I look forward to Nigel's thoughts on Arron Bank's influence.
Arron Banks is a UK citizen seeking to influence UK decision making on Brexit. Soros isn't - so it's a little different. And Soros uses his billions elsewhere to influence policy in nations he is not a resident or a citizen of. I see no issue with people complaining about Rupert Murdochs influence - and presumably doing so doesn't make you anti Christian?
I also assumed we were against foreign parties interfering in our democratic processes - or is just ok when they back remain?
The question of nationality is a fair one but there should also be stricter limits on the extent to which British money should be able to buy political influence too.
Much turns on the purpose of talking with bad people. Do you talk with them in order to try to persuade them not to be bad people, or do you talk with them because you want to be their advocate? ...............................................
In the case of the Northern Irish and the Palestinians, both. How else are you going to end the conflict but by helping fix the underlying causes of it.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
Last train out of Cardiff to Paddington is 9pm and our event doesn't finish until midnight.
Jurys and Marriott both spitting distance from Central Station, ditto Radisson Blu (as are a huge Premier Inn, and the IBIS -if lawyers know of the existence of such chains?). Park Plaza about a mile out.
For boutiquey I've heard good tings about Jolyons down the Bay opposite the Milennium Centre, but you'd need a taxi unless you're going to walk to Butetown from the city centre (hint - don't).
Thanks.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Last train out of Cardiff to Paddington is 9pm and our event doesn't finish until midnight.
Jurys and Marriott both spitting distance from Central Station, ditto Radisson Blu (as are a huge Premier Inn, and the IBIS -if lawyers know of the existence of such chains?). Park Plaza about a mile out.
For boutiquey I've heard good tings about Jolyons down the Bay opposite the Milennium Centre, but you'd need a taxi unless you're going to walk to Butetown from the city centre (hint - don't).
Thanks.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by wining 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote and likely win it on the latest Conservative Home Tory members poll where he is in front.
Prepare for Mogg v Corbyn then!
Looks like I had better break the habit of a lifetime and join a political party to assist in maintaining sanity.
Join ASAP.
The Tory rules don't allow for JCLs or infiltrators.
You need to be a member for at least three months to have a vote in the leadership contest.
Mr. M, Paullus and Varro were consuls. Because they'd combined their forces, command (at that time) switched between consuls on a daily basis. Paullus rejected Varro's plan, but the next day Varro was in charge. The Battle of Cannae did not transpire as he had intended.
Last train out of Cardiff to Paddington is 9pm and our event doesn't finish until midnight.
Jurys and Marriott both spitting distance from Central Station, ditto Radisson Blu (as are a huge Premier Inn, and the IBIS -if lawyers know of the existence of such chains?). Park Plaza about a mile out.
For boutiquey I've heard good tings about Jolyons down the Bay opposite the Milennium Centre, but you'd need a taxi unless you're going to walk to Butetown from the city centre (hint - don't).
Thanks.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
It was a remarkably efficient Anyone-But-Portillo vote that year.
Even more so when you consider that the anyone-but-Portillo turned out to be Michael Howard, who wasn't even standing.
Last train out of Cardiff to Paddington is 9pm and our event doesn't finish until midnight.
Jurys and Marriott both spitting distance from Central Station, ditto Radisson Blu (as are a huge Premier Inn, and the IBIS -if lawyers know of the existence of such chains?). Park Plaza about a mile out.
For boutiquey I've heard good tings about Jolyons down the Bay opposite the Milennium Centre, but you'd need a taxi unless you're going to walk to Butetown from the city centre (hint - don't).
Thanks.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Although this could be an outlier poll (probably is IMO), there does seem to be a slow drift away from Labour since after the election.
Brexit is the main thing and the key factor has nothing to do with Labour. Currently half the population think Brexit will have no economic consequences - maybe helpful. They are wrong and you could also call cognitive dissonance with other things they believe. Nevertheless, opinion polls and elections deal with belief, not reality. Because Brexit is going to be fine, Conservative Headbangers can say and do what they want and it won't make any difference to Brexit success. For the same reason, Labour can't capitalise on Brexit outcomes, although they could possibly shore up their support.
Total hubris to just say they are wrong. Why are they wrong?
Since the country is growing quite healthily at the moment with record low unemployment as opposed to the suggested immediate recession and skyrocketing unemployment I'd have thought those against Brexit might by now have a touch of humility and doubt about their own predictions.
Why wrong that Brexit won't have economic consequences? Because almost all the known unknowns are downside risks. New duties are costs. Non-tariff barriers are costs. Uncertainty is cost. Deferred or lost investment possibilities will cost in jobs. There are many concrete and immediate reasons why Brexit will have negative economic conssequences. There are no reasons to believe it will be positive or neutral and there is actual evidence that it is negative.
Also cognitive dissonance because people think the negotiations are going badly but don't think that badness will have any real consequences. I wouldn't try to reconcile those positions. As I say, reality doesn't matter in opinion polling. You are asking people what they think because that drives election results.
All of that was said before the referendum which resulted in the fatally flawed projections of an immediate recession and sharp uptake in unemployment both of which as we now know haven't happened.
