politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » History suggests one of Philip Hammond, Jeremy Hunt, and Sajid
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » History suggests one of Philip Hammond, Jeremy Hunt, and Sajid Javid will be Theresa May’s successor if she goes before the next election
if("undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper)window.datawrapper={};window.datawrapper["6kdpx"]={},window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].embedDeltas={"100":715.011364,"200":588.011364,"300":562.011364,"400":537.011364,"500":537.011364,"700":511.011364,"800":511.011364,"900":511.011364,"1000":511.011364},window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-6kdpx"),window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].iframe.style.height=window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in a.data["datawrapper-height"])if("6kdpx"==b)window.datawrapper["6kdpx"].iframe.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px"});
Comments
-
If you're going to back Hammond you might as well go the whole hog and put money on Anna Soubry.
Whoever the next Tory leader is, they aren't going to choose a terminally divisive figure like that. Save in the event that they've already split, of course.0 -
Boris was Foreign Secretary and holder of a Great Office of State until last month.
History shows in 1990 Heseltine, a former not current Cabinet Minister, would have become Tory leader and PM if Major had not also beaten Kinnock in the polls.
Currently only a Boris led Tory Party does not trail Corbyn Labour in the latest Yougov polling on the subject, all other alternative Tory leaders polled would see the Tories trail Corbyn Labour0 -
Hammond would likely see a Corbyn landslide due to large numbers of Tory voters defecting to UKIP. There is also no way Hammond wins the Tory membership voteAcorn_Antiques said:If you're going to back Hammond you might as well go the whole hog and put money on Anna Soubry.
Whoever the next Tory leader is, they aren't going to choose a terminally divisive figure like that. Save in the event that they've already split, of course.0 -
History doesn't show any such thing. That's your own bizarre hypothetical to fit into your obsession with polls.HYUFD said:History shows in 1990 Heseltine, a former not current Cabinet Minister, would have become Tory leader and PM if Major had not also beaten Kinnock in the polls.
0 -
You may be right. Who knows? But Hammond is the only Tory leader who would get my vote. Gove might do if he came out in favour of remaining. I don't think that is likely, but he has the right character to become an apostate.HYUFD said:
Hammond would likely see a Corbyn landslide due to large numbers of Tory voters defecting to UKIP. There is also no way Hammond wins the Tory membership voteAcorn_Antiques said:If you're going to back Hammond you might as well go the whole hog and put money on Anna Soubry.
Whoever the next Tory leader is, they aren't going to choose a terminally divisive figure like that. Save in the event that they've already split, of course.0 -
No no, that won’t do at all.HYUFD said:
The Brexit they voted forBromptonaut said:
What do you think the 38% think ‘no deal’ means, O wise one?HYUFD said:
The government is stockpiling medicines and issuing vehicle visas to prepare for no deal while also preparing terms for a transition deal. It is diehard Remainers who are panicked, 38% of the country wants No Deal straight away with Yougov. No Deal plus Deal voters beat Remain in most pollsanothernick said:
I agree it's probably more risky for remainers tha hard leavers. But I think the likelihood is that there WILL be panic in the months leading up to no deal Brexit (if that is what happens). The failure of project fear to materialise up to now has lulled people into a false sense of security pen to the UK.kle4 said:
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.anothernick said:kle4 said:
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.HYUFD said:
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?0 -
Citation needed.HYUFD said:No Deal plus Deal voters beat Remain in most polls
0 -
His performance in said job being one of his many disqualificationsHYUFD said:Boris was Foreign Secretary and holder of a Great Office of State until last month.
History shows in 1990 Heseltine, a former not current Cabinet Minister, would have become Tory leader and PM if Major had not also beaten Kinnock in the polls.
Currently only a Boris led Tory Party does not trail Corbyn Labour in the latest Yougov polling on the subject, all other alternative Tory leaders polled would see the Tories trail Corbyn Labour0 -
Do you not see how obsessed you are with your repetitive mantras on Boris.HYUFD said:Boris was Foreign Secretary and holder of a Great Office of State until last month.
History shows in 1990 Heseltine, a former not current Cabinet Minister, would have become Tory leader and PM if Major had not also beaten Kinnock in the polls.
Currently only a Boris led Tory Party does not trail Corbyn Labour in the latest Yougov polling on the subject, all other alternative Tory leaders polled would see the Tories trail Corbyn Labour
Boris will not lead the party0 -
I am beginning to think you may be rightwilliamglenn said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:No Deal plus Deal voters beat Remain in most polls
0 -
"There’s also the chance that the incumbents of the great offices of state at the time of the next Tory leadership contest maybe different to today."
This, of course, becomes very relevant if there's no/minimal deal and it turns out not to be the disaster that a lot of people think it will be. Then we can reasonably assume the following:
1. Tory internecine strife on Europe ends, because there'll have been a clear break and there'll be no interest amongst politicians or the public (save amongst the Eurofederalists, who constitute a small proportion of the chattering classes and a negligible percentage of the general population) in going through the long, fraught, divisive and expensive ordeal of re-joining
2. The Remain/Leave divide can then be consigned to the dustbin of history. Very ardent Europhiles may remain discredited for having spread one too many scare stories, but other than that it'll be possible for the party to move on
Under such circumstances Theresa May could conceivably serve out a full term and fight the next election, though more likely she'd stay on until 2020 to tie up the loose ends and enable a period of relative peace and quiet, and then stand down to allow for an orderly contest to succeed her.
In that scenario, any speculation over the succession would be pointless until much nearer the time.0 -
0
-
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.0 -
Liam Fox says there's a 60/40 chance of that happening.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.0 -
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.0 -
Major was CoE for a brief period only, but did have powerful backing from the stop Heseltine old guard.Acorn_Antiques said:"There’s also the chance that the incumbents of the great offices of state at the time of the next Tory leadership contest maybe different to today."
