As big dog Gromit quits Wallace is who Tory members want to replace him – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Again, like I just said, Johnson is acting under constraints that do NOT apply to Putin. Same as 45.williamglenn said:
Can you tell me who Johnson has had bumped off? Which countries he's invaded? Which political opponents he's had imprisoned? Which businesses he's expropriated? Which warlords he's bankrolled?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Good grief.williamglenn said:
No doubt in the 1930s you'd have been calling Stanley Baldwin a fascist too.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
No. Not in the way YOU mean. Not a question of taking orders, but of moving along parallel lines, mutual aid, and all that.williamglenn said:
Are you still sticking to the idea that Johnson was a Putin stooge?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Valdimir Putin proclaiming his hatred of Boris Johnson = Boris Johnson proclaiming his love for Barack Obama.
Lying liars lying as per usual for usual reasons that lying liars lie.
Like Hitler and Mussolini. The former took the later for his role model, but certain neither was the puppet of the other.
World is not as simplistic as you would like it to be, for ideological purposes.
Vlad the Mad, BJx2, 45, Orban, Modi, Bolasano = League of Their Own
Show me ONE example of Stanley Baldwin acting in the accustomed style & manner of Adolf Hitler.
Whereas it is NOT difficult to find Boris Johnson acting in style and manner Mad Vlad. Curbed, of course, by the British Constitution - or what's left of it. As with 45 in USA.
Maybe you think we should give them more leeway? I doubt that. And so would Stanley Baldwin I reckon.0 -
It wasn't economic or environmental crisis which brought down any of those PMs, Jezza mate.FrancisUrquhart said:Johnson is the third PM to fall in six years because there is no solution to the deep economic and environmental crisis we face that picks our pockets and steals our future.
Real change isn't a new Tory PM but a new politics to redistribute wealth and power.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1545038685917237248?s=20&t=MKqDfWi87A-3lQCIwY3HNQ
Jezza better form a new party then.1 -
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.0 -
He would flat-out refuse to go north of the border after his last trip with Carrie, to Applecross in midge season.Richard_Nabavi said:
Maybe if we all club together we can get them to hold it at Gleneagles instead, if that helps free things up. I'd happily contribute 10% of my 'Raab as next PM' winnings to get things started.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg1 -
Didn't he check out the function rooms at Peppa Pig World?CarlottaVance said:EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/15450455402445783042 -
Erhhh the training of Ukraine troops which is ongoing, especially prior to the invasion has been crucial to their ability to push back the Russians. The special forces units that were SAS trained have been absolutely key to consistently disrupting the supply lines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
Now the Ukrainian are being trained on firing large artillery.
You keep posting this nonsense about Corbyn, at every opportunity he has demanded there isn't any fighting, we just sit down and chat with Putin (and we have seen how that has gone when Macron has tried it). And his response to Salisbury was a disgrace. His criticism are always about Tories taking donations, he has never blabbered on about how we shouldn't use sanctions as they hurt the people etc.4 -
I am sure an interim PM could permit that, as a gesture.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg0 -
In my professional experience, elected (or hoping to be) politicos typically have a GREAT deal of faith in opinion polls.LostPassword said:
There will be a lot of hypothetical Starmer vs Random Tory polling which might be influential if enough MPs have faith in opinion polls.Pulpstar said:
Think all polling is a bit redundant till we know who the new (wo)man is in No 10.wooliedyed said:Not sure if mentioned but Redfield have a poll out at 5 conducted entirely this morning described by Election Maps UK who has seen it as 'expectedly spicy'
0 -
Why are you remotely surprised?TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
I’m sure they have a friend with a big country pad they can shift it to as all they should be saving by having it at Chequers was venue hire as they would have to pay for food/staff etc…..
Also would be a bit like holding your wedding at your ex in-laws’ house - a dirty great stone reminder of a failed past in the background of all your photos.1 -
I assume someone's probably started a spreadsheet listing who's supporting which candidate.0
-
He mentioned Chequers when he meant to say Downing Street. So Chequers is on his mind.CarlottaVance said:EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/15450455402445783043 -
£2.3 bn in military aid is not insignificant, along with years of training their armed forces. At any rate, the Ukrainians seems impressed, and their opinion is the only one that matters.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.0 -
Is Johnson paying for the private use of Chequers?boulay said:
Why are you remotely surprised?TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
I’m sure they have a friend with a big country pad they can shift it to as all they should be saving by having it at Chequers was venue hire as they would have to pay for food/staff etc…..
Also would be a bit like holding your wedding at your ex in-laws’ house - a dirty great stone reminder of a failed past in the background of all your photos.
Sorry silly question!0 -
Wow. Just wow. Not just factually incorrect, but also rather tin-foily.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
You should (for instance) apply the same logic to Germany and its leaders...
1 -
One more fucking freebie? While half the country is deciding if it's food or heating this winter. Just fuck off now.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg5 -
Lord Goldsmith!Carnyx said:
Who's she marrying?!CarlottaVance said:EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/15450455402445783042 -
Yes, not a bad summary.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
There's also Zahawi (my view:surely no), Baker(my view: definitely no) and Hunt (my view:possibly).
