duffers.

    2) She was a supporter of Cameron and Osborne's agenda within the party. I accept that in retrospect that this was careerism rather than sincerity.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,782
    alex. said:

    Perhaps Parliament should pass a law denying the right of suicide bombers to a (religious?) burial. Would that prevent them seeing the virgins in heaven?

    Just as a matter of interest - what do female suicide bombers get out of the deal?

    I'm not sure but for that matter what would the male suicide bombers do with 72 Ann Widdecombes?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,754
    DavidL said:

    The Tory campaign has been astonishingly inept and I agree with the comments about what this has shown about May's very considerable limitations. The fact is, however, that the Tory share of the vote is down 2-3% since the campaign started. UKIP continue to have no pulse and the vast majority of the Kippers remain on board.

    Maybe her campaign isnt that bad then?
    The main 'mistake' in terms of public support seems to have been on social care. But at least she can claim a mandate for her changes now. And she's still on course to win a respectable majority.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
    Would she really have been worse than Jacqui Smith? Appallingly incompetent and out of her depth undoubtedly but worse than Smith? That is a real challenge.
    So far as I know with all her many and egregious failings nobody ever accused Jacqui Smith of racism, treason or wishing to pay police officers £30 a year.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,026
    edited May 2017
    DavidL said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after his death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
    And err, being a dictator. Given your oft expressed aspirations TSE does this concern you?
    Not in the slightest.

    He was a Puritan, I'm anything but a Puritan, that's why the people will love me and not wish me harm.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
    Would she really have been worse than Jacqui Smith? Appallingly incompetent and out of her depth undoubtedly but worse than Smith? That is a real challenge.
    So far as I know with all her many and egregious failings nobody ever accused Jacqui Smith of racism, treason or wishing to pay police officers £30 a year.
    Nor did she blame IRA atrocities on the presence of British troops and call for their withdrawal and the establishment of a united Ireland.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,515
    CarlottaVance said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
    Would she really have been worse than Jacqui Smith? Appallingly incompetent and out of her depth undoubtedly but worse than Smith? That is a real challenge.
    So far as I know with all her many and egregious failings nobody ever accused Jacqui Smith of racism, treason or wishing to pay police officers £30 a year.
    Nor did she blame IRA atrocities on the presence of British troops and call for their withdrawal and the establishment of a united Ireland.
    That's covered by 'treason.'
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited May 2017
    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SquareRoot said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Sean_F said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    What a depressing poll. 65%/21% want to bring back hanging.

    There is nothing in the small print that suggests this is going to be anything other than an epic landslide for the Tories. They score 43%/24% on the economy and that makes it game set and match.

    Only the dilettante wealthy can afford the luxury of voting on social issues and there aren't enough of them. Brexit is an exception but thanks to Labour's ambivalence that has effectively been neutralised. Terrorism is a seven day wonder and most realise it isn't in the control of politicians.

    I agree about hanging. Noone has the right to take someone elses life. There have been too many wrongful executions.. America is littered with them.
    Support for capital punishment tends to rise sharply after an atrocity, before falling back.
    Indeed but its still terrifying so many people think like that.
    If the public was asked, I suspect you would get a very large majority in favour of hanging all suicide bombers....
    Yeah, they are that dumb. How do you hang a dead suicide bomber.
    in any event depriving them of their liberty forever is a much worse punishment imho
    One of the finest men in the history of this country was executed after death.

    Poor Oliver Cromwell, given a posthumous execution because he believed in democracy and egalitarianism.
    Reading up on Cromwell many yonks ago, I discovered quite a few notable characters from history were exhumed after death, in order to be punished as traitors etc. – The 17th century an odd time for that sort of thing.
    My favorite is Monmouth - executed for treason, but then they realised that they didn't have an official painting of him (as a member of the royal family this was unacceptable). So they stuck his head back on, covered the marks with a scarf, painted him... and then executed him again.