Also you are either discounting or ignoring all the reasons why Brexiteers believe that it could be an economically good thing to be independent. The ability to set our own rules, adapt, evolve and forge new trade deals with the 94% of the world outside of the EU.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
You can't negotiate with a party that is filled with hate. That has to be removed before negotiation begin.
That is the hard bit.
I don't think I was advocating a violent solution, almost the reverse, of turning the other cheek until the anger and hate is spent. Problem is during that phase you can't give way, as you become weak and reward violence. Then the calls for retribution come, and the cycle is inflamed.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Usually, one has to pursue both military, and diplomatic, means in order to achieve a settlement.
Although this could be an outlier poll (probably is IMO), there does seem to be a slow drift away from Labour since after the election.
Brexit is the main thing and the key factor has nothing to do with Labour. Currently half the population think Brexit will have no economic consequences - maybe helpful. They are wrong and you could also call cognitive dissonance with other things they believe. Nevertheless, opinion polls and elections deal with belief, not reality. Because Brexit is going to be fine, Conservative Headbangers can say and do what they want and it won't make any difference to Brexit success. For the same reason, Labour can't capitalise on Brexit outcomes, although they could possibly shore up their support.
Total hubris to just say they are wrong. Why are they wrong?
Since the country is growing quite healthily at the moment with record low unemployment as opposed to the suggested immediate recession and skyrocketing unemployment I'd have thought those against Brexit might by now have a touch of humility and doubt about their own predictions.
Why wrong that Brexit won't have economic consequences? Because almost all the known unknowns are downside risks. New duties are costs. Non-tariff barriers are costs. Uncertainty is cost. Deferred or lost investment possibilities will cost in jobs. There are many concrete and immediate reasons why Brexit will have negative economic conssequences. There are no reasons to believe it will be positive or neutral and there is actual evidence that it is negative.
Also cognitive dissonance because people think the negotiations are going badly but don't think that badness will have any real consequences. I wouldn't try to reconcile those positions. As I say, reality doesn't matter in opinion polling. You are asking people what they think because that drives election results.
All of that was said before the referendum which resulted in the fatally flawed projections of an immediate recession and sharp uptake in unemployment both of which as we now know haven't happened.
Also you are either discounting or ignoring all the reasons why Brexiteers believe that it could be an economically good thing to be independent. The ability to set our own rules, adapt, evolve and forge new trade deals with the 94% of the world outside of the EU.
BoE just upped its growth forecast form one 3 months ago - yet people talk about 15 year Brexit effects - fantasy , pure fantasy.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Corbyn cosying up to holocaust deniers - is he doing that in your name?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by wining 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote and likely win it on the latest Conservative Home Tory members poll where he is in front.
Prepare for Mogg v Corbyn then!
Looks like I had better break the habit of a lifetime and join a political party to assist in maintaining sanity.
Perhaps we might see Labour Party supporters joining the Tories to vote for Mogg to make the Tories 'unelectable' before the 3 month cutoff as some Tory members became registered supporters or members of Labour to vote for Corbyn. Though clearly last time such a 'cunning plan' proved too cunning by half!
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Israel kind of has won.
From 2001-2004 Israel suffered deaths in the triple digits, until it built the wall which has worked.
From 2006 onwards Israel has suffered fewer deaths per annum in every year except for 2015 and 2016 than it did on average during the 1990s Peace Process between the Oslo Accords and Yassir Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize and the start of the Second Intifada.
When Israel is seeing fewer fatalities now than it was during the Peace Process why should they concede anything at this stage?
Last train out of Cardiff to Paddington is 9pm and our event doesn't finish until midnight.
Jurys and Marriott both spitting distance from Central Station, ditto Radisson Blu (as are a huge Premier Inn, and the IBIS -if lawyers know of the existence of such chains?). Park Plaza about a mile out.
For boutiquey I've heard good tings about Jolyons down the Bay opposite the Milennium Centre, but you'd need a taxi unless you're going to walk to Butetown from the city centre (hint - don't).
Thanks.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Depends what you're doing.......
What goes on in Cardiff stays in Cardiff.
Baaaaaa....
I prefer taking my girlfriend for a weekend up Wrexham.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by wining 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote and likely win it on the latest Conservative Home Tory members poll where he is in front.
Prepare for Mogg v Corbyn then!
Looks like I had better break the habit of a lifetime and join a political party to assist in maintaining sanity.
Join ASAP.
The Tory rules don't allow for JCLs or infiltrators.
You need to be a member for at least three months to have a vote in the leadership contest.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Israel kind of has won.
From 2001-2004 Israel suffered deaths in the triple digits, until it built the wall which has worked.
From 2006 onwards Israel has suffered fewer deaths per annum in every year except for 2015 and 2016 than it did on average during the 1990s Peace Process between the Oslo Accords and Yassir Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize and the start of the Second Intifada.
When Israel is seeing fewer fatalities now than it was during the Peace Process why should they concede anything at this stage?
Because it's better to live in peace with one's neighbours, if possible, then to live in an armed camp.