That leaves a sufficient gap for a real outsider I think. (my pick: Alex Chalk)0 -
Seriously, whether or not there's any truth in that, it illustrates why it's so absurd to have Boris remaining as PM over the summer: there will be endless such stories, no doubt some of them will turn out to be zingers, and so the party will remain mired in scandal, unable to move on.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg4 -
Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-10 -
Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away1
-
And as a permanent stab in the back, or rather assisted suicide, reputation-wise.Foxy said:
I am sure an interim PM could permit that, as a gesture.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg0 -
Is "kidding me" her pet name for Lord G?kle4 said:
I'm upset not to be invited too, but not as much as you I guess.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg1 -
Horrible thought Boris is, it's far-fetched to view him as Putin's man in No. 10. At any rate, Putin has wasted his money, if so.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.4 -
Just to make it clear if anyone has forgotten: I didn't want Boris to be PM, I've not voted Conservative whilst he has been leader, and I said he would be a very poor PM. I was an 'anyone but Boris' person.
But I'll defend him on the Russia criticism, which seem rather odd.2 -
He isn't dead. He walked away from the scaffold laughing at us. Again.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
3 -
Oh yes, indeed: not just his own rep but the party's. And at a dreadful time for ordinary plebs* as OLB so rightly says.Richard_Nabavi said:
Seriously, whether or not there's any truth in that, it illustrates why it's so absurd to have Boris remaining as PM over the summer: there will be endless such stories, no doubt some of them will turn out to be zingers, and so the party remain mired in scandal, unable to move on.TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
*Edit: and, to keep Malmesbury et al happy, the capites censi.0 -
1. Promise massive tax cuts for the right sort of people and tax increases for the benefits scroungersDavidL said:This is the sort of problem that the new government is going to have to wrestle with: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62079052
UK debt is on an unsustainable path unless there are cuts in spending AND increases in taxes. This is why Sunak was so keen to keep a hold of his tax increases in NI and CT. We are living massively and unsustainably beyond our means.
Anyone wanting to cut taxes to defuse either the CoL crisis or even inflation has really got to come to terms with the fact that the government cannot really afford to do either.
2. Become Prime Minister
3. Push implementation of much of (1) backwards whilst blaming the idiot predecessor
4. Hope that the mess becomes Someone Else's Problem0 -
It may be the last time I ever will, but I suspect I would agree with HYUFD who will likely suggest bypassing members is a bad idea, if it is to be for a permanent replacement.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-10 -
She can stay as Equalities Minister or Kemi can do it.BartholomewRoberts said:
Curious why you say absolutely not about Truss?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
I believe you've been very positive about her in the past on her role for Equalities and Women's issues which I know is an issue close to your heart?
So I'm wondering what she's said or done to make her absolutely not, despite that?
But I don't think she has what it takes to be PM.
She may well get it, mind.0 -
So what you mean is that you can picture him acting like Putin if he weren't constrained by acting within a completely different political culture.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Again, like I just said, Johnson is acting under constraints that do NOT apply to Putin. Same as 45.williamglenn said:
Can you tell me who Johnson has had bumped off? Which countries he's invaded? Which political opponents he's had imprisoned? Which businesses he's expropriated? Which warlords he's bankrolled?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Good grief.williamglenn said:
No doubt in the 1930s you'd have been calling Stanley Baldwin a fascist too.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
No. Not in the way YOU mean. Not a question of taking orders, but of moving along parallel lines, mutual aid, and all that.williamglenn said:
Are you still sticking to the idea that Johnson was a Putin stooge?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Valdimir Putin proclaiming his hatred of Boris Johnson = Boris Johnson proclaiming his love for Barack Obama.
Lying liars lying as per usual for usual reasons that lying liars lie.
Like Hitler and Mussolini. The former took the later for his role model, but certain neither was the puppet of the other.
World is not as simplistic as you would like it to be, for ideological purposes.
Vlad the Mad, BJx2, 45, Orban, Modi, Bolasano = League of Their Own
Show me ONE example of Stanley Baldwin acting in the accustomed style & manner of Adolf Hitler.
Whereas it is NOT difficult to find Boris Johnson acting in style and manner Mad Vlad. Curbed, of course, by the British Constitution - or what's left of it. As with 45 in USA.
Maybe you think we should give them more leeway? I doubt that. And so would Stanley Baldwin I reckon.
In fact there are probably more similarities between Hillary Clinton and Putin than between Johnson and Putin. She joked about droning Julian Assange, laughed about Gaddafi being brutally murdered, raged against foreign influences and argued that he election loss was illegitimate.0 -
Based on the Chequers Estate Act 1917:NickyBreakspear said:
Is Johnson paying for the private use of Chequers?boulay said:
Why are you remotely surprised?TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
I’m sure they have a friend with a big country pad they can shift it to as all they should be saving by having it at Chequers was venue hire as they would have to pay for food/staff etc…..
Also would be a bit like holding your wedding at your ex in-laws’ house - a dirty great stone reminder of a failed past in the background of all your photos.
Sorry silly question!
As to the Mansion House and grounds and the said furniture pictures tapestry books manuscripts china relics works of art silver linen and other effects hereby assigned upon trust to keep the same in good repair and condition with a staff of not less than four resident indoor servants and with the necessary number of gardeners and labourers and properly warmed and lighted and generally in a fit state as a furnished residence fit for occupation and upon further trust to permit and suffer the Prime Minister for the time being to occupy use and enjoy the same as a furnished country residence for such periods continuous or discontinuous as he may in his absolute discretion think fit.
So the answer is no.0 -
Perhaps caretaker PM can wrastle a bear on the lawn at Chequers to amuse his guests? To validate my Boris = Vlad thesis?