This, of course, becomes very relevant if there's no/minimal deal and it turns out not to be the disaster that a lot of people think it will be. Then we can reasonably assume the following:
1. Tory internecine strife on Europe ends, because there'll have been a clear break and there'll be no interest amongst politicians or the public (save amongst the Eurofederalists, who constitute a small proportion of the chattering classes and a negligible percentage of the general population) in going through the long, fraught, divisive and expensive ordeal of re-joining
2. The Remain/Leave divide can then be consigned to the dustbin of history. Very ardent Europhiles may remain discredited for having spread one too many scare stories, but other than that it'll be possible for the party to move on
Under such circumstances Theresa May could conceivably serve out a full term and fight the next election, though more likely she'd stay on until 2020 to tie up the loose ends and enable a period of relative peace and quiet, and then stand down to allow for an orderly contest to succeed her.
In that scenario, any speculation over the succession would be pointless until much nearer the time.
We are not in Kansas any more. Old rules do not apply over the rainbow.0 -
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?0 -
I see what you did there...Recidivist said:
0 -
Worth considering that on this precedent, Theresa May would not have been elected leader and PM in the 2016 contest, as it is she who sees the inclusion of Home Secretary in to the precedent.
Also worth considering that this is the first time MPs won't be the sole decision makers. Hammond, Hunt and Javid are all very boring very uncharismatic (Hunt less so) who could easily win MPs but might well struggle against a more media friendly rival, who is also a Brexitter. Raab/McVey or Mourdunt say.0 -
Gove is relatively competent?
The man who was responsible for the ginormous clusterfuck these new exams have turned into?
The man who had the bright idea of academy chains?
The man who thought Dominic Cummings was suitable to be a public servant?
If he's competent relative to the rest, we're in a worse mess than I realised.
If you wanted to extend your list TSE then you could add Chamberlain (1937) Baldwin (1923) Asquith (1908) and Disraeli (1868) who were all Chancellor at the time of appointment, plus Rosebery (1894: Foreign Secretary).
The interesting exceptions were Baldwin in 1935 (Lord President of the Council) and Balfour in 1902 (First Lord of the Treasury). However, as they were both leaders of the largest party in the House of Commons and indeed PM de facto at the time, they are hardly relevant to this discussion.
Therefore the meaningful exceptions to your rule in the last 150 years are Winston Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty and David Lloyd George who was not in cabinet at the time of his appointment. Both had however previously been Chancellor and held (or had just resigned from in DLlG's case) offices to do with the war.
I do not quite see Boris doing a Lloyd George. There isn't a war on, and he doesn't have the priceless advantage of being a needed outsider with a reputation for real brilliance.
That's a long winded way of saying I agree with your assessment.
One comment - I think unless he is crowned a la Howard, Hammond will settle for being kingmaker in return for the deputy leadership and staying at the Treasury. That means we should also look closely at who's trying to get into his good books.0 -
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?0 -
The Charity Shield/Community Shield is being played today. At half time Chelsea 0 Man City 1.
Madness to start the football season on 5 August?0 -
No he doesn't, he says there is a 60/40 chance of there being No Deal. People are extrapolating that No Deal equals hauliers out of business etc - but that's not guaranteed.TheScreamingEagles said:
Liam Fox says there's a 60/40 chance of that happening.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
If you're talking percentages then do you view the odds of hauliers out of business etc in a No Deal scenario as being 100%? I don't.0 -
Philip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?
Oh that’s alright then. FFS.Philip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?0 -
Welcome.Theonlylampshade said:Worth considering that on this precedent, Theresa May would not have been elected leader and PM in the 2016 contest, as it is she who sees the inclusion of Home Secretary in to the precedent.
Also worth considering that this is the first time MPs won't be the sole decision makers. Hammond, Hunt and Javid are all very boring very uncharismatic (Hunt less so) who could easily win MPs but might well struggle against a more media friendly rival, who is also a Brexitter. Raab/McVey or Mourdunt say.
Yes, your comment re the Home Office is true, but there are other reasons for that - mostly because from the 1860s until the 1950s it wasn't seen as a great office of state and tended to attract quite junior figures. Afterwards, it tended to be where people the leadership disliked were parked at the top of their careers because it was thought they couldn't do much damage. Finally, it is the most difficult department and as we saw with Rudd the potential for a career-ending slip is very high.
I do not think that members will have a say if there is a need for haste. If there is a clear leader huge pressure will be put on the runner-up to withdraw, as happened last time.0 -
As everyone concentrates on Boris Johnson, no one seems to have noticed that Jacob Rees-Mogg has been completely eclipsed by him. What is supporting his price in the next leader market is now quite beyond me.0
-
Yes I would, if I thought the alternative 95%, 90% or 80% was worth it. I'm not a Luddite who would smash up looms just to prevent a change to the status quo.matt said:
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
Quite frankly as far as employment is concerned hauliage is a largely doomed industry anyway. Driverless vehicles will leave hauliers being akin to horse drawn carriages.0 -
Indeed. You can keep preaching that the sky is falling all you want.Bromptonaut said:Philip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?
Oh that’s alright then. FFS.Philip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?0 -
We only will go by the sound, erudite assessment of HYUFD. Where is he ?ydoethur said:
Welcome.Theonlylampshade said:Worth considering that on this precedent, Theresa May would not have been elected leader and PM in the 2016 contest, as it is she who sees the inclusion of Home Secretary in to the precedent.
Also worth considering that this is the first time MPs won't be the sole decision makers. Hammond, Hunt and Javid are all very boring very uncharismatic (Hunt less so) who could easily win MPs but might well struggle against a more media friendly rival, who is also a Brexitter. Raab/McVey or Mourdunt say.
Yes, your comment re the Home Office is true, but there are other reasons for that - mostly because from the 1860s until the 1950s it wasn't seen as a great office of state and tended to attract quite junior figures. Afterwards, it tended to be where people the leadership disliked were parked at the top of their careers because it was thought they couldn't do much damage. Finally, it is the most difficult department and as we saw with Rudd the potential for a career-ending slip is very high.
