Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

These are the numbers that should really panic Number 10 – politicalbetting.com

1246789

Comments

  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    kinabalu said:

    It's not a massive issue for me but if perchance there was a Referendum on keeping the monarchy I think I'd vote No. That's a change of heart compared to say 10 years ago.

    The reason? Because the institution we have with its pomp and scale is really a hangover from our grand imperial past. It feels out of time now. More than this, it feels absurd and just a touch embarrassing. I get that feeling more than I do the rather heavier sense of it reinforcing white supremacy and class privilege. I also think it infantilizes us a bit. Along with the harmless and positive aspects it does that. Which is not a great thing esp when we have a PM doing the same albeit in a different way.

    So, on balance with the monarchy, a la Duncan Bannatyne on Dragons Den - it's a No from me.
    My view on it is the same as my view on leaving the EU. I am not massively in favour and not massively against. Nonetheless, it would be a totally unnecessary constitutional change, so the change and upheaval is pointless. The House of Lords on the other hand...
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617

    I think Carnyx was being facetious. The comment was top 3 parties in favour of monarchy, then his comment was "Oh, LDs not then?. I took that to mean a genial poke at the libdems losing 3rd party status in Westminster.
    Quite. I was mildly surprised and wondered if I had missed something amongst the sandal folk.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,994

    Many nations that were once colonies are probably receptive to the Russian argument that the boundaries are wrong.

    Their own boundaries are often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.

    So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.

    (I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
    Including when you're a colonial power claiming that territory ?
    Seems a daft rationalisation to me.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    dixiedean said:

    Indeed. Stratford was hardly a desirable location when we built ours.
    Istr Stratford was touted as one of the last places in London you could get a flat for under 100,000 in early 2000s before the Olympic announcement
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,237
    Sandpit said:

    It made no sense at all to build the stadium where they did, without also clearing the slums actively regenerating the whole area around it.
    It was opened in 1998.

    Jacques Chirac was Mayor of Paris from 197x to 1995, and it was not known as being a period entirely free from corruption.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,546

    If the tories want to win the next election, the time to act is now.

    The cabinet need a good sweeping out and a roll of the dice for replacements. Rees-Mogg, Patel, Dorries, all need to be ditched.
    But will he lose a conf vote if it happens?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,394
    kinabalu said:

    It's not a massive issue for me but if perchance there was a Referendum on keeping the monarchy I think I'd vote No. That's a change of heart compared to say 10 years ago.

    The reason? Because the institution we have with its pomp and scale is really a hangover from our grand imperial past. It feels out of time now. More than this, it feels absurd and just a touch embarrassing. I get that feeling more than I do the rather heavier sense of it reinforcing white supremacy and class privilege. I also think it infantilizes us a bit. Along with the harmless and positive aspects it does that. Which is not a great thing esp when we have a PM doing the same albeit in a different way.

    So, on balance with the monarchy, a la Duncan Bannatyne on Dragons Den - it's a No from me.
    I'm happy to leave well alone. In principle I am a republican because of my liberal views, but this is so low on any to do list it would never get done because in the words of Douglas Adams they are mostly harmless and I would add bring some joy to many. And I really quite like most of them. Even Andrew is a hoot.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,096
    edited May 2022
    I think St Denis is a bigger dump than anywhere in London or the UK quite frankly, comparisons with Brixton, Stratford, Moss Side or Bootle don't really capture the squalor there...

    In 2017, the area was the theatre of 18% of all drug offences in metropolitan France.

    That's an astonishing statistic.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,132
    edited May 2022
    Leon said:

    Get well soon

    As someone travelling a lot right now, do you have a suspicion as to where you caught it? Plane? U-bahn?
    Thanks.

    Dunno, FFP2 mask wearing is still mandatory on public transport (though I saw no official enforcers) and was pretty much observed, hardly at all elsewhere. Short and useless answer, could have been anywhere!

    Still have a gnawing suspicion that sitting in a metal tube of recycled air for a couple of hours is fairly high risk, masks notwithstanding.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Carnyx said:

    Hmm, HYUFD rather missed my point that he should have said "four main parties". Unless he thinks Scotland is a republic?
    The SNP do not stand in the UK as a whole unlike the main 3, only in Scotland and even Sturgeon has said she would not remove the monarchy as a priority even if Scotland became independent
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    kjh said:

    No I wasn't. It is amazing how you can misread posts. Your ability to misunderstand stuff is truly awesome.

    I was simply pointing out that we LDs are not in awe of our betters like you, i.e. Davey isn't god. We all think for ourselves and are not guided by our supreme leader.
    You changed tack to that but your original statement was clearly suggesting LD voters were anti monarchy and Davey could not dictate LD policy over that
  • tlg86 said:

    I'd have thought the policing would be different given that people going to the Olympics don't tend to spend the preceding five hours drinking in the city.

    However, the Stade de France isn't in a purpose built Olympic Park. It isn't a particularly nice location, so all the other stuff to do with the locals, could be an issue.
    The challenges of an Olympic Games are very different - crowds aren't segregated and you don't really get the boisterous behaviour that comes with football (not saying that was to blame here but it's an issue that needs to be managed with such crowds).