2 -
Many have, as of course you know.JosiasJessop said:
Wow. Just wow. Not just factually incorrect, but also rather tin-foily.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
You should (for instance) apply the same logic to Germany and its leaders...0 -
Sunak's record is why he is a no, to my mind.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
Javid: I'm not sure about yet1 -
I think these things are utterly irrelevant. I give you all that and raise you Pete Buttigieg.Cookie said:
Whenever I mention Tom Tugendhat as a potential runner to politically-less-engaged friends/colleagues/family/casually aquaintances, their reaction is always the same: surely that can't be his name?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Green was Hancock's proposer in the 2019 leadership election.Andy_JS said:
Bad news for Jeremy Hunt. Damian Green is the sort of MP who might have supported him.Nigelb said:Well that's one vote at least.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1545026016623616000
Damian Green declares for Tom Tugendhat as the “fresh start” candidate - he tells @SophyRidgeSky “you can take it that Tom is going to run”
So, yes, he might have supported Hunt but by absolutely no means a banker for him (and he's not that brilliant a judge).
This will take a while to shake down. There could be several rounds with minor candidates showing a level of support as part of making the case for a cabinet role in future, before the serious business of choosing the final three from among the big boys and girls gets underway.
This is a prediction that no doubt will come back to haunt me, but colour me sceptical about candidates (like Tugendhat) who've not held a major cabinet job at some point. The Conservative Party is selecting a PM, not a leader in opposition, and these characters look like they are jockeying for cabinet position rather than the top job.
I wonder what sort of a barrier this will be? When did we last have a PM with a name that peculiar?
Penny Mordaunt, btw, carries a related handicap: how does one pronounce 'Mordaunt'? I'm hoping it's 'Mordant', or 'Mordunt'. Please tell me it's not 'Mordarnt'? That will put everyone north of Birmingham off.
I do, however, think Tugendhat and Mordaunt both have a problem amongst MPs as they have next to no cabinet experience. The former none at all, the latter a couple of years in a minor department and five minutes at Defence, essentially as a placeholder right at the end of May's ministry.
It won't matter so much to party members, but it's a genuine problem in terms of getting on the ballot. How will they lead a cabinet of colleagues who have that experience? How will the fare on a big occasion under real pressure at the dispatch box? Can they bear up to the pressure of dealing with a policy crisis? Are they respected by senior civil servants?
This is all going to give MPs real pause for thought even if they are attracted by these characters, since they'd be going straight in as PM facing big national and international problems... and the "L" plates are a major concern.3 -
Although Alex Chalk is a good egg he’s too much in danger from the LibDems in his seat.Omnium said:
Yes, not a bad summary.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
There's also Zahawi (my view:surely no), Baker(my view: definitely no) and Hunt (my view:possibly).
That leaves a sufficient gap for a real outsider I think. (my pick: Alex Chalk)
1 -
Truss had better not get it; I've just laid her. Admittedly I'd backed her at 150/1, probably by mistake.Cyclefree said:
She can stay as Equalities Minister or Kemi can do it.BartholomewRoberts said:
Curious why you say absolutely not about Truss?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
I believe you've been very positive about her in the past on her role for Equalities and Women's issues which I know is an issue close to your heart?
So I'm wondering what she's said or done to make her absolutely not, despite that?
But I don't think she has what it takes to be PM.
She may well get it, mind.0 -
You think that Boris & Carrie are planning to pay ANY of the expense for this summer shindig?boulay said:
Why are you remotely surprised?TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
I’m sure they have a friend with a big country pad they can shift it to as all they should be saving by having it at Chequers was venue hire as they would have to pay for food/staff etc…..
Also would be a bit like holding your wedding at your ex in-laws’ house - a dirty great stone reminder of a failed past in the background of all your photos.
Still plenty of favor to curry, influence to peddle, deals to be done, scum to be skimmed.1 -
0
-
More fun to start a spreadsheet listing prospective guests of B & C for tree house play dates.Andy_JS said:I assume someone's probably started a spreadsheet listing who's supporting which candidate.
0 -
Do you mind if I ask why?Cyclefree said:
She can stay as Equalities Minister or Kemi can do it.BartholomewRoberts said:
Curious why you say absolutely not about Truss?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
I believe you've been very positive about her in the past on her role for Equalities and Women's issues which I know is an issue close to your heart?
So I'm wondering what she's said or done to make her absolutely not, despite that?
But I don't think she has what it takes to be PM.
She may well get it, mind.
She's been in the Cabinet about a decade under three very different Prime Ministers. I can't really think of any scandals anywhere she's been, other than she once spoke about cheese and pork markets weirdly nearly a decade ago.
Seems like a sensible, moderate choice to me.2 -
An incentive to do well!boulay said:
Although Alex Chalk is a good egg he’s too much in danger from the LibDems in his seat.Omnium said:
Yes, not a bad summary.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
There's also Zahawi (my view:surely no), Baker(my view: definitely no) and Hunt (my view:possibly).
That leaves a sufficient gap for a real outsider I think. (my pick: Alex Chalk)
(I'm sure he's too inexperienced, and I've no reason to suspect he'd even want to run. Just what I've seen of him he's always seemed very good.)0 -
. .