I do not think that members will have a say if there is a need for haste. If there is a clear leader huge pressure will be put on the runner-up to withdraw, as happened last time.0 -
The possibility of Boris Johnson derailing himself.AlastairMeeks said:As everyone concentrates on Boris Johnson, no one seems to have noticed that Jacob Rees-Mogg has been completely eclipsed by him. What is supporting his price in the next leader market is now quite beyond me.
0 -
No-one is serious about No Deal. Leavers can't decide if No Deal is Project Fear because OF COURSE the EU is going to agree to a bunch of stuff or it doesn't matter because who needs food and medicine anyway? Remainers hate the whole thing.
Therefore there will be a deal. Possibly after a chaotic but short period before we come to our senses. Therefore the deal will be on the EU's terms. Therefore Vassal State. Therefore unhappy Leavers who will blame Remainers and the EU for failing to resolve the contradictions of the Leave position.0 -
Boring. The womens open golf is much better believe it or notDavid_Evershed said:The Charity Shield/Community Shield is being played today. At half time Chelsea 0 Man City 1.
Madness to start the football season on 5 August?0 -
Driverless vehicles are just around the conrer... unfortunately they missed the turn.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes I would, if I thought the alternative 95%, 90% or 80% was worth it. I'm not a Luddite who would smash up looms just to prevent a change to the status quo.matt said:
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
Quite frankly as far as employment is concerned hauliage is a largely doomed industry anyway. Driverless vehicles will leave hauliers being akin to horse drawn carriages.
Serious point: since my new Passat's 'Pasenger Protection' system did an emergency stop as it approached an overhanging nettle on a narrow lane in Cornwall, I have become slightly more sceptical about the driverless car revolution. In the real world, country lanes throw up a very large range of odd situations.0 -
I mean the betting is based on Boris's name recognition, not on the mood inside ERG towers.
But let's assume that JRM, despite appearances, isn't a cretin. Would he support Boris? Even setting aside Boris's almost certain inability to do the job, why would JRM think he could trust Boris?
0 -
Faith, the enemy of logic, reason and thought.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes I would, if I thought the alternative 95%, 90% or 80% was worth it. I'm not a Luddite who would smash up looms just to prevent a change to the status quo.matt said:
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
Quite frankly as far as employment is concerned hauliage is a largely doomed industry anyway. Driverless vehicles will leave hauliers being akin to horse drawn carriages.0 -
Autonomous trucks are certainly coming, imminently. But I don't think the UK's entire road haulage industry is going to be autonomous by March.0
-
Exactly. And on that topic, has anyone done any serious research on the likelihood of the country starving to death in the event of the Customs Union being dissolved?Philip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?
I would doubt it, because it is not a credible scenario. Half of our food is home-produced and another 20% is imported from outside the EU. Of the 30% that comes from the EU, the notion that the entire lot will end up rotting on wharves in the Channel ports is preposterous. Apart from anything else, much of it isn't so perishable that it won't survive being held up for a couple of days, if things even get that bad.
The worst that's actually likely to happen is that there's a salad vegetable shortage, and we have to get used to eating slightly less meat (and importing more of it frozen from South America) for a while. Besides, the whole debate is a textbook example of short-termism; nobody seems to have considered that, in the long run, abandoning the Common External Tariff would allow the UK to adopt a cheap food policy, and that would leave virtually everyone better off. Agricultural tariffs are a huge net cost to a small but densely-populated country such as ours, and the burden of them is disproportionately shouldered by the worst off.0 -
If JRM "despite appearances, isn't a cretin", he will not support Boris. However, I fear appearances may not be deceptive in JRM's case.grabcocque said:I mean the betting is based on Boris's name recognition, not on the mood inside ERG towers.
But let's assume that JRM, despite appearances, isn't a cretin. Would he support Boris? Even setting aside Boris's almost certain inability to do the job, why would JRM think he could trust Boris?0 -
Indeed you are acting on faith against all logic, reason and thought.matt said:
Faith, the enemy of logic, reason and thought.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes I would, if I thought the alternative 95%, 90% or 80% was worth it. I'm not a Luddite who would smash up looms just to prevent a change to the status quo.matt said:
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
Quite frankly as far as employment is concerned hauliage is a largely doomed industry anyway. Driverless vehicles will leave hauliers being akin to horse drawn carriages.
If we go back 40 years someone might have asked if reforms were worth it if they led to a 5% chance of mines shutting down. We did lose the mines but I would still say the reforms were worth it.
No single industry is necessary. We didn't need mines, so why do we 100% need international hauliage. What makes your faith that a 5% risk could not possibly be worth it so unshakeable? What makes your faith that you can't possibly be wrong so immutable.0 -
You are right to be sceptical: for one thing, too many people confuse the driver aids style system with full autonomous cars (often thanks to Tesla's over-ramping of their system), and the true advantages will only occur when we get full Level 5 autonomy countrywide, in all weathers, and allowing for other road users. It's no good getting rid of drivers if the vehicle gets confused and stops at a junction, and the idea of remote 'drivers' sorting out such issues is worrying from a practical and security POV.Benpointer said:
Driverless vehicles are just around the conrer... unfortunately they missed the turn.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes I would, if I thought the alternative 95%, 90% or 80% was worth it. I'm not a Luddite who would smash up looms just to prevent a change to the status quo.matt said:
If there were a 5% chance, would you risk it? 10%? 20%? No sane person would. Of course the Brexiteers don’t seem to worry about consequence.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:m
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
Quite frankly as far as employment is concerned hauliage is a largely doomed industry anyway. Driverless vehicles will leave hauliers being akin to horse drawn carriages.