And specifically, in the case of Israel, there will come a point when the total Arab population in the State of Israel and West Bank combined will reach parity with the Jewish population. It's better to go for a smaller State in which you form a very clear majority, rather than a larger State where you run the risk of being outnumbered.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke
Like Labour MPs "lending" their votes to Corbyn, it was reported that Tory 'anyone-but-Portillo' MPs "lent" their votes to IDS.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by wining 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote and likely win it on the latest Conservative Home Tory members poll where he is in front.
Prepare for Mogg v Corbyn then!
Looks like I had better break the habit of a lifetime and join a political party to assist in maintaining sanity.
Join ASAP.
The Tory rules don't allow for JCLs or infiltrators.
You need to be a member for at least three months to have a vote in the leadership contest.
It is not everyday you get the opportunity to shape this country for the better.
A friend of mine told me last week that he is planning to let his party membership lapse because he's so annoyed about Brexit, Theresa May, and party disunity. I'm going to have a go at persuading him to stay in order to vote for someone sane as PM and leader; it seems to me perverse to drop out just at the point where his vote might make a big difference.
Although this could be an outlier poll (probably is IMO), there does seem to be a slow drift away from Labour since after the election.
Total hubris to just say they are wrong. Why are they wrong?
Since the country is growing quite healthily at the moment with record low unemployment as opposed to the suggested immediate recession and skyrocketing unemployment I'd have thought those against Brexit might by now have a touch of humility and doubt about their own predictions.
Also cognitive dissonance because people think the negotiations are going badly but don't think that badness will have any real consequences. I wouldn't try to reconcile those positions. As I say, reality doesn't matter in opinion polling. You are asking people what they think because that drives election results.
All of that was said before the referendum which resulted in the fatally flawed projections of an immediate recession and sharp uptake in unemployment both of which as we now know haven't happened.
Also you are either discounting or ignoring all the reasons why Brexiteers believe that it could be an economically good thing to be independent. The ability to set our own rules, adapt, evolve and forge new trade deals with the 94% of the world outside of the EU.
BoE just upped its growth forecast form one 3 months ago - yet people talk about 15 year Brexit effects - fantasy , pure fantasy.
People are talking past each other (hardly new). The impact statements are the delta against the base case of remaining in the EU. It doesn't matter if the models are wrong (as they surely are).
We voted differently, but @FF43 is correct. All the short term effects of Brexit are bad - economically. We're introducing cost & friction into supply chains that have grown up over several decades. Unlike the nonsense like the 'punishment' budget, that's not a political statement, it just is. People are using it politically ( and willfully misreporting the facts - in no case is the UK poorer in the 2030s, as some appear to be saying).
Medium term effects are less clear. For example, the UK gets a good chunk of Europe's share of FDI (which is not _necessarily_ good, selling England by the pound etc). Will that continue? Is it because of all the other public goods the UK offers? Or has our success been mostly due to our position within the EU? Who knows.
If people behaved perfectly rationally, we'd never have voted for Brexit. But that's not the basis for leaving, whether you agree with it or not. 'Xenephobes and racists' don't care, and neither do sovereignistas.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
It is not everyday you get the opportunity to shape this country for the better.
A friend of mine told me last week that he is planning to let his party membership lapse because he's so annoyed about Brexit, Theresa May, and party disunity. I'm going to have a go at persuading him to stay in order to vote for someone sane as PM and leader; it seems to me perverse to drop out just at the point where his vote might make a big difference.
I persuaded someone along those lines too.
His biggest concern is what do if JRM wins.
I said I'd remain a member, articulating my brand of One Nation Liberal Conservatism until the party returned to sanity.
But that I'd down tools on the campaigning front, except for the likes of Tissue Price, JohnO, and if Ruth Davidson/David Cameron came back to contest a seat.
From 2001-2004 Israel suffered deaths in the triple digits, until it built the wall which has worked.
From 2006 onwards Israel has suffered fewer deaths per annum in every year except for 2015 and 2016 than it did on average during the 1990s Peace Process between the Oslo Accords and Yassir Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize and the start of the Second Intifada.
When Israel is seeing fewer fatalities now than it was during the Peace Process why should they concede anything at this stage?
If we ignore the morality aspect then maybe they shouldn't, it is a kind of victory, although the problem still exists.
But I certainly think Britain should call them out on that and my problem is the morality of it, not a criticism of the success of it.
There could be an argument for it being in their interest to seek out a good solution for themselves now rather than waiting for a future point where their neighbours might be much stronger in comparison to Israel than they are now.
The St David's Hotel..but it isn't central. It is Cardiff Bay.
Ta, it's taxiable, so it'll be fine
Food is better at the Park Plaza than the St. Davids.....
Surely TSE will dine at Dorothy's on Caroline St?
A five star review:
"It's genuinely incredible, in my life I have experienced few if any takeaways I have eaten in drunk that I would happily go back to sober. This is the one."
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke
Like Labour MPs "lending" their votes to Corbyn, it was reported that Tory 'anyone-but-Portillo' MPs "lent" their votes to IDS.