0 -
There will be three strands to the historic appraisal of Johnson: personal immorality, functional inadequacy and constitutional sabotage. On each one of them, history will damn him. https://inews.co.uk/opinion/apparently-boris-johnson-got-the-big-calls-right-nothing-could-be-further-from-the-truth-17296582
-
John Stevens
@johnestevens
·
19m
Michael Gove, Dominic Raab, Andrea Leadsom and Matt Hancock not running for Tory leadership
All four were candidates in 2019 contest1 -
Hello, lunar lagomorph!MoonRabbit said: . .1 -
To be fair Corbyn has coupled his demand for a ceasefire with withdrawal of Russian troops. This is his tweet on the day of the invasion:FrancisUrquhart said:
Erhhh the training of Ukraine troops which is ongoing, especially prior to the invasion has been crucial to their ability to push back the Russians. The special forces units that were SAS trained have been absolutely key to consistently disrupting the supply lines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
Now the Ukrainian are being trained on firing large artillery.
You keep posting this nonsense about Corbyn, at every opportunity he has demanded there isn't any fighting, we just sit down and chat with Putin (and we have seen how that has gone when Macron has tried it). And his response to Salisbury was a disgrace. His criticism are always about Tories taking donations, he has never blabbered on about how we shouldn't use sanctions as they hurt the people etc.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1496827583828312070?t=08LUQ8CI0kOTUBrZLrwOMg&s=19
In this more recent tweet he backs a petition also demanding Russian withdrawal:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1516030635542028298?t=leAVsO4Lasra65_j0bxaew&s=19
1 -
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
0 -
The weird silence and emptiness is because he's promised to have his head chopped off in October, so there's no catharsis in having him announce the event happening in the future, relative to it actually happening.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
It's hard to celebrate his demise when he hasn't actually demised yet.1 -
'sensible'? No. I'd worry about her starting WW3 to look good to the backbenchers.BartholomewRoberts said:
Do you mind if I ask why?Cyclefree said:
She can stay as Equalities Minister or Kemi can do it.BartholomewRoberts said:
Curious why you say absolutely not about Truss?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
I believe you've been very positive about her in the past on her role for Equalities and Women's issues which I know is an issue close to your heart?
So I'm wondering what she's said or done to make her absolutely not, despite that?
But I don't think she has what it takes to be PM.
She may well get it, mind.
She's been in the Cabinet about a decade under three very different Prime Ministers. I can't really think of any scandals anywhere she's been, other than she once spoke about cheese and pork markets weirdly nearly a decade ago.
Seems like a sensible, moderate choice to me.0 -
Since the PM is appointed by the Queen, and the Queen always follows the advice of her PMs, how do the Tories propose to remove Boris? Especially if he says "I need to stay in post until October Ma'am"?kle4 said:
It may be the last time I ever will, but I suspect I would agree with HYUFD who will likely suggest bypassing members is a bad idea, if it is to be for a permanent replacement.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-10 -
She has a cabinet positionDecrepiterJohnL said:
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
0 -
Of course he did, its classic Stop the War nonsense that doesn't live in the real world. A letter to Putin asking him if he would please withdraw your troops is about as effective writing to Boris Johnson to ask him to stop lying.Foxy said:
To be fair Corbyn has coupled his demand for a ceasefire with withdrawal of Russian troops. This is his tweet on the day of the invasion:FrancisUrquhart said:
Erhhh the training of Ukraine troops which is ongoing, especially prior to the invasion has been crucial to their ability to push back the Russians. The special forces units that were SAS trained have been absolutely key to consistently disrupting the supply lines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
Now the Ukrainian are being trained on firing large artillery.
You keep posting this nonsense about Corbyn, at every opportunity he has demanded there isn't any fighting, we just sit down and chat with Putin (and we have seen how that has gone when Macron has tried it). And his response to Salisbury was a disgrace. His criticism are always about Tories taking donations, he has never blabbered on about how we shouldn't use sanctions as they hurt the people etc.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1496827583828312070?t=08LUQ8CI0kOTUBrZLrwOMg&s=19
In this more recent tweet he backs a petition also demanding Russian withdrawal:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1516030635542028298?t=leAVsO4Lasra65_j0bxaew&s=192 -
In Javid's account there is the positive of two good resignations.Cyclefree said:
Sunak's record is why he is a no, to my mind.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
Javid: I'm not sure about yet0 -
There are sports other than cricket...DavidL said:
Cycling?FrancisUrquhart said:
He has gone off the front again in a 3 man break away with 100+ miles to go. Every day so far he has been putting in massive efforts.turbotubbs said:
??????????????????FrancisUrquhart said:Wout van aert at it again today. He can't keep this up surely.
0 -
😘 .Carnyx said:
Hello, lunar lagomorph!MoonRabbit said: . .1 -
And the biggest call of all- whether he was remotely suitable for the job- was the one he got wrongest.Scott_xP said:There will be three strands to the historic appraisal of Johnson: personal immorality, functional inadequacy and constitutional sabotage. On each one of them, history will damn him. https://inews.co.uk/opinion/apparently-boris-johnson-got-the-big-calls-right-nothing-could-be-further-from-the-truth-1729658
0 -
Yes sorry, I wasn’t overly clear, technically the only free benefit of chequers would be the venue hire as PM - I believe that the PM has to pay for food/booze/entertainments etc out of their own pocket so all that would be problematic in theory if they shifted venue would be additional venue hire cost.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You think that Boris & Carrie are planning to pay ANY of the expense for this summer shindig?boulay said:
Why are you remotely surprised?TheScreamingEagles said:You are fucking kidding me?
