politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Given Dave’s more popular than CON his announcement should
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Given Dave’s more popular than CON his announcement should theoretically help LAB
The latest Ipsos-MORI like leader like party ratings illustrate what is very common when it comes to public views of Cameron and his party: Invariably unlike the other party leaders he is a net asset securing better numbers than the Conservative party.
Comments
-
First?0
-
Second!0
-
I don't see the big woo hah about this.
Did he mean to say it, I don't know, probably not. But he was asked a straight question IF HE WON THE GE, WOULD BE STAY ON AFTER 2020, he started off in standard politician non-committal and then just went are sod it, no I am definitely not going to be around after that.
Is that really a big surprise? I have read plenty that basically said that was always his plan. We all know he doesn't live, breath, eat, sleep, only exist for the fight of politics.
I thought more interesting question / answer, was did he enjoy being PM, and he basically said no!
Somebody stating they will step down in 5 years, will affect your vote in a few weeks how? Most people don't live and breath politics, and what Cameron has said makes no different to GE.
It isn't like we are back to Tony, yes I'm off, well no not quite, maybe in a bit, could be, oh I have been shoved...
Also, they say a week is a long time in politics, 5 years is an entity. How many people would have predicted Ed Miliband in 2005 to lead the Labour Party?0 -
Given the contrast with Blair & Thatcher, I doubt this will do much (or any) damage......0
-
Looking at the collective hysteria of the Westminster Lobby yesterday, you have to ask if any of them even bothered to watch the full Lansdale/Cameron interview on the BBC news? As Lansdale himself pointed out on the 10pm news, he asked Cameron a straight forward question and Cameron then went on and answered it honestly. Alastair Campbell was holed below the waterline on Newsnight the minute that Michael Gove highlighted that very clear and straight forward Cameron response to the question.
Not only did Ed Miliband's visit to Scotland not make the front pages today, neither he or the Labour party managed to successfully neutralise Salmond's unhelpful intervention yesterday. Job done.0 -
I doubt the public will care too much. It's five years away.
If Labour decide to focus on the question of leadership in the election campaign, I doubt that will trouble the Conservative strategists too much either.0 -
Mike - you've ignored the other side of the equation.
My general view is that this was Cameron answering an honest question straightforwardly. A characteristic - like sticking up for his friends - that I find rather refreshing in a politician.
From a tactical perspective, my understanding was that a lot of Kippers have a personal distrust for Cameron. So the message of "hold your nose and vote for the Tories" become much more palatable if it's 3 years of Cameron vs an eternity with Ed. After all, we all know that they are 150% right in their worldview, and the Tories are absolutely certain to see that one day, and vote for St. Nigel to become their leader once Cameron steps down.0 -
p-h-e-w for a moment there I thought it might put you off voting for him.antifrank said:I doubt the public will care too much. It's five years away.
If Labour decide to focus on the question of leadership in the election campaign, I doubt that will trouble the Conservative strategists too much either.0 -
I doubt Cameron's move will change a single kipper vote. It simply introduces a level of uncertainty in a campaign when voters are grasping for certainty. The Beeboid doing the interview agrees with you that he just came straight out with it, but I suspect his election team had one of those wtf moments.Charles said:Mike - you've ignored the other side of the equation.
My general view is that this was Cameron answering an honest question straightforwardly. A characteristic - like sticking up for his friends - that I find rather refreshing in a politician.
From a tactical perspective, my understanding was that a lot of Kippers have a personal distrust for Cameron. So the message of "hold your nose and vote for the Tories" become much more palatable if it's 3 years of Cameron vs an eternity with Ed. After all, we all know that they are 150% right in their worldview, and the Tories are absolutely certain to see that one day, and vote for St. Nigel to become their leader once Cameron steps down.0 -
I thought you were right for the first half the paragraphCharles said:From a tactical perspective, my understanding was that a lot of Kippers have a personal distrust for Cameron. So the message of "hold your nose and vote for the Tories" become much more palatable if it's 3 years of Cameron vs an eternity with Ed. After all, we all know that they are 150% right in their worldview, and the Tories are absolutely certain to see that one day, and vote for St. Nigel to become their leader once Cameron steps down.
I doubt it will change anything because Cameron isn't going to go before the EU referendum, and its that which causes Kippers to distrust him most. They are concerned, with some justification, (cast iron, no ifs no buts, etc) of being sold down the river in a stitch up with the pro-EU establishment, and the few prominent troublemakers (Gove etc) being bought off with some perk or another.
Incidentally the idea that Gove, Dave's dinner party mate that took a shot in the back, for the good of the party, in stepping down from Education with minimal fuss, is going to call him out over Europe seems fanciful to me, and the idea that any senior Tory that wants to get a government position and a 2020 Tory win is going to rock the boat seems a stretch.