Also some IDS MPs voted for Clarke as they thought he could be easier to beat but Clarke won the MP section and IDS only knocked out Portillo by 1 vote. Just as Labour MPs would probably have voted for Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper in 2015 while the members voted for Corbyn so Tory MPs may well have voted for Ken Clarke or Michael Portillo in 2001 while the members voted for IDS
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
You can't negotiate with a party that is filled with hate. That has to be removed before negotiation begin.
That is the hard bit. .
You have it the wrong way round I think. You have to negotiate in spite of the hatred. To reduce the hatred.
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
I think continuing to steal land of the other side, demolishing their homes and building more for settlers, is a pretty huge point of disagreement too.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
It was better than Hague's is about the best you could say of it but at least you could listen to Hague's speeches and be fired up without cringing as was the case with IDS
Bomb them into surrender? Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders? Target the leaders financial activities? Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
To be honest you either go for peaceful solutions or you kill them all.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
I think continuing to steal land of the other side, demolishing their homes and building more for settlers, is a pretty huge point of disagreement too.
The settlers are taking advantage of the fact that the Israeli government is dependent on the votes of the settler party in the Knesset. They are pretty obnoxious - but they could be traded if there was a deal on the table.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
It was better than Hague's is about the best you could say of it but at least you could listen to Hague's speeches and be fired up without cringing as was the case with IDS
If someone other than IDS had won, they would have fought and lost the 2005 election.
And Cameron would never have had the chance to become leader afterwards - he would have been too junior. It would probably have been David Davis...
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
Israel offered an unworkable state with no control over their borders or their air space. That is for starters, anyone who has looked at the deal can tell you it wasn't a serious offer.
Israel did at one point start to make serious efforts towards peace. The Israelis assassinated him.
Also I'd point out that refusing to allow a Palestinian state to exist, making one ever more impossible by seizing more land is even worse, even if you make pretty statements about being for a Palestinian state.
Actions speak louder than words, except in this conflict were the beaten poor and starved are the bad guys because you know... words and stuff.
So according to the BoE the economy is now going to grow faster than Italy and Japan and, possibly, France out of the G7. Basically mid pack. Slightly surprising that the BBC is still saying that we are going to be the slowest growing. It's almost like they had an agenda.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
The prospect of JRM may cause a few letters to be withdrawn from Sir Brady perhaps?
Nah, if there's a leadership election Phil Hammond just appoints Jacob Rees-Mogg as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, thus making the Moggster ineligible to stand in the Tory contest.
From 2001-2004 Israel suffered deaths in the triple digits, until it built the wall which has worked.
From 2006 onwards Israel has suffered fewer deaths per annum in every year except for 2015 and 2016 than it did on average during the 1990s Peace Process between the Oslo Accords and Yassir Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize and the start of the Second Intifada.
When Israel is seeing fewer fatalities now than it was during the Peace Process why should they concede anything at this stage?
If we ignore the morality aspect then maybe they shouldn't, it is a kind of victory, although the problem still exists.
But I certainly think Britain should call them out on that and my problem is the morality of it, not a criticism of the success of it.
There could be an argument for it being in their interest to seek out a good solution for themselves now rather than waiting for a future point where their neighbours might be much stronger in comparison to Israel than they are now.
Looking at it from their perspective they've tried to agree a solution, were betrayed with violence and are now faced by people who still deny their right to exist and aren't seeking a solution. So how do they get one or deal with the "morality" aspect?
If the Palestinians and Israel's neighbours would recognise Israel's right to exist (something Hamas and other irredeemables still don't do) then Israel might be able to act differently to how it does. But even in the Peace Process when they were negotiating with Arafat they were having more fatalities than they are now, so what else should they realistically do?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Still not buying it. I don’t think the piece says JRM could get 90 first round votes anywhere.
MPs supporting JRM should get on with their letters then since it seems very likely TM is not going to deliver a Brexit JRM could sign up to.
Leaver MPs would surely go for johnson or Gove over JRM. Plus either of those two could easily offer Chancellor which I suspect would be far too tempting a carrot.
The prospect of JRM may cause a few letters to be withdrawn from Sir Brady perhaps?
Nah, if there's a leadership election Phil Hammond just makes appoints Jacob Rees-Mogg as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, thus making the Moggster ineligible to stand in the Tory contest.
Can that be done against your will? Surely not?
What stops Phil Hammond from appointing Jeremy Corbyn as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds in that case?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
The prospect of JRM may cause a few letters to be withdrawn from Sir Brady perhaps?
Nah, if there's a leadership election Phil Hammond just makes appoints Jacob Rees-Mogg as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, thus making the Moggster ineligible to stand in the Tory contest.
Can that be done against your will? Surely not?
What stops Phil Hammond from appointing Jeremy Corbyn as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds in that case?
Exactly and you can apply for release from the post straightaway
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
Boris would likely end up as Portillo in that scenario, Rudd as Clarke and JRM as IDS
The prospect of JRM may cause a few letters to be withdrawn from Sir Brady perhaps?
