Who will be the next Prime Minister

briantrumpet

Frank the tank wrote:

I remember the last time we had a "woman" running the show, it didn't go very well.

Whereas, of course, the "males" Heath, Wilson and Callaghan made the 70s a beautiful decade.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

trying to predict what those 150,000 loonies will do is tough

I think you're getting confused with the Labour leadership election.

briantrumpet

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

trying to predict what those 150,000 loonies will do is tough

I think you're getting confused with the Labour leadership election.

At the moment it's very easy to get confused. If the Tories were to lurch rightwards under Leadsom while Labour reaffirms its lurch leftwards with Corbyn, it would leave a very interesting dynamic in British (or English) political alignments.

bobmcstuff

Leadsom is a maniac liar bitch. It's become clear she made up most of her CV yet something towards 50% the conservative party will vote for her anyway. That is absolutely insane. I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Pituophis

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Pituophis wrote:

I would imagine that a very large percentage of all the people who voted out are merely getting by as it is.
The serfs are always going to make up the majority, and if you make the mistake of giving them the vote, expect them to think of themselves (just like everyone else! :roll: )
Dismissing them as uneducated racists and bigots rather than listening to their concerns, real and imagined, is one sure fire way to alienate them further. People who cannot spar with you on an intellectual level are quite likely to pull out a large piece of wood to fight back with, hence the exit vote.

Unlike you, I don't believe that the politicians will ever allow us to leave.
Which might be a shame, and might not. No one really knows yet.

But imho the serfs did not vote through their own pocket. When the economy contracts or merely slows then 90% of the population will be worse off and imho the serfs will be hardest hit. And there is no way that the toffs leading the Out campaign did not know that the economy was going to be negatively impacted.

I don't disagree with you. But both sides told a lot of lies, and the In lot are now passing off speculation as hard facts.
Politicians lie a lot, we all know that.
The trouble is, that the people at the bottom of the pile are having a very hard time of it now. Things are not rosy while we are in the EU for them.
Poverty levels in Britain have increased by 10% over the past 3 years alone. That's within the EU's golden sphere.
Young working class people in jobs now have almost no chance of getting on the property ladder. Rents are so expensive that they cannot possibly save enough for a deposit. Not a problem if mummy and daddy can provide £20k but not happening where the majority live.
If you (not you personally) obviously don't care about the majority, why should you be surprised that they don't care about you? Who cares if a few (or a great many) middle management types loose their jobs, if you are on a zero hour, minimum wage contract? Especially if you would possibly be better off on the dole. (I would not, in case you are wondering :oops: )
If you have next to nothing, you have next to nothing to loose, so why not take the risk? Shake things up and see what happens.

If it makes you feel any better, leaving the EU could potentially put my own job in a very tricky position. But there are still two sides to the argument.

mfin

What's also worrying is every single one of the 5 candidates is religious and has said so. 4 Christians and a 1 Catholic, not that it matters which version, all are clearly not logical people who believe in fairy stories. Leadsom seems the worst of the two left in that she's brought it to her opinions on gay marriage. May is the daughter of a vicar (not that that means anything) but unfortunately is a church goer.

pblakeney

mfin wrote:

What's also worrying is every single one of the 5 candidates is religious and has said so. 4 Christians and a 1 Catholic, not that it matters which version, all are clearly not logical people who believe in fairy stories. Leadsom seems the worst of the two left in that she's brought it to her opinions on gay marriage. May is the daughter of a vicar (not that that means anything) but unfortunately is a church goer.

A pedant could point out that Catholics are Christians, but never mind.

pblakeney

briantrumpet wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

trying to predict what those 150,000 loonies will do is tough

I think you're getting confused with the Labour leadership election.

At the moment it's very easy to get confused. If the Tories were to lurch rightwards under Leadsom while Labour reaffirms its lurch leftwards with Corbyn, it would leave a very interesting dynamic in British (or English) political alignments.

I just want to know, who is steering the boat?

Stevo_666

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

surrey_commuter

Pituophis wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Pituophis wrote:

I would imagine that a very large percentage of all the people who voted out are merely getting by as it is.
The serfs are always going to make up the majority, and if you make the mistake of giving them the vote, expect them to think of themselves (just like everyone else! :roll: )
Dismissing them as uneducated racists and bigots rather than listening to their concerns, real and imagined, is one sure fire way to alienate them further. People who cannot spar with you on an intellectual level are quite likely to pull out a large piece of wood to fight back with, hence the exit vote.

Unlike you, I don't believe that the politicians will ever allow us to leave.
Which might be a shame, and might not. No one really knows yet.

But imho the serfs did not vote through their own pocket. When the economy contracts or merely slows then 90% of the population will be worse off and imho the serfs will be hardest hit. And there is no way that the toffs leading the Out campaign did not know that the economy was going to be negatively impacted.

I don't disagree with you. But both sides told a lot of lies, and the In lot are now passing off speculation as hard facts.
Politicians lie a lot, we all know that.
The trouble is, that the people at the bottom of the pile are having a very hard time of it now. Things are not rosy while we are in the EU for them.
Poverty levels in Britain have increased by 10% over the past 3 years alone. That's within the EU's golden sphere.
Young working class people in jobs now have almost no chance of getting on the property ladder. Rents are so expensive that they cannot possibly save enough for a deposit. Not a problem if mummy and daddy can provide £20k but not happening where the majority live.
If you (not you personally) obviously don't care about the majority, why should you be surprised that they don't care about you? Who cares if a few (or a great many) middle management types loose their jobs, if you are on a zero hour, minimum wage contract? Especially if you would possibly be better off on the dole. (I would not, in case you are wondering :oops: )u
If you have next to nothing, you have next to nothing to loose, so why not take the risk? Shake things up and see what happens.