0 -
Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :
150 minutes 150 seconds0 -
Fundamentally both Gove and Hammond are principled individuals - in Gove's case too willing to speak his mind, and Hammond - I think - knows he will never get the top job (too austere).Indigo said:
I thought you were right for the first half the paragraphCharles said:From a tactical perspective, my understanding was that a lot of Kippers have a personal distrust for Cameron. So the message of "hold your nose and vote for the Tories" become much more palatable if it's 3 years of Cameron vs an eternity with Ed. After all, we all know that they are 150% right in their worldview, and the Tories are absolutely certain to see that one day, and vote for St. Nigel to become their leader once Cameron steps down.
I doubt it will change anything because Cameron isn't going to go before the EU referendum, and its that which causes Kippers to distrust him most. They are concerned, with some justification, (cast iron, no ifs no buts, etc) of being sold down the river in a stitch up with the pro-EU establishment, and the few prominent troublemakers (Gove etc) being bought off with some perk or another.
Incidentally the idea that Gove, Dave's dinner party mate that took a shot in the back, for the good of the party, in stepping down from Education with minimal fuss, is going to call him out over Europe seems fanciful to me, and the idea that any senior Tory that wants to get a government position and a 2020 Tory win is going to rock the boat seems a stretch.
I'd agree that Gove is more likely to resign to actively undermine his friend, but I don't think he'd put his name to something that he fundamentally disagrees with.0 -
Just read this article which projects upto 7.5 million (as reported in the HoC in February) are missing from the Electoral Roll, which makes a lot of the projections of the Polls even more suspect if the article is 50% over stated:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/23/voters_are_missing_its_another_govtdigishambles/?page=10 -
Politician says he won't go on and on and on.
Meh.0 -
It would have been better if he hadn't said it but all the sound and fury is pure Westminster Village. Leave it alone now or it will become seriously boring, I would say.0
-
I am really surprised that this caused such a stir and allowed DC to dominate a news cycle in the way that he did. Surely 15 years in charge of the asylum that is the modern Conservative party is enough for anyone even if one or two of the more extreme maniacs have transferred out.
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
But I don't see it shifting a single vote.0 -
The Spreads on Sporting Index immediately above this box seem to have shifted overnight in the Tories' direction. The gap in the mid points is now 17. A reaction to yesterday's Scottish polls perhaps?0
-
More importantly will OGH serve another full term ?MarqueeMark said:Politician says he won't go on and on and on.
Meh.
Will we hear from his Bedford kitchen who will be the anointed successor ?
Keep it in the family with rcs100 or will the baton be passed to Herders, TSE or Martin Day ? ....
0 -
It does bring it back to the leadership issue. Will Miliband go for a second term if he wins?DavidL said:I am really surprised that this caused such a stir and allowed DC to dominate a news cycle in the way that he did. Surely 15 years in charge of the asylum that is the modern Conservative party is enough for anyone even if one or two of the more extreme maniacs have transferred out.
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
But I don't see it shifting a single vote.
But more importantly: nice kitchen!0 -
It was bound to come up in the campaign and from his own point of view Cameron has done well to deal with it now. He also has to answer to Samantha, of course!0
-
You've grabbed the wrong end of the stick, Mike.
Firstly, he was going to get asked this question at some point so he has got the hysteria out of the way.
Secondly, when Cameron is more popular then Miliband but Labour are more popular than the Tories, this "2-terms-max" and "job half done" mantra makes it more likely that people will stick with Cameron for five more years and then (when Cameron and Miliband are gone) it will be safe to turn to Labour.
How has this been so hard for all the hyperventilating hacks to work out?0 -
This is just another why Dave cant win thread.0
-
And people wonder why politicians don't give honest answers to straight questions.0
-
Moving average chart of the 100 most recent YouGov polls. Click to enlarge...
0 -
Nice wife. She came across really well. I wondered if he wanted to emphasise the strength in depth of his team as well. Whilst not coming close to Maggie's first cabinet it is certainly a favourable comparison to Labour.foxinsoxuk said:
It does bring it back to the leadership issue. Will Miliband go for a second term if he wins?DavidL said:I am really surprised that this caused such a stir and allowed DC to dominate a news cycle in the way that he did. Surely 15 years in charge of the asylum that is the modern Conservative party is enough for anyone even if one or two of the more extreme maniacs have transferred out.
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
But I don't see it shifting a single vote.
But more importantly: nice kitchen!0 -
Morning all.
Cameron has ruled out serving a third term, as has long been speculated by many on PB – can’t see why “Lynton’s campaign plan” should be any different today, than it was yesterday – unless we are discussing the campaign five years down the road.