    However, what this does demonstrate is a potentially very serious problem in the planning, decision making and command structure. The response was straightforwardly chaotic. There's no point "blaming" fake tickets - the fact is both that there were problems long before that, and the turnstiles weren't allowing the expected numbers through leading to a dangerous situation. It doesn't matter if that was due to fake tickets, a computer glitch, or something else - it's the sort of problem that can happen, and it's how you plan for and manage it.

    So where is the risk register and what was the plan? It SURELY wasn't to disperse the crowd with pepper spray - but if it was something else, why wasn't that enacted on the ground?

    These are really serious questions. The risk register and the challenges won't be the same for the Olympics... but there does need to be confidence in it, and there can't be at the moment.

    Before we get too smug, of course, there were similar crises of confidence pre-2012 with contractor problems leading to the Army being brought in, and concerns over handling of the London Riots not all that long before the Olympics. So this isn't specific to France. But they do need to move on from denial and learn some lessons pretty fast.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited May 2022
    dixiedean said:

    @leon makes the pertinent point here.
    This poll comes after the money has been splashed.
    Suggests the public may have made up their minds.
    I expected a large swingback after the cash. Nowt at all.
    Opinions seem to range between. Not before time. Why does X get Y and I only get Z? To those who say we can't afford it at all.
    That's the problem when your big reveal is exactly what everyone expected.

    I think its also that if you tie a dead weight on (Johnson remains) to your safety float you still sink.
    Had this been announced after a defenestration as a reboot (we have lanced the boil, now to help everyone) it would have seen a massive boost.
    Wasted on trying saving an already dead large dog
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,272
    kinabalu said:

    But will he lose a conf vote if it happens?
    What's your gut feel on this? I'm about 75% lose, 25% win.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    kinabalu said:

    It's not a massive issue for me but if perchance there was a Referendum on keeping the monarchy I think I'd vote No. That's a change of heart compared to say 10 years ago.

    The reason? Because the institution we have with its pomp and scale is really a hangover from our grand imperial past. It feels out of time now. More than this, it feels absurd and just a touch embarrassing. I get that feeling more than I do the rather heavier sense of it reinforcing white supremacy and class privilege. I also think it infantilizes us a bit. Along with the harmless and positive aspects it does that. Which is not a great thing esp when we have a PM doing the same albeit in a different way.

    So, on balance with the monarchy, a la Duncan Bannatyne on Dragons Den - it's a No from me.
    We had a monarchy centuries before we had an Empire or even a Union, many nations without imperial pasts eg Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Jordan also have constitutional monarchies
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,848
    ydoethur said:

    I don't think Wallace is PM material but at least he has a functioning brain.

    Similarly I always found Hunt rather a slippery character but he is at least competent.

    Either would be an improvement.
    I've made a start on Jeremy Hunt's new book, Zero, about reducing accidents in the NHS. It is better than I'd expected, at least for the couple of chapters read so far.

    Cynics would point to the serendipity of a prominent leadership contender publishing just last week a serious book about policy and politics.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,546
    kjh said:

    I'm happy to leave well alone. In principle I am a republican because of my liberal views, but this is so low on any to do list it would never get done because in the words of Douglas Adams they are mostly harmless and I would add bring some joy to many. And I really quite like most of them. Even Andrew is a hoot.
    I'm not that fussed either. But if there were a binary Ref, keep v not, I'd vote not. I just thought about it properly this morning and slightly surprised myself with that conclusion.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,169
    Sandpit said:

    The French decided to take the equivalent of a random 150m x 100m piece of land between Brixton and Streatham, and put the national stadium there, with no other improvements to the area, making sure that all the stadium’s visitors would have to park in or walk through the dodgiest part of the city to get there.
    Bit harsh on Brixton and Streatham!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,111

    I've made a start on Jeremy Hunt's new book, Zero, about reducing accidents in the NHS. It is better than I'd expected, at least for the couple of chapters read so far.

    Cynics would point to the serendipity of a prominent leadership contender publishing just last week a serious book about policy and politics.
    Given the electorate, I doubt if it would have a significant impact either way.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    MattW said:

    It was opened in 1998.

    Jacques Chirac was Mayor of Paris from 197x to 1995, and it was not known as being a period entirely free from corruption.
    Stade de France isn't in Paris though.
    Paris itself is largely kept for the well-to-do.
    The "issues" of a big city are pushed beyond the official city limits. You see similar in some US cities.
    Greater London doesn't have this problem
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited May 2022
    Stocky said:

    What's your gut feel on this? I'm about 75% lose, 25% win.
    I appreciate you werent asking me but fwiw my own feeling is they will definitely take the chance once 54 reached. I think Brady might even delay the vote a few days to give cabinet/the suits the chance to convince him out before a vote takes place, or indeed ministers resign from govt and force the issue
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    Pulpstar said:

    I think St Denis is a bigger dump than anywhere in London or the UK quite frankly, comparisons with Brixton, Stratford, Moss Side or Bootle don't really capture the squalor there...

    In 2017, the area was the theatre of 18% of all drug offences in metropolitan France.