EXCL: Boris Johnson and wife Carrie are planning big wedding bash at Chequers within weeks - with sources saying it's part of reason he wants to stay as caretaker.
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1545045540244578304?s=21&t=ZFQFJRlKH4B0ggI8naNrqg
I’m sure they have a friend with a big country pad they can shift it to as all they should be saving by having it at Chequers was venue hire as they would have to pay for food/staff etc…..
Also would be a bit like holding your wedding at your ex in-laws’ house - a dirty great stone reminder of a failed past in the background of all your photos.
Still plenty of favor to curry, influence to
peddle, deals to be done, scum to be skimmed.
But I’m sure he has “friends” donating fine wines and cake.
1 -
Javid cannot be PM, but he is resigned to it.....NorthofStoke said:
In Javid's account there is the positive of two good resignations.Cyclefree said:
Sunak's record is why he is a no, to my mind.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
Javid: I'm not sure about yet
Hat. Coat.0 -
What happened on Mumsnet with Morduant?Cyclefree said:
She can stay as Equalities Minister or Kemi can do it.BartholomewRoberts said:
Curious why you say absolutely not about Truss?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
I believe you've been very positive about her in the past on her role for Equalities and Women's issues which I know is an issue close to your heart?
So I'm wondering what she's said or done to make her absolutely not, despite that?
But I don't think she has what it takes to be PM.
She may well get it, mind.
Tough crowd on there...0 -
We don't have caretaker PMs in this country.LostPassword said:
The weird silence and emptiness is because he's promised to have his head chopped off in October, so there's no catharsis in having him announce the event happening in the future, relative to it actually happening.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
It's hard to celebrate his demise when he hasn't actually demised yet.0 -
We now know (if we did not know in advance), he never wanted to do the job.Stuartinromford said:And the biggest call of all- whether he was remotely suitable for the job- was the one he got wrongest.
He wanted the title. He wanted the trappings. The deference. The applause.
He never wanted to do the work4 -
For those of us less familiar with the current lingo, what is 'getting pawned'?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly0 -
I think that's unfair to Javid, who doesn't have an FPN to his name, does have a compelling back story, and did have the integrity to step down in 2020 at a time when he could have bent over for Cummings.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
He's not a good public speaker - that's absolutely fair. But he has a lot of attributes Sunak lacks... and I do rather wonder if the direct comparison between the would be jumped to if Sajid Javid was Simon Jones and/or Rishi Sunak was Richard Smith.1 -
So does my mum's China collection.wooliedyed said:
She has a cabinet positionDecrepiterJohnL said:
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
IMO, it talks more sense than Ms Braverman6 -
They cannot possibly ignore the members.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-11 -
Betting Post. Although I put £50 on Javid at 14-1 a year ago, his “statement” though nicely written was poorly delivered. It won’t be him.Cyclefree said:
Sunak's record is why he is a no, to my mind.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
Javid: I'm not sure about yet
It was also bogus, as it was all about principled politician putting country and party before himself. If Boris was 10 points ahead, just held two by elections, Javid wouldn’t even have been out there delivering his statement, he would be in there saying “the prime minister has my full support” on the media round. Would he not?0 -
Not in name, but in effect is is possible. Wellington's second term for instance.Andy_JS said:
We don't have caretaker PMs in this country.LostPassword said:
The weird silence and emptiness is because he's promised to have his head chopped off in October, so there's no catharsis in having him announce the event happening in the future, relative to it actually happening.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
It's hard to celebrate his demise when he hasn't actually demised yet.1 -
Which is fine but that means Bozo needs to go now so that a clean pair of hands (even Raab) can actually govern between now and when the member vote finishes.kle4 said:
It may be the last time I ever will, but I suspect I would agree with HYUFD who will likely suggest bypassing members is a bad idea, if it is to be for a permanent replacement.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-10 -
It seems to me pretty obvious that Boris should be removed from Downing Street immediately, with Raab (presumably) replacing him as caretaker.
Why?
Well, because even when he wanted to have the job of PM in perpetuity, Boris seemed incapable of dealing with the daily grind and attention to detail that it involves. On top of his dissembling, lying and poor judgement, that was the source of his downfall.
Does anybody really think he'll give the job due attention now he's on his way out?0 -
A minor misspelling, actually:Luckyguy1983 said:
For those of us less familiar with the current lingo, what is 'getting pawned'?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pwn0 -
Yes I know but the chap who appointed her is about to leave the stage. She now needs to impress the next Prime Minister that she is a significant player, and there is even an outside chance she might win the grand prize.wooliedyed said:
She has a cabinet positionDecrepiterJohnL said:
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
0 -
Would the UK have survived another two years of the lies and corruption .
Johnson only has himself to blame , with an 80 seat majority he blew that because he’s a pathological liar and unfit for office .
The Tories knew this when they elected him and have inflicted the most divisive and morally corrupt PM on the UK .
One can only hope that at least the next PM will have a decent relationship with the truth .0 -
0
-
Yes, but his position is essentially the same as Zelensky, ceasefire and withdrawal, and Ukranian neutrality.FrancisUrquhart said:
Of course he did, its classic Stop the War nonsense that doesn't live in the real world. A letter to Putin asking him if he would please withdraw your troops is about as effective writing to Boris Johnson to ask him to stop lying.Foxy said:
To be fair Corbyn has coupled his demand for a ceasefire with withdrawal of Russian troops. This is his tweet on the day of the invasion:FrancisUrquhart said:
Erhhh the training of Ukraine troops which is ongoing, especially prior to the invasion has been crucial to their ability to push back the Russians. The special forces units that were SAS trained have been absolutely key to consistently disrupting the supply lines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
Now the Ukrainian are being trained on firing large artillery.