    ...probably untrue, but still a great story :smiley:
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2017
    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Theresa May was the longest serving Home Secretary simply because David Cameron did not believe in reshuffles. You might as well fete IDS for keeping his seat warm. May's time at the Home Office is best remembered for a speech to the Police Federation which should have been directed to ACPO, a failure to control even non-EU immigration (remember the Border Farce) and an ongoing though low-key cabinet dispute about whether foreign students counted.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,228
    DavidL said:

    The Tory campaign has been astonishingly inept and I agree with the comments about what this has shown about May's very considerable limitations. The fact is, however, that the Tory share of the vote is down 2-3% since the campaign started. UKIP continue to have no pulse and the vast majority of the Kippers remain on board.

    What has made this election more interesting than anticipated is the extraordinary success of Labour who have moved from the mid 20s to the mid 30s gathering up the vast majority of the opposition outside Scotland.

    I freely confess I did not see that coming. I expected many Labour supporters to go to the Lib Dems in despair. The flow of traffic has been the other way. I expected that the more the public saw and heard of Corbyn the less that they would like it. That is not the case. Labour look on course to get a significantly higher share of the vote than they did in 2015 reducing the swing and the loss of seats.

    I think that we are now as a result in the 52-98 seat majority and quite possibly at the lower end of that. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but it does appear that a lot of Brits have looked at the idea of a May tsunami and decided that they had to do what they could to stop it, even if that meant voting for the idiot from Islington North.

    Good summary.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    New Scotland poll ?

    https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/1069407/poll-snp-mp-at-risk-three-year-low-general-election/

    NAT SINKING FEELING Shock poll shows SNP at three-year low with 32 MPs ‘at risk’ as General Election race tightens
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    SquareRoot said:

    alex. said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    TM was a useless and ineffective Home Sec, she has been a petulant and inflexible autocratic PM for nearly a year, and been in charge of a supremely useless campaign team. None of this bodes well for the next few years in office.

    She was the longest serving Home Secretary for 60 years, so she must have been doing something right (even though Blair's reforms did remove some of the inherent problems with the role). And there can't be many politicians who have been able to use a stint at the Home Office as a pre-cursor to becoming Prime Minister - it doesn't exactly have a history of enhancing reputations.

    Think of the previous 6 Labour Home secretaries. All of them duffers but perhaps Jacqui Smith being the absolute rock bottom of the barrel.

    Straw, Blunkett, Clarke, Reid, Smith and Johnson
    Diane Abbott - The Best Home Secretary We'll Never Have? - Discuss.

    Clearly only after a trip to A&E because of laughter induced cracked ribs.
    Would she really have been worse than Jacqui Smith? Appallingly incompetent and out of her depth undoubtedly but worse than Smith? That is a real challenge.
    Tis a challenge that Diane Abbott would rise to with absolute ease. My only concern would be whether His Munifisence Pope Paul Nuttall VC and bar would dare have such a rival in his government of all the talents ?!?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MarqueeMark said:

    rkrkrk said:

    SouthamObserver said:


    I think that it is the basis for something a lot more considered. What is now absolutely clear is that what matters is not eliminating the deficit, but being serious about managing its reduction. That gives a lot more scope for a sensible Labour party, which the current one is not. Renationalisation is ridiculous, as is the free stuff for the middle classes. Take those things out and there is a base from which to build. As I have also said on here a few times, the Tory move on social care also frees Labour up, as does the Tory acceptance that the state is a force for good. Labour genuinely believes that. I wonder how many Tory MPs do.

    Why is renationalisation ridiculous?
    If you think the NHS is underfunded, why would you spend umpteen billions buying back say water companies from foreign Govt. bodies that hold shares in them?

    Oh I forgot, you will be paying them with "bonds", which don't represent real money at all, do they Jeremy?

    :face-palm:
    Non tradeable bonds. Then you can defer the interest or principal repayment and it becomes a matter of default rather than anything else.

    If they were to try and implement this it would end up in court (and would shut down the capital markets)
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025