    That's an astonishing statistic.

    Far more likely 18% of convictions. But point taken.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766

    11% is over @HYUFD 10% for Boris to be in trouble

    Come on @HYUFD join those of us calling for Boris to go
    I think his head just exploded.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Bit harsh on Brixton and Streatham!
    Maybe. I’ve not been there in a while!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,237
    edited May 2022

    The challenges of an Olympic Games are very different - crowds aren't segregated and you don't really get the boisterous behaviour that comes with football (not saying that was to blame here but it's an issue that needs to be managed with such crowds).

    However, what this does demonstrate is a potentially very serious problem in the planning, decision making and command structure. The response was straightforwardly chaotic. There's no point "blaming" fake tickets - the fact is both that there were problems long before that, and the turnstiles weren't allowing the expected numbers through leading to a dangerous situation. It doesn't matter if that was due to fake tickets, a computer glitch, or something else - it's the sort of problem that can happen, and it's how you plan for and manage it.

    So where is the risk register and what was the plan? It SURELY wasn't to disperse the crowd with pepper spray - but if it was something else, why wasn't that enacted on the ground?

    These are really serious questions. The risk register and the challenges won't be the same for the Olympics... but there does need to be confidence in it, and there can't be at the moment.

    Before we get too smug, of course, there were similar crises of confidence pre-2012 with contractor problems leading to the Army being brought in, and concerns over handling of the London Riots not all that long before the Olympics. So this isn't specific to France. But they do need to move on from denial and learn some lessons pretty fast.
    Agree. I think the fans' behaviour is not the issue.

    The boisterous behaviour last w/e was local criminal gangs, locals breaking into the stadium, and police pepper spraying people doing nothing wrong as if they were watering the garden.

    Plus things like security threatening journalists with being prevented entering the stadium if they did not delete their footage.

    Plus the stuff like forcing 20k of people through a couple of narrow gaps.

    That's institutional reform, culture change and development of professionalism in the authorities needed, which is far trickier to do in 2 years. Even without the Government standing on their head in a bucket.

    One difference is that the counterparty will be the Olympic Organising Committee not UEFA.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    edited May 2022
    Farooq said:

    Wait, you think Denmark doesn't have an imperial past?
    Good god man, can you get ANYTHING right?
    Compared to the Spanish Empire, the Russian Empire, the French Empire, the British Empire, the German Empires or even the Italian and Austrian empires no it doesn't.

    Most of those are republics
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Farooq said:

    They're still objectively the UK's 3rd party
    Not on voteshare
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    Scott_xP said:

    The Telegraph discrediting both "dead cats" deployed to save flailing Johnson feels like quite a significant moment. Especially since they seem custom-made for its readership. ~AA https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1531567821389549569/photo/1

    Even the Brexitgraph doesn't like to be associated with an incompetent loser it seems. Rats and sinking ships
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Farooq said:

    Wait, you think Denmark doesn't have an imperial past?
    Good god man, can you get ANYTHING right?
    Or Sweden
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,151
    Tom Larkin
    @TomLarkinSky
    ·
    40m
    Just a week ago Andrea Leadsom told LBC: "I sincerely hope that tomorrow we can put it behind us and move on". Now appears that she's changed her mind...
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,369

    Bugger.
    Now scouring the internet for 'I went to Berlin and all I got was lousy Covid' t shirts.


    Oh no, hope you are OK! My mum has just got it for the first time, I am guessing my dad will follow. A reminder it is still around. Take care of yourself - tea and paracetamol!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886

    Tom Larkin
    @TomLarkinSky
    ·
    40m
    Just a week ago Andrea Leadsom told LBC: "I sincerely hope that tomorrow we can put it behind us and move on". Now appears that she's changed her mind...

    She's put that interview behind her and moved on.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    feels like game on

    Mort au gros garcon
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    Two big interventions this morning:

    Andrea Leadsom, loyalist who put her reputation on the line for PM during Owen Paterson debacle, accuses him of 'unacceptable favours of leadership'

    William Hague says PM in 'very serious trouble' & predicts no confidence vote by end of June

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1531573389172826112
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,436

    Bugger.
    Now scouring the internet for 'I went to Berlin and all I got was lousy Covid' t shirts.


    Plague Island (continent)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Farooq said:

    You support FPTP, you don't care about vote share
    As I have already said on here I don't absolutely, I was one of the minority who voted for AV in 2011
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,151

    Even the Brexitgraph doesn't like to be associated with an incompetent loser it seems. Rats and sinking ships
    This isn't particularly new. There has been a steady stream of columnists attacking Johnson, particularly over failure to actually be a conservative for weeks now. Heath, Johnston, Timothy etc etc.

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,954
    Scott_xP said:

    The Telegraph discrediting both "dead cats" deployed to save flailing Johnson feels like quite a significant moment. Especially since they seem custom-made for its readership. ~AA https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1531567821389549569/photo/1

    Boris will see his old boss the Telegraph's sniffing at his imperial-measures revolution - something he'd have assumed was the very essence of Brexit for its readers - as a bitter blow. How must that man be feeling this morning?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,369
    MattW said:

    Agree. I think the fans' behaviour is not the issue.