Serious point: since my new Passat's 'Pasenger Protection' system did an emergency stop as it approached an overhanging nettle on a narrow lane in Cornwall, I have become slightly more sceptical about the driverless car revolution. In the real world, country lanes throw up a very large range of odd situations.
(In fact, security is a whole other set of issues)
These are not easy problems to solve. I'm far from convinced that the Waymo-style geofencing is going to work for a full nation, or that it is possible without true AI.0 -
This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topicPhilip_Thompson said:
My basis is that "doom and gloom" fearmongering of "the sky is falling" variety is almost invariably bullshit.Bromptonaut said:
I place more faith in the evidenced views of the Road Haulage Association than some bloke off of the internet, so I tend towards believing it to be a serious possibility.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think it will happen? Do you?Bromptonaut said:
No no, that won’t do at all.
Do you think (for example) they understand that ‘no deal’ means that UK haulage operators will go out of business?
“British hauliers that make international journeys will be forced out of business,...”
https://www.rha.uk.net/news/press-releases/2018-07-july/brexit-and-the-uk-haulage-industry-–-no-deal-no-jobs-no-food
Do you think they voted for that? Do you?
That's complete baloney.
What’s your basis for thinking otherwise?
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/8322621628024709140 -
Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
Heseltine knew once Thatcher had resigned his chances of becoming leader and PM were gone - the "establishment" rallied to Major rather than Hurd (and Major had the "blessing" of Margaret as well) and the rest is history.
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
0 -
Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.0 -
Re your last paragraph I do not see TM losing a VNOC causing a leadership election just at the climax of EU negotiationsstodge said:Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
Heseltine knew once Thatcher had resigned his chances of becoming leader and PM were gone - the "establishment" rallied to Major rather than Hurd (and Major had the "blessing" of Margaret as well) and the rest is history.
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?0 -
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
Heseltine knew once Thatcher had resigned his chances of becoming leader and PM were gone - the "establishment" rallied to Major rather than Hurd (and Major had the "blessing" of Margaret as well) and the rest is history.
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour0 -
For reasons I've stated elsewhere (and which are basically HYUFD's points 3-5 from this morning) May is safe for now. As for a VNOC, does May have to lose to go ? If she got fewer than 200 votes, I think that would represent a fatal wound given the "payroll vote" would have to support her.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Re your last paragraph I do not see TM losing a VNOC causing a leadership election just at the climax of EU negotiationsstodge said:
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
If memory serves, Thatcher got 52 votes more than Heseltine so it's not about winning but how you win and by how much.
0 -
@stodge
Lloyd George was not Chancellor when he replaced Asquith, having been moved to Munitions in 1915, the War Office in 1916 and resigned in 1916.
Baldwin briefly continued to hold the office of Chancellor (he had offered it to Reginald McKenna who wasn't an MP) but the day to day running of the Treasury was left to the Financial Secretary, Joynson-Hicks.
Bonar Law, like Campbell-Bannerman in 1905, effectively marked a change in the governing party.0 -
May has said she will stay if she wins by even a vote. Remember she is a 'bloody difficult woman'stodge said:
For reasons I've stated elsewhere (and which are basically HYUFD's points 3-5 from this morning) May is safe for now. As for a VNOC, does May have to lose to go ? If she got fewer than 200 votes, I think that would represent a fatal wound given the "payroll vote" would have to support her.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Re your last paragraph I do not see TM losing a VNOC causing a leadership election just at the climax of EU negotiationsstodge said:
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
If memory serves, Thatcher got 52 votes more than Heseltine so it's not about winning but how you win and by how much.
However, if the VNOC is post Brexit I think it is more likely she would stand down0 -
It does not work like that. The conservative mps will put the final two to the members, the members have no say until then.HYUFD said:
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
Heseltine knew once Thatcher had resigned his chances of becoming leader and PM were gone - the "establishment" rallied to Major rather than Hurd (and Major had the "blessing" of Margaret as well) and the rest is history.
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour
And post Brexit the Country will move on. Farage is a busted flush0 -
Yes, but she needed 56 more than him (a 15% margin of those entitled to vote) to forestall a second ballot.stodge said:
For reasons I've stated elsewhere (and which are basically HYUFD's points 3-5 from this morning) May is safe for now. As for a VNOC, does May have to lose to go ? If she got fewer than 200 votes, I think that would represent a fatal wound given the "payroll vote" would have to support her.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Re your last paragraph I do not see TM losing a VNOC causing a leadership election just at the climax of EU negotiationsstodge said:
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
If memory serves, Thatcher got 52 votes more than Heseltine so it's not about winning but how you win and by how much.0 -
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.0 -
Leave with No Deal or Leave on Chequers Deal terms combined 47%, Remain 45%williamglenn said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:No Deal plus Deal voters beat Remain in most polls
https://t.co/VDpHIbMW1p?amp=10 -
If you actually bothered to read what I wrote, all I said was once May had stood down or been forced out by a VONC, senior Cabinet members would be free to enter any leadership election.HYUFD said:
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour
I simply postulated whether Javid and Hunt could or would combine against either Boris or JRM. The next stage would be a ballot of MPs and it might be (given we are talking about choosing a PM rather than LOTO) that the defeated candidates might simply acknowledge the winner as PM rather than taking it to the wider Party membership.
Let me ask you as a cheerleader for Boris - IF Boris came second to Javid or Hunt in the MPs ballot, would you encourage him to withdraw in the interests of quick formation of a Government or would you urge him to push for a members' ballot ?
On your other point - as I recall, there was little or no polling with Major until after Thatcher quit on the Thursday. The bandwagon for major rolled very quickly with Thatcher's endorsement and the widespread support among local Constituency Chairs and the weekend polling confirmed Major's popularity as a "man with the common touch" against the multi-millionaire Heseltine.
0 -
Are you a fecking history teacher ??ydoethur said:@stodge
Lloyd George was not Chancellor when he replaced Asquith, having been moved to Munitions in 1915, the War Office in 1916 and resigned in 1916.