Nah, if there's a leadership election Phil Hammond just makes appoints Jacob Rees-Mogg as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, thus making the Moggster ineligible to stand in the Tory contest.
Can that be done against your will? Surely not?
What stops Phil Hammond from appointing Jeremy Corbyn as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds in that case?
It's a crime under the Misconduct in Public Office punishable with time in prison, however I'm sure Phil Hammond is prepared to take one for the team
Seems increasingly likely that Con's best bet may well be to just let T May lead them into the next GE.
If she can move into even a small poll lead after a disastrous GE followed by 7 months of almost constant terrible press then who's to say she wouldn't win the next GE with a decent manifesto.
Plus it would avoid the risk of someone much less electable winning a leadership contest.
It's incredibly hard to tell but it does seem plausible that some of the Corbyn bounce in the GE campaign was strongly influenced by Brexit - if Brexit falls away as a GE issue then he may well lose that support.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
Why is Boris acceptable now, but he thought it best to stand down last time?
Israel offered the two state solution - but the Palestinians wouldn't acknowledge their right to exist as a state.
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
Israel offered an unworkable state with no control over their borders or their air space. That is for starters, anyone who has looked at the deal can tell you it wasn't a serious offer.
Israel did at one point start to make serious efforts towards peace. The Israelis assassinated him.
Also I'd point out that refusing to allow a Palestinian state to exist, making one ever more impossible by seizing more land is even worse, even if you make pretty statements about being for a Palestinian state.
Actions speak louder than words, except in this conflict were the beaten poor and starved are the bad guys because you know... words and stuff.
You left your tin foil over there.
Rabin was assassinated by a single extremist, not "the Israelis". But I'm having supper with his grandson on Sunday if you want me to share any evidence that you have...
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Still not buying it. I don’t think the piece says JRM could get 90 first round votes anywhere.
MPs supporting JRM should get on with their letters then since it seems very likely TM is not going to deliver a Brexit JRM could sign up to.
Leaver MPs would surely go for johnson or Gove over JRM. Plus either of those two could easily offer Chancellor which I suspect would be far too tempting a carrot.
I'm not a Tory activist, so I've no real idea, but it feels to me like JRM could do 'a Corbyn' and be unstoppable quite rapidly.
Given the last couple of years of madness in politics, it seems a dead cert frankly that the Tories would lose their heads finally and elect him leader. I mean, 80-odd of them thought Leadsom was great and some of them even marched down Whitehall chanting her name. These are not the actions of rational people.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
If we ignore the morality aspect then maybe they shouldn't, it is a kind of victory, although the problem still exists.
But I certainly think Britain should call them out on that and my problem is the morality of it, not a criticism of the success of it.
There could be an argument for it being in their interest to seek out a good solution for themselves now rather than waiting for a future point where their neighbours might be much stronger in comparison to Israel than they are now.
Looking at it from their perspective they've tried to agree a solution, were betrayed with violence and are now faced by people who still deny their right to exist and aren't seeking a solution. So how do they get one or deal with the "morality" aspect?
If the Palestinians and Israel's neighbours would recognise Israel's right to exist (something Hamas and other irredeemables still don't do) then Israel might be able to act differently to how it does. But even in the Peace Process when they were negotiating with Arafat they were having more fatalities than they are now, so what else should they realistically do?
It wasn't a serious offer, they were seriously considering making offers before which is he was assassinated. The 'offer' made just showed that Israel was planning on keeping up the status quo, they knew that full well.
The Palestinians aren't going to become less extreme by doing this, saying we can't work with them and must continue to make their lives hell until they become less extreme is bad logic unless you want an excuse to continue. Hamas took power because we refused to deal with the issue, they were more extreme than what they replaced.
Although to be honest if millions of Muslims came to Britain and kicked British people out of their homes to create a Muslim country.
How do you think the British people would react?
Do you think we would recognise this new Muslim country?
Many people seem to think the Palestinians should be saints capable of actions no other peoples could manage.
I mean, 80-odd of them thought Leadsom was great and some of them even marched down Whitehall chanting her name. These are not the actions of rational people.
Yes, and don't forget it was only Leadsom herself that stopped her going as a selection to the members... I'm not backing Mogg at his current crazily short prices, but he might be a live runner...
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Still not buying it. I don’t think the piece says JRM could get 90 first round votes anywhere.
MPs supporting JRM should get on with their letters then since it seems very likely TM is not going to deliver a Brexit JRM could sign up to.
Leaver MPs would surely go for johnson or Gove over JRM. Plus either of those two could easily offer Chancellor which I suspect would be far too tempting a carrot.
I'm not a Tory activist, so I've no real idea, but it feels to me like JRM could do 'a Corbyn' and be unstoppable quite rapidly.
Given the last couple of years of madness in politics, it seems a dead cert frankly that the Tories would lose their heads finally and elect him leader. I mean, 80-odd of them thought Leadsom was great and some of them even marched down Whitehall chanting her name. These are not the actions of rational people.