    The boisterous behaviour last w/e was local criminal gangs, locals breaking into the stadium, and police pepper spraying people doing nothing wrong as if they were watering the garden.

    Plus things like security threatening journalists with being prevented entering the stadium if they did not delete their footage.

    Plus the stuff like forcing 20k of people through a couple of narrow gaps.

    That's institutional reform, culture change and development of professionalism in the authorities needed, which is far trickier to do in 2 years. Even without the Government standing on their head in a bucket.

    One difference is that the counterparty will be the Olympic Organising Committee not UEFA.

    There is something deeply, deeply wrong with the French police. They make our own issues with the Met look almost laughable in comparison.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,436

    Bad luck. Hope it is just a mild case.

    I have been snotty for the past 5 or 6 days, but the LFT says it isn't Covid.
    Hope you get through ok and quickly.

    Anecdote from the weekend - one of our cricketers missed the match due to covid. When we mentioned this to the other side, one piped up 'who's testing now?'

    I suspect for a lot of people covid is over. There is a danger in that for sure, but its also quite refreshing.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766

    This isn't particularly new. There has been a steady stream of columnists attacking Johnson, particularly over failure to actually be a conservative for weeks now. Heath, Johnston, Timothy etc etc.

    There are probably a whole load of people there who have had their wives, sisters, daughters shagged or propositioned by the Shagger-in-Chief
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,060
    HYUFD said:

    Compared to the Spanish Empire, the Russian Empire, the French Empire, the British Empire, the German Empires or even the Italian and Austrian empires no it doesn't.

    Most of those are republics
    I think the Danish Empire at peak (Greenland and presences in Africa and South America) could be easily compared to the German Empire. The Swedish Empire also.

    Then there is the Dutch Empire, monarchy, and the Japanese Empire on top.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589

    This isn't particularly new. There has been a steady stream of columnists attacking Johnson, particularly over failure to actually be a conservative for weeks now. Heath, Johnston, Timothy etc etc.

    Of course the likelihood is if Johnson goes the Conservative Party will shift further right, especially on economics
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    HYUFD said:

    Of course the likelihood is if Johnson goes the Conservative Party will shift further right, especially on economics
    If it becomes better managed and less populist then fine. It is currently a compete joke.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    HYUFD said:

    The SNP do not stand in the UK as a whole unlike the main 3, only in Scotland and even Sturgeon has said she would not remove the monarchy as a priority even if Scotland became independent
    The Tories don't stand in NI, neither do the LDs - I think Labour do?

    Unless NI isn't part of the UK?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886

    This isn't particularly new. There has been a steady stream of columnists attacking Johnson, particularly over failure to actually be a conservative for weeks now. Heath, Johnston, Timothy etc etc.

    This is the nub of the issue though, isn't it?
    There are two metrics of "conservative". One is socially. It would be difficult for a new leader to ratchet a Culture War upwards.
    The second is economically.
    Which means removing Rishi money and radically slashing already creaking spending on services. Which would go down great with the wider public right now.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    edited May 2022
    Carnyx said:

    The Tories don't stand in NI, neither do the LDs - I think Labour do?

    Unless NI isn't part of the UK?
    Traditionally the Tories were partnered with Ulster Unionists and Labour SDLP. But I think you knew that anyway.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,951

    My view on it is the same as my view on leaving the EU. I am not massively in favour and not massively against. Nonetheless, it would be a totally unnecessary constitutional change, so the change and upheaval is pointless. The House of Lords on the other hand...
    I've been struck at the response in a Yorkshire village I know. Bunting everywhere and the high street to be closed for a street party. Obvs everyone is up for a celebration etc, and HMQ is v popular personally but, all the same, any serious attempt to do away the monarchy would be highly divisive. No sensible politician will go anywhere near it. And the succession is secured by William and Kate, even if Charles isn't so popular. This is really a non-issue.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617

    Traditionally the Tories were partnered with DUP and Labour SDLP. But I think you knew that anyway.
    Quite, but it instantly refutes HYUFD's criterion that somehow the UK is what he wants it to be. In any case, on his own criteria, that instantly also excludes the LDs. So he's contradicting himself.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,417
    edited May 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Compared to the Spanish Empire, the Russian Empire, the French Empire, the British Empire, the German Empires or even the Italian and Austrian empires no it doesn't.

    Most of those are republics
    That wasn't the question, anyway. Denmark's main 'imperialism' might be a bit further back, although the sovereign of Denmark was also that of Iceland until 1944 or so, and Norway until 1905.
    In 'early modern' times Sweden was very aggressive in Mid and Eastern Europe.

    Edit. See also Greenland for Denmark, upthread!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    TOPPING said:

    It's more complicated than that. First off the hunt spends a lot of time visiting said farmer (who might easily hunt or have a hunting daughter/family himself) for precisely these reasons. To ensure that there is understanding and agreement (areas to avoid, making good afterwards, etc). Farmers who are anti-hunting are left alone and no one goes near their land.

    And of course there are people who live in the countryside who are anti-hunting. Not everyone outside the cities and suburbs supports hunting, and that's fine. Plenty do, however.