You keep posting this nonsense about Corbyn, at every opportunity he has demanded there isn't any fighting, we just sit down and chat with Putin (and we have seen how that has gone when Macron has tried it). And his response to Salisbury was a disgrace. His criticism are always about Tories taking donations, he has never blabbered on about how we shouldn't use sanctions as they hurt the people etc.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1496827583828312070?t=08LUQ8CI0kOTUBrZLrwOMg&s=19
In this more recent tweet he backs a petition also demanding Russian withdrawal:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1516030635542028298?t=leAVsO4Lasra65_j0bxaew&s=19
0 -
Wallace tells BBC "Britain is full square behind" Zelensky.
Re PM: "It's not just about one person..."
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/15450518811388190791 -
Penny Mordaunt is an excellent dispatch box performer.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think these things are utterly irrelevant. I give you all that and raise you Pete Buttigieg.Cookie said:
Whenever I mention Tom Tugendhat as a potential runner to politically-less-engaged friends/colleagues/family/casually aquaintances, their reaction is always the same: surely that can't be his name?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Green was Hancock's proposer in the 2019 leadership election.Andy_JS said:
Bad news for Jeremy Hunt. Damian Green is the sort of MP who might have supported him.Nigelb said:Well that's one vote at least.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1545026016623616000
Damian Green declares for Tom Tugendhat as the “fresh start” candidate - he tells @SophyRidgeSky “you can take it that Tom is going to run”
So, yes, he might have supported Hunt but by absolutely no means a banker for him (and he's not that brilliant a judge).
This will take a while to shake down. There could be several rounds with minor candidates showing a level of support as part of making the case for a cabinet role in future, before the serious business of choosing the final three from among the big boys and girls gets underway.
This is a prediction that no doubt will come back to haunt me, but colour me sceptical about candidates (like Tugendhat) who've not held a major cabinet job at some point. The Conservative Party is selecting a PM, not a leader in opposition, and these characters look like they are jockeying for cabinet position rather than the top job.
I wonder what sort of a barrier this will be? When did we last have a PM with a name that peculiar?
Penny Mordaunt, btw, carries a related handicap: how does one pronounce 'Mordaunt'? I'm hoping it's 'Mordant', or 'Mordunt'. Please tell me it's not 'Mordarnt'? That will put everyone north of Birmingham off.
I do, however, think Tugendhat and Mordaunt both have a problem amongst MPs as they have next to no cabinet experience. The former none at all, the latter a couple of years in a minor department and five minutes at Defence, essentially as a placeholder right at the end of May's ministry.
It won't matter so much to party members, but it's a genuine problem in terms of getting on the ballot. How will they lead a cabinet of colleagues who have that experience? How will the fare on a big occasion under real pressure at the dispatch box? Can they bear up to the pressure of dealing with a policy crisis? Are they respected by senior civil servants?
This is all going to give MPs real pause for thought even if they are attracted by these characters, since they'd be going straight in as PM facing big national and international problems... and the "L" plates are a major concern.0 -
Nom Dom for six years floated to the surface. What else lurks down there?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think that's unfair to Javid, who doesn't have an FPN to his name, does have a compelling back story, and did have the integrity to step down in 2020 at a time when he could have bent over for Cummings.Endillion said:
Javid is basically discount Sunak, so I don't really get why one is a no and one isn't.Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly
Other than still holding on to some residual Sunak-love long after it should have gone, I basically agree with this.
Also, it's pwned, not pawned.
He's not a good public speaker - that's absolutely fair. But he has a lot of attributes Sunak lacks... and I do rather wonder if the direct comparison between the would be jumped to if Sajid Javid was Simon Jones and/or Rishi Sunak was Richard Smith.0 -
autocorrect for pwned. "to utterly defeat (an opponent or rival);"Luckyguy1983 said:
For those of us less familiar with the current lingo, what is 'getting pawned'?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly0 -
I don't think that's technically right. The Attorney General is one of several positions where the incumbent attends Cabinet but isn't actually a member of the Cabinet (like the Paymaster General and Chief Whip).wooliedyed said:
She has a cabinet positionDecrepiterJohnL said:
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
0 -
I was going to do a spreadsheet but Guido has already started one:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ffqemZ-YOi7AvAw8HbxmMd0vIbsOXLZ7KpAmNQPD2r8/edit#gid=00 -
-
Morley and Outwood MP Andrea Jenkyns - who backed Boris Johnson right until the end - tells TV cameras after the PM's resignation: "they'll regret it like they did with Thatcher... this will be a mistake" https://twitter.com/harry_horton/status/1545051047932018689/video/10
-
Conservative members gave us Boris.Andy_JS said:
They cannot possibly ignore the members.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-1
It might be in everyone's interests if they don't have any input this time.