I’m not a Tory party member either - but that sounds like the argument for why Le Pen would win... everything else that seems crazy is happening...
it doesn’t justify someone with limited support, no govt experience, way out of step with his party and who may not even want the job being the runaway favourite.
It is possible, and indeed looks more likelt than I ever thought it would get, but still a lay for me.
It's very amusing to see Labour complaining that Boris Johnson is not acting like a colonial-era grandee and calling on him to overrule the benighted locals:
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Still not buying it. I don’t think the piece says JRM easily offer Chancellor which I suspect would be far too tempting a carrot.
I'm not a Tory activist, so I've no real idea, but it feels to me like JRM could do 'a Corbyn' and be unstoppable quite rapidly.
Given the last couple of years of madness in politics, it seems a dead cert frankly that the Tories would lose their heads finally and elect him leader. I mean, 80-odd of them thought Leadsom was great and some of them even marched down Whitehall chanting her name. These are not the actions of rational people.
I’m not a Tory party member either - but that sounds like the argument for why Le Pen would win... everything else that seems crazy is happening...
it doesn’t justify someone with limited support, no govt experience, way out of step with his party and who may not even want the job being the runaway favourite.
It is possible, and indeed looks more likelt than I ever thought it would get, but still a lay for me.
Le Pen had to appeal to millions of French voters not just 318 Tory MPs and 100 000 Tory members.
Mogg v Corbyn would be a like a cross between Fillon and Le Pen v Melenchon/Hamon unless Umunna tried to do a Macron and go third party
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
Why is Boris acceptable now, but he thought it best to stand down last time?
Been asking that for year. No-one seems to have an answer. Over to you, Mr. Gove....
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
Why is Boris acceptable now, but he thought it best to stand down last time?
Been asking that for year. No-one seems to have an answer. Over to you, Mr. Gove....
Surely the obvious answer would be that we've seen the alternative?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
I imagine if you chose to only specifically talk to the elements of Palestinian society which are pure of any anti semitism you would end up ignoring a large (and important in terms of the conflict) section of Palestinian society and get nowhere.
Of course Ignoring them because they were beyond the pale is what some did with Arafat and his organisation. So we refused to do much and let the situation fester, because they were beyond the pale.
Hamas eventually won over in Gaza, arguably more extreme than what came before them.
Now we can continue the 'ohh no beyond the pale' routine whilst the Israeli's continue to enforce conditions onto the Palestinians which make their views even more extreme.
The idea that we support Israel continuing it's actions whilst waiting for the Palestinian Nelson Mandela is foolish, Israel would have taken him out.
Palestinians should not be anti semitic but having their homes taken from them, their land stolen and living under an almost constant terror campaign for decades the reality is a lot of them are and sticking our heads in the sand is easy but will just makes things worse.
The people the British government talked to in Ireland had reprehensible views, there were much nicer more morally pure the government could have talked to instead... but they weren't the people the government needed to talk to. They had to talk to the bad people.
It rather depends on whether you value the principles you claim to have.
If you say you are against racism then you don't cosy up to and give legitimacy to anti-semites.
Corbyn can do nothing about sorting out the Palestinian/Israeli dispute. It is unlikely that Britain can do anything about it. (Indeed, it is likely to become even more intractable if Israelis are expected to embrace people who want to kill them and wipe them from the face of the earth as people like Hamas want to do. Encouraging Palestinians to address the beams in their own eyes would do a great deal to make it easier for those on the Israeli side who want a peaceful settlement to gain traction.)
But the Labour party's principles are something which Corbyn can do something about. And those anti-racist principles seem to be somewhat of a chimera when it comes to tolerating some pretty unpleasant anti-Jewish racism. That is what he is being criticised for, rightly in my view.
If the Labour party's principles can be abandoned so easily when it comes to Jews, why they might just as easily be abandoned when it comes to other minorities: women, for instance, or gays or others. And some of us might well conclude that Labour's claim to the moral high ground is so much phooey.
Labour's "principles" are too often used to attack others but are not seen as a moral imperative which should govern their own actions.
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
IDS's leadership was the best thing that every happened to the Conservative Party
It was better than Hague's is about the best you could say of it but at least you could listen to Hague's speeches and be fired up without cringing as was the case with IDS
If someone other than IDS had won, they would have fought and lost the 2005 election.
And Cameron would never have had the chance to become leader afterwards - he would have been too junior. It would probably have been David Davis...
Cameron only got a Shadow Cabinet position after the 2005 general election, not impossible Portillo could have got a similar result as Howard, resigned and also appointed younger faces to succeed him. Clarke may have got a hung parliament though and stayed on
Jacob Rees-Mogg might very well get 90 MPs in the final round of voting. First he'd have to get to the final round of voting. Is he really more popular with enough of the extremists than Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Andrea Leadsom to eliminate them all?
Has anyone asked which benches those 90 MPs said to be backing The Moggster currently sit on?
The ultimate act of three-quiderism - cross the floor, get Rees Mogg, cross back.....
Not possible, if you defect to the Tory party you have to be in receipt of the Tory Whip and consistently vote with the Tories for at least 18 months before you can vote in the MP section.