Baldwin briefly continued to hold the office of Chancellor (he had offered it to Reginald McKenna who wasn't an MP) but the day to day running of the Treasury was left to the Financial Secretary, Joynson-Hicks.
Bonar Law, like Campbell-Bannerman in 1905, effectively marked a change in the governing party.
Aren't you meant to be on holiday - I'll give you a C minus for your efforts.0 -
A car that drove itself except for occasionally getting confused and stopping and beeping at you to help it out would totally transform a lot of people's commutes.JosiasJessop said:It's no good getting rid of drivers if the vehicle gets confused and stops at a junction
0 -
Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It does not work like that. The conservative mps will put the final two to the members, the members have no say until then.HYUFD said:
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
Heseltine knew once Thatcher had resigned his chances of becoming leader and PM were gone - the "establishment" rallied to Major rather than Hurd (and Major had the "blessing" of Margaret as well) and the rest is history.
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour
And post Brexit the Country will move on. Farage is a busted flush
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus0 -
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.0 -
What people say before a vote and what they do once the votes are cast are often two very different things. If 150 MPs vote against her, there's no way May could stay - I know that, you know that, she knows that but she has no choice but to talk tough.Big_G_NorthWales said:May has said she will stay if she wins by even a vote. Remember she is a 'bloody difficult woman'
However, if the VNOC is post Brexit I think it is more likely she would stand down0 -
I really don't understand your religious belief in polls as the Biblical Truth. They're a snapshot and not a very good one at that, MPs understand that.HYUFD said:Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus0 -
I'm sure there's a point to this post, but having read it three times I'm not sure what it is.stodge said:
Are you a fecking history teacher ??ydoethur said:@stodge
Lloyd George was not Chancellor when he replaced Asquith, having been moved to Munitions in 1915, the War Office in 1916 and resigned in 1916.
Baldwin briefly continued to hold the office of Chancellor (he had offered it to Reginald McKenna who wasn't an MP) but the day to day running of the Treasury was left to the Financial Secretary, Joynson-Hicks.
Bonar Law, like Campbell-Bannerman in 1905, effectively marked a change in the governing party.
Aren't you meant to be on holiday - I'll give you a C minus for your efforts.0 -
Given the last Yougov had a Javid or Hunt led Tories on 29% ie 1997 style Corbyn Labour landslide and Boris Tories on 38% ie likely still largest party the answer is obvious, Boris would have to go to the members or the Tories face annihilation.stodge said:
If you actually bothered to read what I wrote, all I said was once May had stood down or been forced out by a VONC, senior Cabinet members would be free to enter any leadership election.HYUFD said:
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour
I simply postulated whether Javid and Hunt could or would combine against either Boris or JRM. The next stage would be a ballot of MPs and it might be (given we are talking about choosing a PM rather than LOTO) that the defeated candidates might simply acknowledge the winner as PM rather than taking it to the wider Party membership.
Let me ask you as a cheerleader for Boris - IF Boris came second to Javid or Hunt in the MPs ballot, would you encourage him to withdraw in the interests of quick formation of a Government or would you urge him to push for a members' ballot ?
On your other point - as I recall, there was little or no polling with Major until after Thatcher quit on the Thursday. The bandwagon for major rolled very quickly with Thatcher's endorsement and the widespread support among local Constituency Chairs and the weekend polling confirmed Major's popularity as a "man with the common touch" against the multi-millionaire Heseltine.
It was the polling showing Major beating Kinnock Labour that was key to his win, Javid and Hunt are now senior Cabinet ministers and must improve their polling fast0 -
Sorry, i'm not convinced. MPs will come under pressure from their local members to nominate someone they want to vote for e.g. the hard brexiteer. It's a secret ballot, so an MP might make promises and then not deliver. But I doubt it.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It does not work like that. The conservative mps will put the final two to the members, the members have no say until then.HYUFD said:
If you think the ERG MPs and the majority of Tory members would allow a Coronation for a BINO or pro Chequers Deal candidate without putting forward Boris or Mogg as an alternative you are being deluded. Especially with UKIP, most likely led by a returned Farage, ready to pounce if it is BINO and make a pitch for Tory Leave voters.stodge said:Afternoon all
First, Mr Eagles, apologies for daring to take you out of context yesterday evening. You did say the words "Tory gains" with reference to the 2019 local elections but I realise you were talking only about Conservatives gaining some of the 200 or so UKIP seats up for grabs as distinct from trying to defend the 5,500 Conservative seats.
On topic, you have to go back to Churchill in 1940 for a person becoming PM outside a GE who was not serving as CoE, HS or FS. Even in the inter-war period, I believe Chamberlain was CoE when taking over from Baldwin and Baldwin was CoE when he took over from Bonar Law (and I think he continued as CoE even after becoming PM). Lloyd George was Chancellor when taking over from Asquith so that leaves Bonar Law who took over in 1922 from Austen Chamberlain (as Conservative leader) and Lloyd George (as PM).
Replacing a PM in office is emphatically different from replacing a defeated PM after an election. I could see Boris emerging from the wreckage of a defeated Conservative Party to take over.
As for 1990, as is widely known (except by some it seems), the vote for Heseltine in the first ballot was to force Thatcher out and allow her Cabinet colleagues who were bound to support her to enter the fray (a similar tactic failed spectacularly in 1975 when Thatcher not only won the first ballot but got so much momentum she was able to defeat Whitelaw in the second ballot).
snip
Forcing May out via a No Confidence vote would allow senior Cabinet members such as Javid and Hunt to either stand against each other or agree a joint anti-Boris candidature. As an aside, would all this still mean a ballot of Party members or in practice would the defeated candidate withdraw and allow the leading candidate to become PM as soon as possible?