    But the bigger point is more important, and you make it yourself - you accept that one way or another the fox gets it. Either by being shot (good luck with that but of course it happens) or snaring or gassing or being hunted by hounds.

    And funnily enough of all of those methods the only one AFAIA that has had a whole enquiry dedicated to it is the last, hunting by hounds, and that enquiry determined that such activity was not cruel.

    The enquiry determined there was not enough evidence to say whether it was cruel or not. That is a different thing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Carnyx said:

    The Tories don't stand in NI, neither do the LDs - I think Labour do?

    Unless NI isn't part of the UK?
    The Conservative Party of NI certainly do stand there, all the other 2 parties stand throughout GB unlike the SNP and in NI via their sister parties the SDLP and Alliance

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Conservatives
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    edited May 2022

    Traditionally the Tories were partnered with Ulster Unionists and Labour SDLP. But I think you knew that anyway.
    The Conservatives do stand in NI. With a stunning lack of success.

    Edit.
    Oops. Meant to reply to the preceding post on this topic.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766

    I've been struck at the response in a Yorkshire village I know. Bunting everywhere and the high street to be closed for a street party. Obvs everyone is up for a celebration etc, and HMQ is v popular personally but, all the same, any serious attempt to do away the monarchy would be highly divisive. No sensible politician will go anywhere near it. And the succession is secured by William and Kate, even if Charles isn't so popular. This is really a non-issue.
    I hope that when William accedes (is that the right word?) he will de-pomp. That might be sensible. Personally I think having a family of minor aristocrats from Germany as our head of state somewhat absurd, but there are worse things, so best leave it as is.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    Of course the likelihood is if Johnson goes the Conservative Party will shift further right, especially on economics
    Further right?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,954
    HYUFD said:

    Of course the likelihood is if Johnson goes the Conservative Party will shift further right, especially on economics
    Not necessarily. They might conclude that tax-and-spend populism plus Woke Wars is these days the only viable formula for the political Right. It just needs to be better managed.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    The Tory party is going to mess up the Jubilee by keeping this going through the long bank holiday when everyone wants to forget about politics, isn't it?
    https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1531576052845264897
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,994
    On Russian state TV, they discuss not only what it would take to destroy the United States, but also how many Ukrainians have to be massacred. One lawmaker came up with a figure: 2 million. No one in the studio blinked or objected—including the host, who is himself a Duma member.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1531301883628986368
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,394
    HYUFD said:

    You changed tack to that but your original statement was clearly suggesting LD voters were anti monarchy and Davey could not dictate LD policy over that
    No it wasn't you Pillock. How can you so obviously misunderstand just 14 words. I'm not even anti and had no idea what LD voters views were.

    You really are mad.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    HYUFD said:

    The Conservative Party of NI certainly do stand there, all the other 2 parties stand throughout GB unlike the SNP and in NI via their sister parties the SDLP and Alliance

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Conservatives
    SDLP and Alliance are not the same parties as their so-called 'sisters' (your expression). Look at the Electoral Commission criteria. You're fiddling things yet again becvause you can't bear to be caught out in a schoolchild error about politics.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589

    That wasn't the question, anyway. Denmark's main 'imperialism' might be a bit further back, although the sovereign of Denmark was also that of Iceland until 1944 or so, and Norway until 1905.
    In 'early modern' times Sweden was very aggressive in Mid and Eastern Europe.
    That is little different to the UK union, it is not a grand global imperial past like that of Britain or Germany or France or even a large European empire like that of Austria.

    Certainly being a republican because of your nation's imperial past is ludicrous, France had a big imperial past and is a republic with an imperial presidency, see Bastille Day
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,546
    Stocky said:

    What's your gut feel on this? I'm about 75% lose, 25% win.
    Have it more 50/50 but it's not much of a gut feel. Tories something of a mystery to me sometimes.

    H is the view to get if he's in a candid helpful mood.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,549

    My view on it is the same as my view on leaving the EU. I am not massively in favour and not massively against. Nonetheless, it would be a totally unnecessary constitutional change, so the change and upheaval is pointless. The House of Lords on the other hand...
    My views would be to structure things so as to preserve as much of the current status quo as possible under democratic consent.

    For royalty, I would elect the head of the privy council on a long tenure, who would be understood to step in as political head of state in any republican settlement. I'd then put some kind of public acclamation vote on a new head of state in the first few years of reign and perhaps at long periods thereafter. Failure of acclamation would put a stronger onus on the privy council, but only repeat losses would lead to a vote on the monarchy itself. I'd also remove the disbarment of Catholics, and allow for separation in who would succeed as religious head of state in those circumstances.

    For the Lords, I would go for a Regional PR system (close to EU election system), with parties having regional appointment committees. Lords elections would coincide with GEs, but then Lords would only be appointed to rebalance from the lists annually, based on aggregate 15 year results (30 per yr X 15 yr tenure). Cross-bench lists would be a baked in feature, and a transition period with 1/15 of current peers retiring annually to be replaced in proportion to the last 15 years GE results to be started. (this could also incorporate legal, spiritual and hereditary strands in the closed lists if necessary).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Farooq said:

    Denmark: we claim Greenland!
    HYUFD: not a real empire
    Italy: we claim a quarter of the Sahara desert!
    HYUFD: [places forehead on the floor]
    Greeland is still part of the 3 kingdoms of Denmark, it is not really an ex colony
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    HYUFD said:

    That is little different to the UK union, it is not a grand global imperial past like that of Britain or Germany or France or even a large European empire like that of Austria.