0 -
So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?0
-
There is some truth in that. What struck me about the mini-documentary last night is how unchanged Cameron looks after five years as Prime Minister. In many ways he looks and sounds the same to me as he did in 2009, when he was still leader of the opposition: posh, relaxed, a bit aloof, doesn't-take-life-too-seriously, small-c conservative and fairly happy with all of it.DavidL said:
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
He hasn't been altered or transformed by the trappings of office. He doesn't look too fussed, or bothered, by politics either way and looks as though he'd be just as happy spending time with his friends and family and tending his vegetable patch in the Cotswolds.
Of course, that is both a strength and a weakness.
0 -
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
Surely he's a small-l liberal?Casino_Royale said:
There is some truth in that. What struck me about the mini-documentary last night is how unchanged Cameron looks after five years as Prime Minister. In many ways he looks and sounds the same to me as he did in 2009, when he was still leader of the opposition: posh, relaxed, a bit aloof, doesn't-take-life-too-seriously, small-c conservative and fairly happy with all of it.DavidL said:
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
He hasn't been altered or transformed by the trappings of office. He doesn't look too fussed, or bothered, by politics either way and looks as though he'd be just as happy spending time with his friends and family and tending his vegetable patch in the Cotswolds.
Of course, that is both a strength and a weakness.0 -
The danger is that Labour will say: "Vote Dave, get *most unpopular Tory choice* "PeterC said:It would have been better if he hadn't said it but all the sound and fury is pure Westminster Village. Leave it alone now or it will become seriously boring, I would say.
And then project onto that unpopular Tory choice the most controversial policies they can think of.
The flip-side is that the alternatives Cameron name checked: Osborne and Johnson aren't particularly unpopular at the moment. Most people are ambivalent (or don't know anything) about May.
It's probably a good job he didn't mention Gove.0 -
What is surprising is that anyone is actually surprised..All politicians who become PM have reached their sell by during a second term.0
-
No, he's a small-c conservative as in a person who is moderate, cautious, averse to or suspicious of change, and has a tendency to wish to conserve.Innocent_Abroad said:
Surely he's a small-l liberal?Casino_Royale said:
There is some truth in that. What struck me about the mini-documentary last night is how unchanged Cameron looks after five years as Prime Minister. In many ways he looks and sounds the same to me as he did in 2009, when he was still leader of the opposition: posh, relaxed, a bit aloof, doesn't-take-life-too-seriously, small-c conservative and fairly happy with all of it.DavidL said:
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
He hasn't been altered or transformed by the trappings of office. He doesn't look too fussed, or bothered, by politics either way and looks as though he'd be just as happy spending time with his friends and family and tending his vegetable patch in the Cotswolds.
Of course, that is both a strength and a weakness.0 -
Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?0
-
Are you sure? I don't watch it obsessively but I thought the spread for the Tories was 283/287 before and Labour 268/272 which seemed ridiculous enough given current polling. Both seemed to have moved 1 seat.surbiton said:
It shifted to 17 well before - in fact, it is stuck there !DavidL said:The Spreads on Sporting Index immediately above this box seem to have shifted overnight in the Tories' direction. The gap in the mid points is now 17. A reaction to yesterday's Scottish polls perhaps?
Spread betting always frightens me but Labour are a serious buy at this level.0 -
In 2005 the Tories started to say "vote Tony, get Gordon"; but dropped it when they realised that the slogan was doing Labour some good.Casino_Royale said:
The danger is that Labour will say: "Vote Dave, get *most unpopular Tory choice* "PeterC said:It would have been better if he hadn't said it but all the sound and fury is pure Westminster Village. Leave it alone now or it will become seriously boring, I would say.
And then project onto that unpopular Tory choice the most controversial policies they can think of.
The flip-side is that the alternatives Cameron name checked: Osborne and Johnson aren't particularly unpopular at the moment. Most people are ambivalent (or don't know anything) about May.
It's probably a good job he didn't mention Gove.
Leadership speculation is the bread and butter of political punditry. I cannot see this dominating the campaign or hurting the Conservatives.
Indeed some of the front bench may be energised by the announcement.0 -
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
0 -
Surely no-one thinks that in 5 years time the front runners for any party leadership will be those we think of now.Casino_Royale said:
The danger is that Labour will say: "Vote Dave, get *most unpopular Tory choice* "PeterC said:It would have been better if he hadn't said it but all the sound and fury is pure Westminster Village. Leave it alone now or it will become seriously boring, I would say.
And then project onto that unpopular Tory choice the most controversial policies they can think of.
The flip-side is that the alternatives Cameron name checked: Osborne and Johnson aren't particularly unpopular at the moment. Most people are ambivalent (or don't know anything) about May.