(Plus there's the process can be massively accelerated this way.)2 -
I mean what will Scott do all day if he cant retweet about BJMoonRabbit said:0 -
Because he remains an agent of chaosMoonRabbit said:0 -
Yes, he doesn't have Carrie insisting he'll cling on until the wedding bash is done.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Again, like I just said, Johnson is acting under constraints that do NOT apply to Putin...williamglenn said:
Can you tell me who Johnson has had bumped off? Which countries he's invaded? Which political opponents he's had imprisoned? Which businesses he's expropriated? Which warlords he's bankrolled?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Good grief.williamglenn said:
No doubt in the 1930s you'd have been calling Stanley Baldwin a fascist too.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
No. Not in the way YOU mean. Not a question of taking orders, but of moving along parallel lines, mutual aid, and all that.williamglenn said:
Are you still sticking to the idea that Johnson was a Putin stooge?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Valdimir Putin proclaiming his hatred of Boris Johnson = Boris Johnson proclaiming his love for Barack Obama.
Lying liars lying as per usual for usual reasons that lying liars lie.
Like Hitler and Mussolini. The former took the later for his role model, but certain neither was the puppet of the other.
World is not as simplistic as you would like it to be, for ideological purposes.
Vlad the Mad, BJx2, 45, Orban, Modi, Bolasano = League of Their Own
Show me ONE example of Stanley Baldwin acting in the accustomed style & manner of Adolf Hitler.
Whereas it is NOT difficult to find Boris Johnson acting in style and manner Mad Vlad. Curbed, of course, by the British Constitution - or what's left of it. As with 45 in USA.0 -
Saying that Corbyn's position on Russia is essentially the same as Zelensky's is some gaslighting.Foxy said:
Yes, but his position is essentially the same as Zelensky, ceasefire and withdrawal, and Ukranian neutrality.FrancisUrquhart said:
Of course he did, its classic Stop the War nonsense that doesn't live in the real world. A letter to Putin asking him if he would please withdraw your troops is about as effective writing to Boris Johnson to ask him to stop lying.Foxy said:
To be fair Corbyn has coupled his demand for a ceasefire with withdrawal of Russian troops. This is his tweet on the day of the invasion:FrancisUrquhart said:
Erhhh the training of Ukraine troops which is ongoing, especially prior to the invasion has been crucial to their ability to push back the Russians. The special forces units that were SAS trained have been absolutely key to consistently disrupting the supply lines.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Not really. That is a straw man argument, as above. And what are these things Boris did? Sanctions against Russia were led by the United States, and even Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further than Boris. British-supplied NLAWS were crucial in the battle for Kyiv, it is true, but since then we've not supplied much, no doubt in part because we do not have much we can supply after decades of Tory defence cuts.JosiasJessop said:
" but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia,"DecrepiterJohnL said:
I think "stooge" might be a straw man, though keep an eye on whether Starmer runs with Lebedev that was getting Labour excited in the Commons this morning, but we do know Boris has done things which suited Russia, so perhaps a Leninist useful idiot is the other end of the scale. We also know Russia does interfere with foreign politics; that the KGB attempted to recruit David Cameron; that Russians continue to fund the Conservative Party. But it is probably a step too far to claim Boris follows daily orders from the Kremlin.JosiasJessop said:
Aside from Brexit and the odd inclusion of Lebedev, those are just continuation of long-term trends.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Brexit; increased strain on the union, with both Scotland and Northern Ireland looking a bit dicey; continued army cuts; Lebedev; continued selling off of British defence and technology companies.JosiasJessop said:If Johnson was a Putin stooge, then Putin got a very, very poor deal out of it. If he did, then it was a failed gamble; money wasted.
It doesn't mean he didn't try, though ...
The counter argument is much more persuasive: continued sanctions on Russia after Salisbury, continuation of the training scheme for Ukrainian troops; the way Johnson led the world (yes, really) in helping Ukraine at the start of this mess.
It would have been really easy for Johnson to have stopped or reduced the training scheme, called for the loosening of sanctions ("for peace"), not provided Ukraine with NLAWS, and not been as strident against Russia back in February.
That's where the argument for Johnson being a Putin stooge really falls down. His major actions were the opposite, and hurt Russia.
And some really, really important and immediate things that really went against Russia's interests. That's where your argument fails.
But if all you want to claim is that Boris was not directly controlled from the Kremlin, then yes.
Now the Ukrainian are being trained on firing large artillery.
You keep posting this nonsense about Corbyn, at every opportunity he has demanded there isn't any fighting, we just sit down and chat with Putin (and we have seen how that has gone when Macron has tried it). And his response to Salisbury was a disgrace. His criticism are always about Tories taking donations, he has never blabbered on about how we shouldn't use sanctions as they hurt the people etc.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1496827583828312070?t=08LUQ8CI0kOTUBrZLrwOMg&s=19
In this more recent tweet he backs a petition also demanding Russian withdrawal:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1516030635542028298?t=leAVsO4Lasra65_j0bxaew&s=192 -
If he no longer commands the support of the House of Commons the Queen can ask someone else who can.Beibheirli_C said:
Since the PM is appointed by the Queen, and the Queen always follows the advice of her PMs, how do the Tories propose to remove Boris? Especially if he says "I need to stay in post until October Ma'am"?kle4 said:
It may be the last time I ever will, but I suspect I would agree with HYUFD who will likely suggest bypassing members is a bad idea, if it is to be for a permanent replacement.Scott_xP said:Now we're talking...
🔴 Tory MPs are plotting to replace Boris Johnson by the end of next week by side-stepping party members
Read more from @CamillaTominey ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/07/tory-mps-plotting-replace-boris-johnson-end-next-week/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1657202395-1
0 -
So, here is my solution.
Boris remains PM until recess (can be VONC'd any time if he tarts about). Resigns on last day once the 2 final runners are known or replacement agreed. Raab takes over until end of contest during recess to babysit any issues that arise and cabinet does its stuff as usual, Boris and Carrie are allowed to use Chequers 'wholly at their expense' for their party.