Major only beat Heseltine after a poll showed a Major led Tories beating Kinnock Labour
And post Brexit the Country will move on. Farage is a busted flush
Assuming UKIP and Farage are busted is a big mistake imho.0 -
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.0 -
150,000 in Israelydoethur said:
They ARE a minority. That is simple mathematics.surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Do you mean 'an oppressed minority?'
The Druze faith incorporates elements of Islam's Ismailism,[27] Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, Pythagoreanism, Hinduism[28][29] and other philosophies and beliefs, creating a distinct and secretive theology known to interpret esoterically religious scriptures, and to highlight the role of the mind and truthfulness.[18][29] The Druze follow theophany, and believe in reincarnation or the transmigration of the soul.[30]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze0 -
Yes and no - for one thing, it depends where the confusion occurs; on a minor road in light traffic, no problem. Stopping because of confusion on a buy road just holds everyone up. It is also by definition not driverless, as you need to be on hand to solve the issue.edmundintokyo said:
A car that drove itself except for occasionally getting confused and stopping and beeping at you to help it out would totally transform a lot of people's commutes.JosiasJessop said:It's no good getting rid of drivers if the vehicle gets confused and stops at a junction
TBH, technologies we already have, such as active lane keeping, 'intelligent' cruise control and automatic braking will, when perfected, reduce much of the drivers' load when driving on many journeys.0 -
I take it you've forgotten that Turkey is in a Customs Union with the EU? If that is what a Customs Union looks like then frankly it is no solution and no advantage.FF43 said:This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topic
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/832262162802470914
Then again this is what the Customs Union border between the EU and Turkey looks like, is this your vision for the UK?
0 -
Where were you when Iran became an Islamic Republic in '79?surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
And as we discussed last night, Pakistan has been an Islamic Republic since '47!0 -
That isn't and wasn't the point. As soon as she failed to win the first ballot, she was history. She actually said at the French Embassy "it is my intention to let my name go forward" - that was the get-out line. Most people knew if there was a second ballot between just her and Heseltine she would lose. The only way to prevent a Heseltine win was for her to stand down and allow other Cabinet members to join the ballot.ydoethur said:
Yes, but she needed 56 more than him (a 15% margin of those entitled to vote) to forestall a second ballot.0 -
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.0 -
Many "Deal voters" will not vote for a "No deal". Your argument has less validity than a Trumpian tweet.williamglenn said:
Citation needed.HYUFD said:No Deal plus Deal voters beat Remain in most polls
0 -
If it had been between her and Heseltine, she would have won with ease. In fact, she did win, just not by the margin required under the party's rules to prevent a second ballot.stodge said:
That isn't and wasn't the point. As soon as she failed to win the first ballot, she was history. She actually said at the French Embassy "it is my intention to let my name go forward" - that was the get-out line. Most people knew if there was a second ballot between just her and Heseltine she would lose. The only way to prevent a Heseltine win was for her to stand down and allow other Cabinet members to join the ballot.ydoethur said:
Yes, but she needed 56 more than him (a 15% margin of those entitled to vote) to forestall a second ballot.
The risk was that other figures on the right of the party disillusioned with her leadership would have stood against her and split the vote, handing victory to Heseltine. The way out of that was to replace her on the ballot with a more unifying figure - except, ironically, because two of them stood the winner ended up with fewer votes than she had had.0 -
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.0 -
I for one would have respect for Corbyn et al if they made this point. Instinctively I'm not a fan of things like an international definition of antisemitism so I don't have a problem with it being challenged so long as it's done logically.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.0 -
Well yes, good point that the UK is actually not a secular nation. We are officially a Christian nation.ydoethur said:
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.0 -
Where is the 150 coming from. I just do not see TM losing a VNOC before Brexitstodge said:
What people say before a vote and what they do once the votes are cast are often two very different things. If 150 MPs vote against her, there's no way May could stay - I know that, you know that, she knows that but she has no choice but to talk tough.Big_G_NorthWales said:May has said she will stay if she wins by even a vote. Remember she is a 'bloody difficult woman'
However, if the VNOC is post Brexit I think it is more likely she would stand down0 -
There isn't a leadership vote happening NOW so all this polling you repeat ad infinitum and ad nauseam is meaningless.HYUFD said:
Given the last Yougov had a Javid or Hunt led Tories on 29% ie 1997 style Corbyn Labour landslide and Boris Tories on 38% ie likely still largest party the answer is obvious, Boris would have to go to the members or the Tories face annihilation.
It was the polling showing Major beating Kinnock Labour that was key to his win, Javid and Hunt are now senior Cabinet ministers and must improve their polling fast
IF the likes of Javid or Hunt were on the ballot their public profile would rise and IF their performance improved to be comparable to or better than Boris, what then?
Major's public profile soared once Thatcher was gone and he became the challenger to Heseltine. Couldn't the same happen to Javid or Hunt once May was gone?
What would YOU do than - if polls showed Javid performing better than Boris in a match with Labour, would you switch your support to Javid?
0 -
Chesea looked poor. Cannot see them making it back into the top 4 this season.David_Evershed said:The Charity Shield/Community Shield is being played today. At half time Chelsea 0 Man City 1.
Madness to start the football season on 5 August?