It's probably a good job he didn't mention Gove.
I suppose it’s a sign of age, but I can recall that for years the heir-apparent to Churchill was Eden. When Eden actually got the job he made a bog of it.0 -
The incoherent ranting in this morning's Mirror show just how ridiculous it is possible to sound by overdoing the significance of this. You are right about Cameron's general demeanor - not since Mr McMillan have we seen such spendid languor!Casino_Royale said:
The danger is that Labour will say: "Vote Dave, get *most unpopular Tory choice* "PeterC said:It would have been better if he hadn't said it but all the sound and fury is pure Westminster Village. Leave it alone now or it will become seriously boring, I would say.
And then project onto that unpopular Tory choice the most controversial policies they can think of.
The flip-side is that the alternatives Cameron name checked: Osborne and Johnson aren't particularly unpopular at the moment. Most people are ambivalent (or don't know anything) about May.
It's probably a good job he didn't mention Gove.
0 -
I once walked into a production company in Madrid and all the staff had a lemon and a piece of garlic on their desk. I asked what it was all about?
'It's too get rid of evil spirits. Clotti (one of their PA's) arrived home from location last night and found her husband having sex with a neighbour in his car"
"Poor Clotti" I said. "What kind of car was it?" Nobody spoke to me for the rest of the day.......
When I watched the kitchen interview with Cameron last night I felt a cringing embarrassment that I haven't felt since Eamon Andrews did his final 'This is your life'
It took a constitution toughened in Mexico City not to throw up listening to those two crawling all over each other.
Please. No more. And that BBC need better interviewers.0 -
Oh, I see what you mean - he wishes to conserve Blairism!Casino_Royale said:
No, he's a small-c conservative as in a person who is moderate, cautious, averse to or suspicious of change, and has a tendency to wish to conserve.Innocent_Abroad said:
Surely he's a small-l liberal?Casino_Royale said:
There is some truth in that. What struck me about the mini-documentary last night is how unchanged Cameron looks after five years as Prime Minister. In many ways he looks and sounds the same to me as he did in 2009, when he was still leader of the opposition: posh, relaxed, a bit aloof, doesn't-take-life-too-seriously, small-c conservative and fairly happy with all of it.DavidL said:
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
He hasn't been altered or transformed by the trappings of office. He doesn't look too fussed, or bothered, by politics either way and looks as though he'd be just as happy spending time with his friends and family and tending his vegetable patch in the Cotswolds.
Of course, that is both a strength and a weakness.0 -
What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?Roger said:I once walked into a production company in Madrid and all the staff had a lemon and a piece of garlic on their desk. I asked what it was all about?
'It's too get rid of evil spirits. Clotti (one of their PA's) arrived home from location last night and found her husband having sex with a neighbour in his car"
"Poor Clotti" I said. "What kind of car was it?" Nobody spoke to me for the rest of the day.......
When I watched the kitchen interview with Cameron last night I felt a cringing embarrassment that I haven't felt since Eamon Andrews did his final 'This is your life'
It took a constitution toughened in Mexico City not to throw up listening to those two crawling all over each other.
Please. No more. And that BBC need better interviewers.
0 -
If Cameron did produce a majority (massive if of course) it would certainly whet the interest in who got what jobs and profile. I expect Sajid Javid to get a much bigger job in the next Cabinet, maybe something like Trade and Industry with a mandate to put a rocket under the department after the quietus of the Cable years.0
-
They then let Michael Fallon get away with the usual sort of bullshit without any forensic questioning. He was allowed to get away with telling us how much they are spending on submarines etc as a response to a report which says we should be doing something different. And he failed to give a straight question to the 2% of GDP question. So I presume the Tories are planning to not meet our NATO obligations. The presenters should have pointed out it was a yes or no question and asked if a failure to say yes in fact means no.dr_spyn said:
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
0 -
Indeed - would they prefer to get Cameron into Downing Street then have a shot at moving in themselves, or the Tories losing and then getting the worst job in politics (leader of opposition)foxinsoxuk said:
...
Indeed some of the front bench may be energised by the announcement.0 -
@Roger Had hoped your anecdote was going to be about the removal of a car roof.
Link to Guardian - David Cameron talks breasts, thighs – and third terms.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/david-cameron-third-term-bbc-interview
But was it the second kitchen?