    Certainly being a republican because of your nation's imperial past is ludicrous, France had a big imperial past and is a republic with an imperial presidency, see Bastille Day
    Some UK subjects might differ. They might quite like to be proper citizens instead of being expected to cringe to people who went to posh schools and posh unis.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Carnyx said:

    SDLP and Alliance are not the same parties as their so-called 'sisters' (your expression). Look at the Electoral Commission criteria. You're fiddling things yet again becvause you can't bear to be caught out in a schoolchild error about politics.

    You wrongly stated the Conservatives do not stand in NI for which you still have not apologised and you talk about schoolboy errors!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,517
    HYUFD said:

    That is little different to the UK union, it is not a grand global imperial past like that of Britain or Germany or France or even a large European empire like that of Austria.

    Certainly being a republican because of your nation's imperial past is ludicrous, France had a big imperial past and is a republic with an imperial presidency, see Bastille Day
    The US Virgin Islands were Danish from 1754 to 1917.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    Pro_Rata said:

    My views would be to structure things so as to preserve as much of the current status quo as possible under democratic consent.

    For royalty, I would elect the head of the privy council on a long tenure, who would be understood to step in as political head of state in any republican settlement. I'd then put some kind of public acclamation vote on a new head of state in the first few years of reign and perhaps at long periods thereafter. Failure of acclamation would put a stronger onus on the privy council, but only repeat losses would lead to a vote on the monarchy itself. I'd also remove the disbarment of Catholics, and allow for separation in who would succeed as religious head of state in those circumstances.

    For the Lords, I would go for a Regional PR system (close to EU election system), with parties having regional appointment committees. Lords elections would coincide with GEs, but then Lords would only be appointed to rebalance from the lists annually, based on aggregate 15 year results (30 per yr X 15 yr tenure). Cross-bench lists would be a baked in feature, and a transition period with 1/15 of current peers retiring annually to be replaced in proportion to the last 15 years GE results to be started. (this could also incorporate legal, spiritual and hereditary strands in the closed lists if necessary).
    Failing all that I am happy to nominate myself as Lord Protector. Much simpler. Maybe a little divisive though, but those who disagree I will send to Rwanda.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    What must it feel like to a narcissist to see this table, to be behind non-entities like Trevelyan by 80 points. https://twitter.com/bestforbritain/status/1531573852450455552

    @sturdyAlex These charts will hurt him. He’s not interested in policy but popularity charts get him going…and he appointed a bunch of subservient mediocrities partly so he would shine by comparison and top these charts.
    https://twitter.com/steverichards14/status/1531577498466754560
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    kjh said:

    No it wasn't you Pillock. How can you so obviously misunderstand just 14 words. I'm not even anti and had no idea what LD voters views were.

    You really are mad.
    You made that comment specifically because you assumed LD voters disagreed with Davey's support for the constitutional monarchy, as the polling evidence I produced showed you you were wrong!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,546
    HYUFD said:

    We had a monarchy centuries before we had an Empire or even a Union, many nations without imperial pasts eg Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Jordan also have constitutional monarchies
    You'd vote to keep this full monty anachronism then? No slimming down or reform?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,667
    I'd think Hunt and Wallace appeal to the same "serious common sense" sector of the party, which is probably more represented in the Parliamentary party than the wider membership, who are more into "serious conservatism". So I'd have thought a Hunt vs Truss final was more likely than a Hunt vs Wallace one. But others here are better-placed to judge, eh?

    Certainly betting on a VONC happening seems a strong option, but beware of Betfair's market on this - you're betting on whether the VONC succeeds, perhaps a more iffy proposition.

    A new leader will certainly give a temporary bounce - lots of people like BigG and dyedwoolie are natural Conservatives who would return to the fold. But the situation is objectively difficult, so the new person will struggle to come up with bright new prospects. From that viewpoint, the Tories might be best off with a change next year, by which time the energy price spike may have unwound, giving the new leader an aura of miraculous success. Either way it does seem to me that the dominant public view is that the Conservatives have run out of steam, much as they felt about Labour in 2009-10.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited May 2022
    Alistair said:

    Yes, famously farmers upon seeing a fox would think "I could shoot this fucker worrying my livestock right now but I better leave it around for some wankers to chase in 3 months time".
    Absolutely fucking monumental fail because, yes, that is largely right, with various payoffs which have been explained to you. You might not like it but it is just how things were.

    Never seen anyone embarrass himself so badly on here. You are like a self proclaimed member of the cricketing community who thinks the game is played with an oval ball.

