JohnO
-
Re: Meeks and Rentoul argue over Davey’s “No deals with CON” – politicalbetting.com
Many Tory MPs might support a reduction but a significant number would not and of those who do, a lot would be horrified that it would be a whipped vote. The proposal would crash and burn (majority a… (View Post)3 -
Re: Meeks and Rentoul argue over Davey’s “No deals with CON” – politicalbetting.com
I agree but would put the threshold just a tad lower, perhaps 310 in which the Tories could just about stagger on as a deflated minority government surviv You have now not only crashed into the buffe… (View Post)2 -
Re: Meeks and Rentoul argue over Davey’s “No deals with CON” – politicalbetting.com
In those circumstances, sure, they could offer a vote but no Tory MP will be whipped to support it. And you were talking about the manifesto which patently is published before the election. That will… (View Post)2 -
Re: Meeks and Rentoul argue over Davey’s “No deals with CON” – politicalbetting.com
Anyway, there’s not the slightest chance of the next Conservative manifesto containing a commitment to restrict abortions to 22 weeks or any other level. It might conceivably pledge to have another v… (View Post)3 -
Re: Meeks and Rentoul argue over Davey’s “No deals with CON” – politicalbetting.com
If I were an MP, I’d support a reduction to 22 weeks but the notion that Tory MPs who disagree should be compelled to vote against their conscience is repulsive. (View Post)5