@Tim would have loved it two OEs together, Landale and Cameron.0 -
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
Surely the answer to that question from Fallon is that is above my pay grade and the Chancellor and the PM will make our position very clear in due course.JohnLilburne said:
They then let Michael Fallon get away with the usual sort of bullshit without any forensic questioning. He was allowed to get away with telling us how much they are spending on submarines etc as a response to a report which says we should be doing something different. And he failed to give a straight question to the 2% of GDP question. So I presume the Tories are planning to not meet our NATO obligations. The presenters should have pointed out it was a yes or no question and asked if a failure to say yes in fact means no.dr_spyn said:
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
Edit, driving home yesterday I heard the UKIP spokesman on defence matters. Thought he came across quite well and was pressing a lot of buttons in his target audience.0 -
Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.0 -
Also, the other member states will want assurances that the person who follows him will stick to what is agreed.Alanbrooke said:
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
The job for Boris is party chair, drawing in the crowds on the rubber chicken circuit.SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
Not working out the details of the British banana policy.0 -
One of the reasons, perhaps, that he has and will continue to make clear that he will be leaving allowing the party to try to find a unifying figure after a campaign that is going to test the coherence of the Tories in a way rarely seen since the Corn Laws.Alanbrooke said:
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
"Link to Guardian - David Cameron talks breasts, thighs – and third terms.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/david-cameron-third-term-bbc-interview"
Thanks Dr Spyn! Just the picture we need at 7.30 in the morning (but it does illustrate my post well)0 -
Which leads to the thought - who was the laziest Party Leader ever to win a General Election?SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
0 -
SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
0 -
I'm less sure about that. The Tory ultras have jumped ship to UKIP, you could argue it's the Cameroons who are the sulky children these days as much as the right wing. I suspect having re-acquired a taste of Government the Tories will find someone who can carry a broad church once again. But who knows ? Maybe that's just wishful thinking.DavidL said:
One of the reasons, perhaps, that he has and will continue to make clear that he will be leaving allowing the party to try to find a unifying figure after a campaign that is going to test the coherence of the Tories in a way rarely seen since the Corn Laws.Alanbrooke said:
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
We have a treaty commitment. Any answer other than "yes" must mean no.DavidL said:
Surely the answer to that question from Fallon is that is above my pay grade and the Chancellor and the PM will make our position very clear in due course.JohnLilburne said:
They then let Michael Fallon get away with the usual sort of bullshit without any forensic questioning. He was allowed to get away with telling us how much they are spending on submarines etc as a response to a report which says we should be doing something different. And he failed to give a straight question to the 2% of GDP question. So I presume the Tories are planning to not meet our NATO obligations. The presenters should have pointed out it was a yes or no question and asked if a failure to say yes in fact means no.dr_spyn said:
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
Edit, driving home yesterday I heard the UKIP spokesman on defence matters. Thought he came across quite well and was pressing a lot of buttons in his target audience.
0 -
pangs of guilt Roger ?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
cameras still rolling when the baby oil came out ?
PB should be told.0 -
Not sure he'd be that interested in such a job. Travelling around the country doing meetings in obscure places with obscure people is not Boris's thing either. I suppose he could do it part-time alongside other stuff. If the Tories win in May and Dave manages to do as he says, it seems to me that both Boris and Theresa are now in with almost no chance of taking over.foxinsoxuk said:
The job for Boris is party chair, drawing in the crowds on the rubber chicken circuit.SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
Not working out the details of the British banana policy.
BoJo's best chance now is if the Tories lose in May or if there is a major bust-up over Europe if they get a new term. I'd be very surprised if he did not take the other side to Dave and George - ie, advocate an Out vote - should there be a referendum.
0 -
Well maybe, but I think we can all safely vote Out in the Referendum to improve our negotiating position safe in the knowledge that it's only a practice and doesn't count until we get the right answer.SouthamObserver said:
Also, the other member states will want assurances that the person who follows him will stick to what is agreed.Alanbrooke said:
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
0 -
We have a massive budget deficit and a need to make spending cuts. Combining that with a commitment to increase defence spending is not necessarily wrong but it is a big decision. And the Treaty commitment doesn't seem to bother anyone else in Europe.JohnLilburne said:
We have a treaty commitment. Any answer other than "yes" must mean no.DavidL said:
Surely the answer to that question from Fallon is that is above my pay grade and the Chancellor and the PM will make our position very clear in due course.JohnLilburne said:
They then let Michael Fallon get away with the usual sort of bullshit without any forensic questioning. He was allowed to get away with telling us how much they are spending on submarines etc as a response to a report which says we should be doing something different. And he failed to give a straight question to the 2% of GDP question. So I presume the Tories are planning to not meet our NATO obligations. The presenters should have pointed out it was a yes or no question and asked if a failure to say yes in fact means no.dr_spyn said:
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
Edit, driving home yesterday I heard the UKIP spokesman on defence matters. Thought he came across quite well and was pressing a lot of buttons in his target audience.0 -
No, I think you're right. Finding someone who can hold it together will not be easy but it might be easier once Cameron has got the referendum out of the way.Alanbrooke said:
I'm less sure about that. The Tory ultras have jumped ship to UKIP, you could argue it's the Cameroons who are the sulky children these days as much as the right wing. I suspect having re-acquired a taste of Government the Tories will find someone who can carry a broad church once again. But who knows ? Maybe that's just wishful thinking.DavidL said:
One of the reasons, perhaps, that he has and will continue to make clear that he will be leaving allowing the party to try to find a unifying figure after a campaign that is going to test the coherence of the Tories in a way rarely seen since the Corn Laws.Alanbrooke said:
Hmm, not quite so sure David. If Cameron hasn't made clear that he's going post referendum, then the risk is it's vote out and get rid of Cameron.DavidL said:
As soon as the Euro referendum is out of the way would be my guess. A Cameron that has nothing to lose and no need to compromise with his sceptic wing on that will be a formidable asset to the stay in side.surbiton said:So, if Cameron is the PM in next Parliament, when will the leadership election take place ?