Jacob Rees-Mogg might very well get 90 MPs in the final round of voting. First he'd have to get to the final round of voting. Is he really more popular with enough of the extremists than Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Andrea Leadsom to eliminate them all?
Given that is more than Leadsom got in 2016 when she got to the final 2 by winning 84 MPs in the 2nd round (albeit dropping out) if Mogg stood and got almost 90 MPs voting for him he would go to the membership vote
Not necessarily. You need one-third of the votes to be assured of a second-round place. In 2001, Portillo missed out on the members' vote despite receiving the backing of 32% of MPs - the equivalent of 101 with today's larger parliamentary party.
Except JRM is the IDS candidate not the Portillo candidate and there is bound to be at least one right wing Leaver in the final 2. Portillo got knocked out as he was squeezed in the end between the right wing IDS and the One Nation Clarke.
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
The other day I got a few negative comments when I suggested that the MPs would put JRM in final two, under pressure from their own local parties.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
Yes, what looked laughable a year ago is now gathering steam as the Corbyn bandwagon did
Who is the 'stop JRM candidate'? Hunt?
Rudd probably but if JRM gets to the members he probably wins regardless of his opponent
Yeah exactly. There'd need to be two 'stop JRM' candidates. Seems likely that Boris would be one of them.
Why is Boris acceptable now, but he thought it best to stand down last time?
Been asking that for year. No-one seems to have an answer. Over to you, Mr. Gove....
Boris is a disorganised shambles. But he is at least a populist disorganised shambles with an ear for the public.
Comments
Sanctions to strangle the economy and starve them?
Those never seem to work very well.
Drone strikes on the leaders?
Target the leaders financial activities?
Sanctions on Supporters?
Those are equally successful.
Wait until they have spawned all their hate and then try talking.
That can work, when the hate is spent and they see it will not gain ground.
I've stayed in an IBIS a few times, not my first (or even in my top 10) but was fine for the price.
I don't like Premier Inns either, basically their double beds are two single beds zipped together which leads to great discomfort.
Baaaaaa....
Also you are either discounting or ignoring all the reasons why Brexiteers believe that it could be an economically good thing to be independent. The ability to set our own rules, adapt, evolve and forge new trade deals with the 94% of the world outside of the EU.
If military solutions (aside from genocide) defeated terrorism Israel would have won years ago, the only reason to continue is that capturing more land is more important that any lives lost. The only reason for us to continue supporting that is if we feel more land for Israel is worth the dead Israelis and Palestinians.
You can vote for whatever you want, but not in my name.
That is the hard bit.
I don't think I was advocating a violent solution, almost the reverse, of turning the other cheek until the anger and hate is spent. Problem is during that phase you can't give way, as you become weak and reward violence. Then the calls for retribution come, and the cycle is inflamed.
From 2001-2004 Israel suffered deaths in the triple digits, until it built the wall which has worked.
From 2006 onwards Israel has suffered fewer deaths per annum in every year except for 2015 and 2016 than it did on average during the 1990s Peace Process between the Oslo Accords and Yassir Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize and the start of the Second Intifada.
When Israel is seeing fewer fatalities now than it was during the Peace Process why should they concede anything at this stage?
(Say it out loud)
You could even have the satisfaction, after having voted against Mogg, of resigning your membership should he get elected.
Looks like I had better break the habit of a lifetime...
You even have me considering it now...
Plus remember 90 first round votes for Mogg could easily go above 101 in the 2nd round once other right-wing candidates e.g. Fox, Leadsom, maybe even Boris get knocked out
And specifically, in the case of Israel, there will come a point when the total Arab population in the State of Israel and West Bank combined will reach parity with the Jewish population. It's better to go for a smaller State in which you form a very clear majority, rather than a larger State where you run the risk of being outnumbered.
It is not everyday you get the opportunity to shape this country for the better.
We voted differently, but @FF43 is correct. All the short term effects of Brexit are bad - economically. We're introducing cost & friction into supply chains that have grown up over several decades. Unlike the nonsense like the 'punishment' budget, that's not a political statement, it just is. People are using it politically ( and willfully misreporting the facts - in no case is the UK poorer in the 2030s, as some appear to be saying).
Medium term effects are less clear. For example, the UK gets a good chunk of Europe's share of FDI (which is not _necessarily_ good, selling England by the pound etc). Will that continue? Is it because of all the other public goods the UK offers? Or has our success been mostly due to our position within the EU? Who knows.
If people behaved perfectly rationally, we'd never have voted for Brexit. But that's not the basis for leaving, whether you agree with it or not. 'Xenephobes and racists' don't care, and neither do sovereignistas.
Now it seems 90 MPs may just do that.
His biggest concern is what do if JRM wins.
I said I'd remain a member, articulating my brand of One Nation Liberal Conservatism until the party returned to sanity.
But that I'd down tools on the campaigning front, except for the likes of Tissue Price, JohnO, and if Ruth Davidson/David Cameron came back to contest a seat.
But I certainly think Britain should call them out on that and my problem is the morality of it, not a criticism of the success of it.