    You can't even get the dates right. Hunting ends as lambing begins, and three months time is in midsummer.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,394
    kinabalu said:

    I'm not that fussed either. But if there were a binary Ref, keep v not, I'd vote not. I just thought about it properly this morning and slightly surprised myself with that conclusion.
    You should surprise yourself every day.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    Scott_xP said:

    What must it feel like to a narcissist to see this table, to be behind non-entities like Trevelyan by 80 points. https://twitter.com/bestforbritain/status/1531573852450455552

    @sturdyAlex These charts will hurt him. He’s not interested in policy but popularity charts get him going…and he appointed a bunch of subservient mediocrities partly so he would shine by comparison and top these charts.
    https://twitter.com/steverichards14/status/1531577498466754560

    Vanitas vanitas omnia vanitas
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,272
    kinabalu said:

    Have it more 50/50 but it's not much of a gut feel. Tories something of a mystery to me sometimes.

    H is the view to get if he's in a candid helpful mood.
    Yes, indeed, I agree and pick his brains from time to time. He get's too much flak on here.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    I'd think Hunt and Wallace appeal to the same "serious common sense" sector of the party, which is probably more represented in the Parliamentary party than the wider membership, who are more into "serious conservatism". So I'd have thought a Hunt vs Truss final was more likely than a Hunt vs Wallace one. But others here are better-placed to judge, eh?

    Certainly betting on a VONC happening seems a strong option, but beware of Betfair's market on this - you're betting on whether the VONC succeeds, perhaps a more iffy proposition.

    A new leader will certainly give a temporary bounce - lots of people like BigG and dyedwoolie are natural Conservatives who would return to the fold. But the situation is objectively difficult, so the new person will struggle to come up with bright new prospects. From that viewpoint, the Tories might be best off with a change next year, by which time the energy price spike may have unwound, giving the new leader an aura of miraculous success. Either way it does seem to me that the dominant public view is that the Conservatives have run out of steam, much as they felt about Labour in 2009-10.

    Wallace should shave off his remaining hair. Much edgier and he needs to differentiate himself from IDS
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    IshmaelZ said:

    Further right?
    Truss for example is far more of a tax cutter and spending slasher than Johnson, Wallace is also more socially conservative than Johnson and voted against gay marriage for instance (even if he accepts it now).

    Hunt and Wallace are also more pro life than Johnson. Patel is harder line on immigration than Johnson
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,647
    Alistair said:

    The enquiry determined there was not enough evidence to say whether it was cruel or not. That is a different thing.
    "In a later debate in the House of Lords, the inquiry chairman, Lord Burns, also stated that "Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."[7]"

    wiki
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589

    I'd think Hunt and Wallace appeal to the same "serious common sense" sector of the party, which is probably more represented in the Parliamentary party than the wider membership, who are more into "serious conservatism". So I'd have thought a Hunt vs Truss final was more likely than a Hunt vs Wallace one. But others here are better-placed to judge, eh?

    Certainly betting on a VONC happening seems a strong option, but beware of Betfair's market on this - you're betting on whether the VONC succeeds, perhaps a more iffy proposition.

    A new leader will certainly give a temporary bounce - lots of people like BigG and dyedwoolie are natural Conservatives who would return to the fold. But the situation is objectively difficult, so the new person will struggle to come up with bright new prospects. From that viewpoint, the Tories might be best off with a change next year, by which time the energy price spike may have unwound, giving the new leader an aura of miraculous success. Either way it does seem to me that the dominant public view is that the Conservatives have run out of steam, much as they felt about Labour in 2009-10.

    Wallace v Truss is more likely than Hunt v Truss.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,194

    Not necessarily. They might conclude that tax-and-spend populism plus Woke Wars is these days the only viable formula for the political Right. It just needs to be better managed.
    It's a tempting comfort blanket, Johnsonism without Johnson. Does that favour Truss in the ensuing scramble?

    The downside is that it's not a slam-dunk formula for electoral success- see Australia. Or France. But it's not obvious that there's another big idea out there at the moment, or anyone really trying to come up with one. Charlotte Ivers was bewailing the lack of ideas on the right in the Sunday Times this week. Come to think of it, Gyles Brandreth was noting the same thing in his diaries as the 1997 debacle unfolded.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,766
    HYUFD said:

    Truss for example is far more of a tax cutter and spending slasher than Johnson, Wallace is also more socially conservative than Johnson and voted against gay marriage for instance (even if he accepts it now).

    Hunt and Wallace are also more pro life than Johnson. Patel is harder line on immigration than Johnson
    And yet none of them are fat lazy lying law-breaking idiots. Even Patel would be an improvement (OK, OK, maybe not, but you know what I mean)
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    Waitrose shoppers back in vogue with the Tory party, this week.🤣 https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1531548957989642240/photo/1
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,664
    HY is always correct and never gets it wrong. And certainly wouldn't pompously insist he is right regardless of the evidence or the laughter. So in this jubilee week we can Prove for a Fact that there was no Danish empire. Remember the tale in our royal family's past?

    King Harold, daughter of a Dane, direct blood descendent of King Cnut the Great - a Viking- who only a few decades earlier had directly ruled England as part of his Danish Empire after centuries of Viking rule. Harold who fights off the King of Norway - a Viking - only to then be defeated by William. Who was a direct descendant of Rollo the Viking who had conquered Normandy. Nor Man. North men. Vikings.