0 -
Depends what you mean by lazy. Politics was far less time consuming in 19th century. Gladstone read novels by all accounts, thousands of them. He even read part of Treasure Island on the way to kiss hands with the Queen to become PM.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which leads to the thought - who was the laziest Party Leader ever to win a General Election?SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.0 -
Alanbrooke
"pangs of guilt Roger ?
cameras still rolling when the baby oil came out ?
PB should be told."
I just wanted to know if they used tongues.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/david-cameron-third-term-bbc-interview (compliments Dr Spyn)0 -
You clearly missed the Gordon Brown tongue/sphincter interview of 2010.Roger said:I felt a cringing embarrassment that I haven't felt since Eamon Andrews did his final 'This is your life'
0 -
On the topic. I think that in the main this is yet another story that has the 'beltway' around Westminster all fired up, but voters will barely notice. No one really believes any PM who starts predicting when they might go. The only possible way this may have an effect is to appear to be taking a 2nd term for granted, always a mistake.0
-
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.0 -
Hasn't Cameron simply signalled that he won't do a Blair (or a Thatcher), and the general public will actually quite like that?
'I'll finish the job I started (deficit) and then I'll be gone'.
What the public won't like is a Gordon style coronation.
0 -
Definitely in the speaking parts, as for the rest of it I couldn't say.Roger said:Alanbrooke
"pangs of guilt Roger ?
cameras still rolling when the baby oil came out ?
PB should be told."
I just wanted to know if they used tongues.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/david-cameron-third-term-bbc-interview (compliments Dr Spyn)0 -
I'd like to see some honesty about it. I do worry we don't get the bangs for our bucks, would like to see some benchmarking done against other countries to see how they do it. I presume the French spend less than us but manage to deploy to former colonies whenever they feel like it. I wonder if we spend too much on civil servants and expensive contractors, and that the defence forces are the last great producer monopoly.DavidL said:
We have a massive budget deficit and a need to make spending cuts. Combining that with a commitment to increase defence spending is not necessarily wrong but it is a big decision. And the Treaty commitment doesn't seem to bother anyone else in Europe.JohnLilburne said:
We have a treaty commitment. Any answer other than "yes" must mean no.DavidL said:
Surely the answer to that question from Fallon is that is above my pay grade and the Chancellor and the PM will make our position very clear in due course.JohnLilburne said:
They then let Michael Fallon get away with the usual sort of bullshit without any forensic questioning. He was allowed to get away with telling us how much they are spending on submarines etc as a response to a report which says we should be doing something different. And he failed to give a straight question to the 2% of GDP question. So I presume the Tories are planning to not meet our NATO obligations. The presenters should have pointed out it was a yes or no question and asked if a failure to say yes in fact means no.dr_spyn said:
Pond life, who showed that they could also up their website. The Cameron scoop is to try and defect criticism of their multiple failings.JohnLilburne said:Off topic - BBC Breakfast News are referring to the Commons Defence Committee report as a "Government report". What sort of idiots does the BBC employ?
Edit, driving home yesterday I heard the UKIP spokesman on defence matters. Thought he came across quite well and was pressing a lot of buttons in his target audience.
0 -
Gladstone was many things, but lazy he was not. Lazy men don't box the political compass, as he and Churchill both did.rottenborough said:
Depends what you mean by lazy. Politics was far less time consuming in 19th century. Gladstone read novels by all accounts, thousands of them. He even read part of Treasure Island on the way to kiss hands with the Queen to become PM.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which leads to the thought - who was the laziest Party Leader ever to win a General Election?SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
I think my vote would be for Eden, but I could easily be persuaded otherwise.
0 -
SO
"Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?"