There could be an argument for it being in their interest to seek out a good solution for themselves now rather than waiting for a future point where their neighbours might be much stronger in comparison to Israel than they are now.
"It's genuinely incredible, in my life I have experienced few if any takeaways I have eaten in drunk that I would happily go back to sober. This is the one."
That's a pretty fundamental point of disagreement
You have to negotiate in spite of the hatred. To reduce the hatred.
I'm off to wash my mind with copious amounts of mind bleach.
https://twitter.com/GrantTucker/status/961589118923890688
And Cameron would never have had the chance to become leader afterwards - he would have been too junior. It would probably have been David Davis...
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/adam-ramsay/how-did-arron-banks-afford-brexit
I wonder if our Ulster pizza delivery service has any information...
JRM may be as mad as a bag of frogs, however he IS electable. Corbyn is not!
Israel did at one point start to make serious efforts towards peace. The Israelis assassinated him.
Also I'd point out that refusing to allow a Palestinian state to exist, making one ever more impossible by seizing more land is even worse, even if you make pretty statements about being for a Palestinian state.
Actions speak louder than words, except in this conflict were the beaten poor and starved are the bad guys because you know... words and stuff.
If the Palestinians and Israel's neighbours would recognise Israel's right to exist (something Hamas and other irredeemables still don't do) then Israel might be able to act differently to how it does. But even in the Peace Process when they were negotiating with Arafat they were having more fatalities than they are now, so what else should they realistically do?
Isn't that the classic Cardiff dinner?
MPs supporting JRM should get on with their letters then since it seems very likely TM is not going to deliver a Brexit JRM could sign up to.
Leaver MPs would surely go for johnson or Gove over JRM.
Plus either of those two could easily offer Chancellor which I suspect would be far too tempting a carrot.
What stops Phil Hammond from appointing Jeremy Corbyn as Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds in that case?
https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/961591575980707840
If she can move into even a small poll lead after a disastrous GE followed by 7 months of almost constant terrible press then who's to say she wouldn't win the next GE with a decent manifesto.
Plus it would avoid the risk of someone much less electable winning a leadership contest.
It's incredibly hard to tell but it does seem plausible that some of the Corbyn bounce in the GE campaign was strongly influenced by Brexit - if Brexit falls away as a GE issue then he may well lose that support.
Rabin was assassinated by a single extremist, not "the Israelis". But I'm having supper with his grandson on Sunday if you want me to share any evidence that you have...
Last night's interaction between Sean and dura_ace was comedy gold.
Given the last couple of years of madness in politics, it seems a dead cert frankly that the Tories would lose their heads finally and elect him leader. I mean, 80-odd of them thought Leadsom was great and some of them even marched down Whitehall chanting her name. These are not the actions of rational people.
The Palestinians aren't going to become less extreme by doing this, saying we can't work with them and must continue to make their lives hell until they become less extreme is bad logic unless you want an excuse to continue. Hamas took power because we refused to deal with the issue, they were more extreme than what they replaced.
Although to be honest if millions of Muslims came to Britain and kicked British people out of their homes to create a Muslim country.
How do you think the British people would react?
Do you think we would recognise this new Muslim country?
Many people seem to think the Palestinians should be saints capable of actions no other peoples could manage.
I'm not backing Mogg at his current crazily short prices, but he might be a live runner...
It follows reports it has £2.4bn in reserves and pays its boss £1.7m.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42978997
it doesn’t justify someone with limited support, no govt experience, way out of step with his party and who may not even want the job being the runaway favourite.
It is possible, and indeed looks more likelt than I ever thought it would get, but still a lay for me.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/08/uk-government-under-pressure-bermuda-same-sex-marriage-repeal
Mogg v Corbyn would be a like a cross between Fillon and Le Pen v Melenchon/Hamon unless Umunna tried to do a Macron and go third party
The ultimate act of three-quiderism - cross the floor, get Rees Mogg, cross back.....
If you say you are against racism then you don't cosy up to and give legitimacy to anti-semites.
Corbyn can do nothing about sorting out the Palestinian/Israeli dispute. It is unlikely that Britain can do anything about it. (Indeed, it is likely to become even more intractable if Israelis are expected to embrace people who want to kill them and wipe them from the face of the earth as people like Hamas want to do. Encouraging Palestinians to address the beams in their own eyes would do a great deal to make it easier for those on the Israeli side who want a peaceful settlement to gain traction.)
But the Labour party's principles are something which Corbyn can do something about. And those anti-racist principles seem to be somewhat of a chimera when it comes to tolerating some pretty unpleasant anti-Jewish racism. That is what he is being criticised for, rightly in my view.
If the Labour party's principles can be abandoned so easily when it comes to Jews, why they might just as easily be abandoned when it comes to other minorities: women, for instance, or gays or others. And some of us might well conclude that Labour's claim to the moral high ground is so much phooey.
Labour's "principles" are too often used to attack others but are not seen as a moral imperative which should govern their own actions.
And if we're talking about the party membership....
Can't believe my Bayeux bet might take till 2022 to pay out. That'll be an even longer wait than Italian GE bet (Made in 2013 !)