Job done.0 -
Pwned originated as a typo in a computer game and the tech nerds ran with it.mwadams said:
autocorrect for pwned. "to utterly defeat (an opponent or rival);"Luckyguy1983 said:
For those of us less familiar with the current lingo, what is 'getting pawned'?Cyclefree said:Views on contenders:
Sunak - no
Javid: hmmm
Mordaunt: no - said daft things about Brexit, organised that ludicrous Leadsom March and got utterly pawned by Mumsnet the other day
Truss: absolutely not
Tugendhat: maybe depending on his team
Braverman: please God no
Wallace: possibly1 -
Yes, youre right, i stand correctedSirNorfolkPassmore said:
I don't think that's technically right. The Attorney General is one of several positions where the incumbent attends Cabinet but isn't actually a member of the Cabinet (like the Paymaster General and Chief Whip).wooliedyed said:
She has a cabinet positionDecrepiterJohnL said:
If Braverman can pick up more than a handful of votes, she must be seriously considered for a Cabinet position by whoever does win, and such are the vagaries of Tory leadership elections that rank outsiders can win, like David Cameron, Theresa May and Margaret Thatcher.Scott_xP said:Doesn't hang about. ~AA https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1545050657022808068/photo/1
0 -
That's going back rather a long way.kle4 said:
Not in name, but in effect is is possible. Wellington's second term for instance.Andy_JS said:
We don't have caretaker PMs in this country.LostPassword said:
The weird silence and emptiness is because he's promised to have his head chopped off in October, so there's no catharsis in having him announce the event happening in the future, relative to it actually happening.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
It's hard to celebrate his demise when he hasn't actually demised yet.0 -
I'm sure she speaks well. But there's a difference between giving a statement and answering questions as a pretty junior figure, and dealing with the big Parliamentary occasion.Luckyguy1983 said:
Penny Mordaunt is an excellent dispatch box performer.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I think these things are utterly irrelevant. I give you all that and raise you Pete Buttigieg.Cookie said:
Whenever I mention Tom Tugendhat as a potential runner to politically-less-engaged friends/colleagues/family/casually aquaintances, their reaction is always the same: surely that can't be his name?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Green was Hancock's proposer in the 2019 leadership election.Andy_JS said:
Bad news for Jeremy Hunt. Damian Green is the sort of MP who might have supported him.Nigelb said:Well that's one vote at least.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1545026016623616000
Damian Green declares for Tom Tugendhat as the “fresh start” candidate - he tells @SophyRidgeSky “you can take it that Tom is going to run”
So, yes, he might have supported Hunt but by absolutely no means a banker for him (and he's not that brilliant a judge).
This will take a while to shake down. There could be several rounds with minor candidates showing a level of support as part of making the case for a cabinet role in future, before the serious business of choosing the final three from among the big boys and girls gets underway.
This is a prediction that no doubt will come back to haunt me, but colour me sceptical about candidates (like Tugendhat) who've not held a major cabinet job at some point. The Conservative Party is selecting a PM, not a leader in opposition, and these characters look like they are jockeying for cabinet position rather than the top job.
I wonder what sort of a barrier this will be? When did we last have a PM with a name that peculiar?
Penny Mordaunt, btw, carries a related handicap: how does one pronounce 'Mordaunt'? I'm hoping it's 'Mordant', or 'Mordunt'. Please tell me it's not 'Mordarnt'? That will put everyone north of Birmingham off.
I do, however, think Tugendhat and Mordaunt both have a problem amongst MPs as they have next to no cabinet experience. The former none at all, the latter a couple of years in a minor department and five minutes at Defence, essentially as a placeholder right at the end of May's ministry.
It won't matter so much to party members, but it's a genuine problem in terms of getting on the ballot. How will they lead a cabinet of colleagues who have that experience? How will the fare on a big occasion under real pressure at the dispatch box? Can they bear up to the pressure of dealing with a policy crisis? Are they respected by senior civil servants?
This is all going to give MPs real pause for thought even if they are attracted by these characters, since they'd be going straight in as PM facing big national and international problems... and the "L" plates are a major concern.
Look - I'm not saying she or others lack attractive qualities or would be bad PMs. I'm simply - in terms of betting predictions - saying that MPs are going to be worried about putting someone in who MIGHT be good but is somewhat untested. I think there will be a strong bias towards known quantities.1 -
With Liar gone, the red Red Wall has gone too. Will the new PM be able to stop the rot in the Blue Wall?
Tories are screwed. Johnson was by far your best hope.0 -
Maybe, but I think its not over yet as he is still PM. If he resigned and left Raab in charge it would feel different.Leon said:Friend of mine just made a brilliant analogy. Said the fall of Boris has been like a public execution. Everyone has been standing around baying for the blood of the panto villain, and yet, now his head is chopped off there is a weird silence and emptiness. It hasn’t brought the fulfilment hoped. A tinge of regret or guilt on the air. People walk quietly away
2 -
John Major won the subsequent general election and notwithstanding Jenkyns is an idiot.Scott_xP said:Morley and Outwood MP Andrea Jenkyns - who backed Boris Johnson right until the end - tells TV cameras after the PM's resignation: "they'll regret it like they did with Thatcher... this will be a mistake" https://twitter.com/harry_horton/status/1545051047932018689/video/1
1