RIGHT!! I get it now. Am I the only person who didn't know this? Was it part of the presentation of the interview that Cammo's school chum and bosom Buddy was the oleaginous interviewer?
If they'd said it viewers might have seen it in a more sympathetic light0 -
Agree - Cameron is saying 'there is more to life than work' - and I can believe he will have a long, happy, productive 'retirement' - like Major or Callaghan, and not like Heath, Thatcher, or it would appear the haunted Blair or Brown......chestnut said:Hasn't Cameron simply signalled that he won't do a Blair (or a Thatcher), and the general public will actually quite like that?
'I'll finish the job I started (deficit) and then I'll be gone'.
What the public won't like is a Gordon style coronation.0 -
Yes.Innocent_Abroad said:
Oh, I see what you mean - he wishes to conserve Blairism!Casino_Royale said:
No, he's a small-c conservative as in a person who is moderate, cautious, averse to or suspicious of change, and has a tendency to wish to conserve.Innocent_Abroad said:
Surely he's a small-l liberal?Casino_Royale said:
There is some truth in that. What struck me about the mini-documentary last night is how unchanged Cameron looks after five years as Prime Minister. In many ways he looks and sounds the same to me as he did in 2009, when he was still leader of the opposition: posh, relaxed, a bit aloof, doesn't-take-life-too-seriously, small-c conservative and fairly happy with all of it.DavidL said:
One of Cameron's more attractive features is that he is not a political obsessive in the way so many of our leaders are. It gives him a useful sense of perspective and a deep inclination not to get wound up by every Westminster bubble story. It has allowed his administration to be much more relaxed than new Labour and has allowed Cabinet Ministers to get on with their jobs. Confirming that there is more to life than this seems a part of this to me.
He hasn't been altered or transformed by the trappings of office. He doesn't look too fussed, or bothered, by politics either way and looks as though he'd be just as happy spending time with his friends and family and tending his vegetable patch in the Cotswolds.
Of course, that is both a strength and a weakness.
0 -
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
0 -
He got some sympathetic coverage in The National:fitalass said:
Not only did Ed Miliband's visit to Scotland not make the front pages today, neither he or the Labour party managed to successfully neutralise Salmond's unhelpful intervention yesterday. Job done.
ED Miliband tried his hardest to make this speech all about Labour and the Tories. But for the party members and the media at the back of the room, it was all about the SNP.
Clydebank is as red as they come. This is a place that has had a Labour MP for just about as long as it has been possible to have a Labour MP. .....
Miliband was due to speak just after 9am. At 8.55am The Guardian released the details of its ICM poll under the headline “Labour faces wipeout in Scotland”.
http://www.thenational.scot/politics/terrible-timing-for-red-ed-as-visit-to-clydebank-coincides-with-forecast-of-scottish-wipe-out.13650 -
Patrick
"You clearly missed the Gordon Brown tongue/sphincter interview of 2010."
Time to put your Marlborough days beind you and move on.....0 -
Isn't Cameron one of the happy clappy evangelicals who might speak in tongues?Roger said:Alanbrooke
"pangs of guilt Roger ?
cameras still rolling when the baby oil came out ?
PB should be told."
I just wanted to know if they used tongues.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/david-cameron-third-term-bbc-interview (compliments Dr Spyn)0 -
what's so noteworthy about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.0 -
No, me neither - I'd have guessed Lansdale was younger - and of course he had his battle with cancer a few years back.Roger said:Am I the only person who didn't know this?
0 -
Tony Blair with his sofa government?Innocent_Abroad said:
Gladstone was many things, but lazy he was not. Lazy men don't box the political compass, as he and Churchill both did.rottenborough said:
Depends what you mean by lazy. Politics was far less time consuming in 19th century. Gladstone read novels by all accounts, thousands of them. He even read part of Treasure Island on the way to kiss hands with the Queen to become PM.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which leads to the thought - who was the laziest Party Leader ever to win a General Election?SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
I think my vote would be for Eden, but I could easily be persuaded otherwise.
Too lazy to control his underlings in their squabbles, and willing to pluck policies out of the air.
Mind you Gordon was clearly a grafter. Not that it made him a better PM.0 -
Roger, unroll the banknote and put away the powder NOW.Roger said:SO
"Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?"
RIGHT!! I get it now. Am I the only person who didn't know this? Was it part of the presentation of the interview that Cammo's school chum and bosom Buddy was the oleaginous interviewer?