Man City look rampant again.0 -
Hyufd has a lot of interesting information and thoughts but his worship of polls undermines a lot of his postsPhilip_Thompson said:
I really don't understand your religious belief in polls as the Biblical Truth. They're a snapshot and not a very good one at that, MPs understand that.HYUFD said:Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus0 -
Surby seems weirdly silent about this topicPhilip_Thompson said:
Well yes, good point that the UK is actually not a secular nation. We are officially a Christian nation.ydoethur said:
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that. 0 -
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-saudi-arabia-yemen-war-arms-supplies-uk-theresa-may-latest-a8243916.htmlydoethur said:
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.
https://www.ft.com/content/34b8642e-2215-11e8-9a70-08f715791301
Corbyn had the guts to criticise Saudi Arabia and arms sales to them. No other politician had the ball£ to say it.0 -
Full membership of the EU is the sensible option, since you ask. But that wasn't what we are discussing. The question is is whether it's baloney and bullshit, fear-mongering, and against all logic and reason to say British lorry drivers would prevented from entering the EU in a No Deal Brexit. The answer is no. British lorry drivers would be stopped.Philip_Thompson said:
I take it you've forgotten that Turkey is in a Customs Union with the EU? If that is what a Customs Union looks like then frankly it is no solution and no advantage.FF43 said:This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topic
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/832262162802470914
Then again this is what the Customs Union border between the EU and Turkey looks like, is this your vision for the UK?0 -
I've sold Arsenal on the spreads, now I'm thinking I should have sold Chelsea, but then it was City who looked up for it.Foxy said:
Chesea looked poor. Cannot see them making it back into the top 4 this season.David_Evershed said:The Charity Shield/Community Shield is being played today. At half time Chelsea 0 Man City 1.
Madness to start the football season on 5 August?
Man City look rampant again.
Sarri is an interesting choice. It does feel at little bit AVB.0 -
Britain is hardly a Christian nation. Do one gets beheaded for not going to Church. 70% of Christians do not practice the religion. This is a sensible, mainly atheist , nationSunil_Prasannan said:
Surby seems weirdly silent about this topicPhilip_Thompson said:
Well yes, good point that the UK is actually not a secular nation. We are officially a Christian nation.ydoethur said:
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.0 -
White smoke ! Pope to play for England.0
-
Ashcroft is doing a poll on whether HY is worth listening to. When we have the results, we won't have to worry any more.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hyufd has a lot of interesting information and thoughts but his worship of polls undermines a lot of his postsPhilip_Thompson said:
I really don't understand your religious belief in polls as the Biblical Truth. They're a snapshot and not a very good one at that, MPs understand that.HYUFD said:Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus
0 -
No it is bullshit. They will not be stopped any more than Turkish, Ukrainian or any other nations drivers are. They may be slowed but slow isn't stop.FF43 said:
Full membership of the EU is the sensible option, since you ask. But that wasn't what we are discussing. The question is is whether it's baloney and bullshit, fear-mongering, and against all logic and reason to say British lorry drivers would prevented from entering the EU in a No Deal Brexit. The answer is no. British lorry drivers would be stopped.Philip_Thompson said:
I take it you've forgotten that Turkey is in a Customs Union with the EU? If that is what a Customs Union looks like then frankly it is no solution and no advantage.FF43 said:This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topic
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/832262162802470914
Then again this is what the Customs Union border between the EU and Turkey looks like, is this your vision for the UK?
Full membership of the EU may have been sensible but then we had a vote and made our choice. These insane halfway house "solutions" lack the advantages of both membership and leaving. One or the other we need to do and we made our choice.0 -
Ways not to start an over in hit and giggle ooops, T20 cricket.
1) Bowl a no-ball;
2) Watch Michael Klinger whack it for six.
Edit - 3) Bowl the third ball (what would have been the second legitimate ball) for five wides.
This is Kent's overseas spinner as well...0 -
+1IanB2 said:
Ashcroft is doing a poll on whether HY is worth listening to. When we have the results, we won't have to worry any more.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hyufd has a lot of interesting information and thoughts but his worship of polls undermines a lot of his postsPhilip_Thompson said:
I really don't understand your religious belief in polls as the Biblical Truth. They're a snapshot and not a very good one at that, MPs understand that.HYUFD said:Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus0 -
Fine. Have a dull uncharismatic BINO Tory leader at the next general election, then see Corbyn win a large majority as Tory Leavers stay home or vote UKIP.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hyufd has a lot of interesting information and thoughts but his worship of polls undermines a lot of his postsPhilip_Thompson said:
I really don't understand your religious belief in polls as the Biblical Truth. They're a snapshot and not a very good one at that, MPs understand that.HYUFD said:Tory MPs want to keep their seats, polls show Boris best able to do that.
BINO would relaunch Farage quicker than Lazarus
Then you might consider Boris, most Tory member including myself in the latest polls already are0 -
Who gets beheaded for not going to Church in Israel?surby said:
Britain is hardly a Christian nation. Do one gets beheaded for not going to Church. 70% of Christians do not practice the religion. This is a sensible, mainly atheist , nationSunil_Prasannan said:
Surby seems weirdly silent about this topicPhilip_Thompson said:
Well yes, good point that the UK is actually not a secular nation. We are officially a Christian nation.ydoethur said:
It's not one nation and one religion. He's quite happy to say nasty things about the UK as well. That said so far as I am aware he has never criticised Christianity.Philip_Thompson said:
If the Jezziahs were opposed to all nations linked to a particular religion like Iran then it'd be consistent.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
However Jezziah is quite happy to support Iran and take paid work on Press TV isn't he? It seems to be only one religion and only one nation that is objected to. There's a word for that.
The UK is officially an Anglican nation. The Church of England is our official state religion. Bishops from the Church are given their own seats in Parliament to set laws.
Israel is less extreme in their religion and state mix than we are. Last I checked rabbis aren't given seats in the Knesset.0 -
May lost an unloseable election. Imagine what she could do in a loseable election....Big_G_NorthWales said:
Where is the 150 coming from. I just do not see TM losing a VNOC before Brexitstodge said:
What people say before a vote and what they do once the votes are cast are often two very different things. If 150 MPs vote against her, there's no way May could stay - I know that, you know that, she knows that but she has no choice but to talk tough.Big_G_NorthWales said:May has said she will stay if she wins by even a vote. Remember she is a 'bloody difficult woman'
However, if the VNOC is post Brexit I think it is more likely she would stand down
....think 250 MPs.0 -
This, of course, being impossible for them.tlg86 said:
I for one would have respect for Corbyn et al if they made this point. Instinctively I'm not a fan of things like an international definition of antisemitism so I don't have a problem with it being challenged so long as it's done logically.surby said:
All nations which are linked to a particular religion is wrong. Saudi Arabia is the biggest offender - our friend ! Officially, Israel was not one until a few weeks back. Now it is also a state where only Jews have the right of self determination.tlg86 said:
This, for me, is an important point. I think a secularist could oppose the linking of a state to a specific religion if they were opposed to it on a point of principle. But I think we all know that Jezza's lot don't have too much of a problem with other religions being linked to a state.Sunil_Prasannan said:
There are many "Islamic" nations across the Mid East. By definition non-Muslims would be second class? No?surby said:Druze in Israel say they feel like a minority.