    So yes. HY is right and there was never a Danish empire and certainly not one big enough to seed the English royal family, create English cities that still stand, name hundreds of places and provide words and grammatical rules to the language. And living in Thornaby-on-Tees as I did I was very clear that Thornaby wasn't founded as Thormod (a Viking)'s Farmstead. No sir.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    TOPPING said:

    "In a later debate in the House of Lords, the inquiry chairman, Lord Burns, also stated that "Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."[7]"

    wiki
    One does have to admit, that 'question' and 'no' are ambiguous.

    We were not implying ...?
    Hunting is not cruel ...?

    I'd normally go higher up in the sentence, and assume that 'no' wa sin response to 'people ask [us]'

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    edited May 2022
    They seem to have called all the seats in Oz.
    Labor majority of three.
    Not sure how Gilmore is Labor with a 242 vote lead and 10% still to be counted, but there we go.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    edited May 2022
    kinabalu said:

    You'd vote to keep this full monty anachronism then? No slimming down or reform?
    I agree with the Prince Charles proposed reforms ie open up the Palaces more to the public, make Balmoral a museum to the Queen and cut down the Royal family to the inner core of him and Camilla, the Cambridges and Anne and Edward.

    William has also said he may not automatically head the Commonwealth either, it could be rotated amongst Commonwealth heads of state for example
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,440
    For Sunday I think I'll publish a piece reminding you that the Conservative Party uses a form of quasi AV to elect their party leader.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    IshmaelZ said:

    he needs to differentiate himself from IDS

    He is not, and never will be, IDS.

    That is sufficient...
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    Alistair said:

    The enquiry determined there was not enough evidence to say whether it was cruel or not. That is a different thing.
    In contrast to other methods of fox control.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    I'd think Hunt and Wallace appeal to the same "serious common sense" sector of the party, which is probably more represented in the Parliamentary party than the wider membership, who are more into "serious conservatism". So I'd have thought a Hunt vs Truss final was more likely than a Hunt vs Wallace one. But others here are better-placed to judge, eh?

    Certainly betting on a VONC happening seems a strong option, but beware of Betfair's market on this - you're betting on whether the VONC succeeds, perhaps a more iffy proposition.

    A new leader will certainly give a temporary bounce - lots of people like BigG and dyedwoolie are natural Conservatives who would return to the fold. But the situation is objectively difficult, so the new person will struggle to come up with bright new prospects. From that viewpoint, the Tories might be best off with a change next year, by which time the energy price spike may have unwound, giving the new leader an aura of miraculous success. Either way it does seem to me that the dominant public view is that the Conservatives have run out of steam, much as they felt about Labour in 2009-10.

    Tbf Nick even my dislike of Labour is starting to feel like not enough regardless of what the Tories do for next time.
    I quite like imperial measurements, so does my butcher for example, however bringing them back in some triumphant flag waving weirdness whilst we are mired in war, economic crisis and coming out of a really depressing 2 years makes the Cones Hotline look good politics.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,589
    Carnyx said:

    Some UK subjects might differ. They might quite like to be proper citizens instead of being expected to cringe to people who went to posh schools and posh unis.
    Some far left Scottish Nationalists like you but we don't care what you think.

    In any case plenty of Presidents around the world went to posh schools and posh unis
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    HYUFD said:

    You wrongly stated the Conservatives do not stand in NI for which you still have not apologised and you talk about schoolboy errors!
    I'll apologise for that (zero MPs) when you apologise for

    (a) confusing the UK and England when you claimed 3 main parties and that Mr Davey was leader of the third
    (b) claiming specifically that there are three main parties UK wide including NI when you have only evidence for one. At least I got that number right even if I muddled Labour and the Tories in NI.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,111

    For Sunday I think I'll publish a piece reminding you that the Conservative Party uses a form of quasi AV to elect their party leader.

    If we were Yanks this would be banned under the Eighth Amendment.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    Truss for example is far more of a tax cutter and spending slasher than Johnson, Wallace is also more socially conservative than Johnson and voted against gay marriage for instance (even if he accepts it now).

    Hunt and Wallace are also more pro life than Johnson. Patel is harder line on immigration than Johnson
    These guys may talk a good game of slashing this and that, but try taking a look at what they do, and what they permit the CotE to do. A proper slasher would have resigned from the Cabinet over last week's bonanza.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,959
    IshmaelZ said:

    Markets including markets in loopholes tend to be efficient. If you want your theory to stand up you need to point to some recent, major, tenant friendly (ie UnConservative) change in the law. I don't know of any. I f it were a longer standing thing they'd have been doing it already.
    Certainly in Scotland emergency provisions brought in for Covid made the payment of rent an optional extra for most, inevitably catapulting arrears into the stratosphere. Free lunches come to mind.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    HYUFD said:

    Some far left Scottish Nationalists like you but we don't care what you think.

    In any case plenty of Presidents around the world went to posh schools and posh unis
    Hey, if you think I'm far left, you'd better start worrying about your appeal to voters.
This discussion has been closed.