If they'd said it viewers might have seen it in a more sympathetic light0 -
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
0 -
Eden wasn’t, I think, lazy, but he was promoted above his ability.Innocent_Abroad said:
Gladstone was many things, but lazy he was not. Lazy men don't box the political compass, as he and Churchill both did.rottenborough said:
Depends what you mean by lazy. Politics was far less time consuming in 19th century. Gladstone read novels by all accounts, thousands of them. He even read part of Treasure Island on the way to kiss hands with the Queen to become PM.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which leads to the thought - who was the laziest Party Leader ever to win a General Election?SouthamObserver said:Can't see this will make much difference at all. However, this does seem to be a move that favours GO. If the Tories are in with a shout at the next election it will largely be down to him, so why on earth would they look at another candidate? If they are not, then none of the three that Cameron mentions will stand a chance.
The idea of Boris knuckling down, working hard and mastering a ministerial brief for four or five years as he bides his time waiting for a shot at the leadership is an interesting one. Per the exchanges on here last night: he is certainly very clever, but he is also bone idle and does not bother himself with things like detail - he pays others to do that in London.
I think my vote would be for Eden, but I could easily be persuaded otherwise.0 -
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?0 -
Not sure that I would survive an interview done by one of my ex-es!Alanbrooke said:
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?
0 -
Absolutely nothing at all :-)Alanbrooke said:
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?
0 -
not sure I'd survive an interview done by some of the people I weent to school with !foxinsoxuk said:
Not sure that I would survive an interview done by one of my ex-es!Alanbrooke said:
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?0 -
Politicians and 'the bubble' won't like it. I do have a gut feeling that the public won't have quite the same reaction.CarlottaVance said:
Agree - Cameron is saying 'there is more to life than work' - and I can believe he will have a long, happy, productive 'retirement' - like Major or Callaghan, and not like Heath, Thatcher, or it would appear the haunted Blair or Brown......chestnut said:Hasn't Cameron simply signalled that he won't do a Blair (or a Thatcher), and the general public will actually quite like that?
'I'll finish the job I started (deficit) and then I'll be gone'.
What the public won't like is a Gordon style coronation.
I'm sure I predicted he'd leave around midway through any second term. Might dig out the post.0 -
SouthamObserver said:
Absolutely nothing at all :-)Alanbrooke said:
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?
Sunshine breaks out in Warwickshire :-)0 -
Roger,
Was it the interview you disliked or the thought that a sympathetic chat might add a fraction to the Tories polling? It won't do any harm? It might mitigate the upward blip for Ukip from the luvvie love-in at the pub on Sunday.
I used to wonder what the more demonstrative people in politics thought they were gaining by gobby, look at me, anti-social rants. Then I realised .. they gained a warm feeling for themselves, so job done.
Anyway, Cameron was asked a question. He decided to answer. Unusual, but not earth-shattering for normal people.0 -
Why on earth would I want a hard working Prime Minister?
There is very rarely a time when political action is better than inaction - perhaps 1939, but that's about it. I just wish we'd had more lazy politicians.0 -
It's cold, though. And I have to go to the gym. Drought approaching ...Alanbrooke said:SouthamObserver said:
Absolutely nothing at all :-)Alanbrooke said:
Interviewschminterview.SouthamObserver said:
Of all the schools in all the world you had to go to mine. I wonder when EdM was last interviewed by someone who went to Haverstock.Alanbrooke said:
what's so noteworty about it ?SouthamObserver said:
I am not particularly fascinated. But it does strike me as noteworthy that the BBC interviewer and the PM were in the same year at the same school.Alanbrooke said:
Why the fascination with schools, your parents chose your school for you.SouthamObserver said:
Yes - same year at Eton. Who'd have thought it?Roger said:SO
"What could be more natural than two old school friends having a cosy chat in front of the cameras?"
Is that true?
More relevant is choice of university which you by and large chose yourself.
So we get the joy of people campaigning against status and elitism from the most staussy elitist institutions in the country, And they do it with a straight face.
You'll find Ed has been interviewed by Stephanie Flanders his one-time squeeze, should we ban her from the airwaves or him for that matter ?
You'll find most of the frontbenches and media land are Oxbridgers. It's much more likely our elite instuitutions will bag all the top jobs for their mates more than the schools.
What's school got to do with it ?
Sunshine breaks out in Warwickshire :-)
0 -
secondedrcs1000 said:Why on earth would I want a hard working Prime Minister?
There is very rarely a time when political action is better than inaction - perhaps 1939, but that's about it. I just wish we'd had more lazy politicians.0 -
As an aside, isn't Stephanie Flanders a bit out of Ed's league? I assume she dumped him.0
-
Alanbrooke
"Roger, unroll the banknote and put away the powder NOW."
You don't have to be Tapestry to suspect the chances of a BBC interviewer being one of the 12 pupils in Cameron's class at Eton being more than coincidence. The random chances would be literally hundreds of thousands to one.
Therefore it is part of the story and I would be surprised if the BBC failed to mention it.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