Well, you are now a minority legally - you are a second class citizen, official.
Funnily enough, you do not see too many posts on this topic from our anti-Jezziahs.
Putin works hand-in-glove with the Russian Orthodox Church and Iran is an out-and-out Shi'ite Muslim theocracy. That's two of their favourite countries they'd have to tear strips off for starters.
The basis of the Far-Left world view is anti-Westernism. It hasn't moved on, in any fundamental sense, from the Cold War: America and its allies beat their beloved Soviet Union, and thus any nation, people or political movement that opposes them must be supported. My enemy's enemy is my friend and all that.
Criticism of Israeli policy is perfectly legitimate from a human rights perspective but that's not what they're ultimately interested in. Israel is part of the enemy and so they wish to see it defeated. Working from that perspective, the more radical the Israeli Government becomes the better, because this would give them more sticks to beat the country with.
The last thing on Earth that UK Labour would want would be for Israeli Labour to return to power and implement more moderate policies.0 -
It's only not bullshit if there's a deal. Which there will be. On the EU's terms. Vassal State, here we come.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is bullshit. They will not be stopped any more than Turkish, Ukrainian or any other nations drivers are. They may be slowed but slow isn't stop.FF43 said:
Full membership of the EU is the sensible option, since you ask. But that wasn't what we are discussing. The question is is whether it's baloney and bullshit, fear-mongering, and against all logic and reason to say British lorry drivers would prevented from entering the EU in a No Deal Brexit. The answer is no. British lorry drivers would be stopped.Philip_Thompson said:
I take it you've forgotten that Turkey is in a Customs Union with the EU? If that is what a Customs Union looks like then frankly it is no solution and no advantage.FF43 said:This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topic
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/832262162802470914
Then again this is what the Customs Union border between the EU and Turkey looks like, is this your vision for the UK?
Full membership of the EU may have been sensible but then we had a vote and made our choice. These insane halfway house "solutions" lack the advantages of both membership and leaving. One or the other we need to do and we made our choice.0 -
If Javid was beating Corbyn comfortably in the polls I may well support him but the fact is he is not and as Home Secretary just as with Hunt now Foreign Secretary the name recognition excuse is running short. Major was of course Chancellor when the first polls showed him beating Kinnock. So as long as Boris polls best against Corbyn I will back Boris.stodge said:
There isn't a leadership vote happening NOW so all this polling you repeat ad infinitum and ad nauseam is meaningless.HYUFD said:
Given the last Yougov had a Javid or Hunt led Tories on 29% ie 1997 style Corbyn Labour landslide and Boris Tories on 38% ie likely still largest party the answer is obvious, Boris would have to go to the members or the Tories face annihilation.
It was the polling showing Major beating Kinnock Labour that was key to his win, Javid and Hunt are now senior Cabinet ministers and must improve their polling fast
IF the likes of Javid or Hunt were on the ballot their public profile would rise and IF their performance improved to be comparable to or better than Boris, what then?
Major's public profile soared once Thatcher was gone and he became the challenger to Heseltine. Couldn't the same happen to Javid or Hunt once May was gone?
What would YOU do than - if polls showed Javid performing better than Boris in a match with Labour, would you switch your support to Javid?0 -
She did dreadfully but she didn't lose anymore than Cameron lost 2010. She is PM.MarqueeMark said:
May lost an unloseable election. Imagine what she could do in a loseable election....Big_G_NorthWales said:
Where is the 150 coming from. I just do not see TM losing a VNOC before Brexitstodge said:
What people say before a vote and what they do once the votes are cast are often two very different things. If 150 MPs vote against her, there's no way May could stay - I know that, you know that, she knows that but she has no choice but to talk tough.Big_G_NorthWales said:May has said she will stay if she wins by even a vote. Remember she is a 'bloody difficult woman'
However, if the VNOC is post Brexit I think it is more likely she would stand down
....think 250 MPs.0 -
Are Switzerland and Norway vassal states? Even in the single market or tied to it in Switzerland's case they do not follow 25% of EU law and even the Chequers Deal technically replaces free movement with a mobility framework so you need a job offer or offer of study on arrival rather than after 3 months as nowFF43 said:
It's only not bullshit if there's a deal. Which there will be. On the EU's terms. Vassal State, here we come.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is bullshit. They will not be stopped any more than Turkish, Ukrainian or any other nations drivers are. They may be slowed but slow isn't stop.FF43 said:
Full membership of the EU is the sensible option, since you ask. But that wasn't what we are discussing. The question is is whether it's baloney and bullshit, fear-mongering, and against all logic and reason to say British lorry drivers would prevented from entering the EU in a No Deal Brexit. The answer is no. British lorry drivers would be stopped.Philip_Thompson said:
I take it you've forgotten that Turkey is in a Customs Union with the EU? If that is what a Customs Union looks like then frankly it is no solution and no advantage.FF43 said:This is a good backgrounder on transit permits should you wish to inform yourself on the topic
https://twitter.com/hmalikh/status/832262162802470914
Then again this is what the Customs Union border between the EU and Turkey looks like, is this your vision for the UK?
Full membership of the EU may have been sensible but then we had a vote and made our choice. These insane halfway house "solutions" lack the advantages of both membership and leaving. One or the other we need to do and we made our choice.0