If it makes you feel any better, leaving the EU could potentially put my own job in a very tricky position. But there are still two sides to the argument.

Strangely I think we are more or less agreeing, the difference being that you are looking on a micro level and I am looking macro.

I agree there are lots of people worse off that they were eight years ago and that this impacts the less wealthy the hardest. For me this is due to the recession and our climb back afterwards. Where we differ is that I see the solution being a successful economy. Leaving the EU was always going to hammer the economy short-term and reduce long-term growth rates. This knocks a big hole in govt finances that will need filling by more taxes and cuts. At the same time workers will have less wage growth and less hours. I sincerely believe that we are all going to pay for that referendum but that' the poorest will feel it the hardest. I also believe that the Leave leaders knew that and the ones who did it for political gain should be strung up.

Speculation vs fact
To an economist free trade being good is a given in the same way that cycling in a bunch is good. Leaving the world's largest free trade block will knock half a % off our long-term growth. Other factors could double this.
Official stats will not be out for months but economists look at micro data points these are showing that the economy has hit the buffers.

surrey_commuter

PBlakeney wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

trying to predict what those 150,000 loonies will do is tough

I think you're getting confused with the Labour leadership election.

At the moment it's very easy to get confused. If the Tories were to lurch rightwards under Leadsom while Labour reaffirms its lurch leftwards with Corbyn, it would leave a very interesting dynamic in British (or English) political alignments.

I just want to know, who is steering the boat?

Carney?

surrey_commuter

bobmcstuff wrote:

Leadsom is a maniac liar *****. It's become clear she made up most of her CV yet something towards 50% the conservative party will vote for her anyway. That is absolutely insane. I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

I really don't get that either. Some political pundits think that May supporters voted tactically to get rid of Gove. Now they can destroy Leadsom as a fantasist.

veronese68

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Leadsom is a maniac liar *****. It's become clear she made up most of her CV yet something towards 50% the conservative party will vote for her anyway. That is absolutely insane. I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

I really don't get that either. Some political pundits think that May supporters voted tactically to get rid of Gove. Now they can destroy Leadsom as a fantasist.

Apparently Leadsom is quite annoyed that people don't believe her CV, she said she didn't have to put up with that kind of sh!t when she was an astronaut.
Seriously though, how can anyone support someone that is such a pathological liar? Maybe they think it's a good thing in politics.

surrey_commuter

Veronese68 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Leadsom is a maniac liar *****. It's become clear she made up most of her CV yet something towards 50% the conservative party will vote for her anyway. That is absolutely insane. I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

I really don't get that either. Some political pundits think that May supporters voted tactically to get rid of Gove. Now they can destroy Leadsom as a fantasist.

Apparently Leadsom is quite annoyed that people don't believe her CV, she said she didn't have to put up with that kind of sh!t when she was an astronaut.
Seriously though, how can anyone support someone that is such a pathological liar? Maybe they think it's a good thing in politics.

All May's camp have to do is to keep it centre stage - maybe write it on the side of a big red bus.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

How a political party chose or who, for their leader is THEIR business... this is not the case here, they are picking the next PM.

Outrageous that 150,000 unelected people will get a fundamental say in the direction of the country, had the system remained unchanged, at least the MPs doing the choosing would have been elected, which in a representative democracy would have been ok.

unless its escaped your notice, one reason we voted OUT was because of un elected Brussels commissioners imposing their will on the UK.

btw i know plenty of Tory party members and all are totally normal, they are not swivel eyed loons, should they chose May, who might take the Tories back to their one nation roots (and i reckon wont take us out of EU) might even see me voting tory next time round, subject to a decent local tory candidate :shock:

bendertherobot

Flip side is, of course, constitutionally we never vote for a PM, so they can do what they want. And, of course, PM is not a constitutional role anyway, just one of convention.

And that's quite interesting because, practically, there's little doubt that the electorate are voting to varying degrees, for a PM and not necessarily the person who is their local representative. Such is the complicated nature of party politics, MP's and PM's.

So legally there are many differences with being "unelected" but for all real world discussions there's an element of it. I do think that an election is likely sooner rather than later depending on the outcome of Letwin's multi dimensional paper.

surrey_commuter

bendertherobot wrote:

Flip side is, of course, constitutionally we never vote for a PM, so they can do what they want. And, of course, PM is not a constitutional role anyway, just one of convention.

And that's quite interesting because, practically, there's little doubt that the electorate are voting to varying degrees, for a PM and not necessarily the person who is their local representative. Such is the complicated nature of party politics, MP's and PM's.

So legally there are many differences with being "unelected" but for all real world discussions there's an element of it. I do think that an election is likely sooner rather than later depending on the outcome of Letwin's multi dimensional paper.

Chris Grayling's constituency voted In. If there is a vote in Parliament should he represent the views of his constituency as expressed in the referendum, those of the country as expressed in the referendum or should he vote based on his own conscience?

bobmcstuff

Stevo 666 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

Much larger bunch, to be fair. And I'd choose a different descriptor - pseudo-communist fantasists maybe.

bendertherobot

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Flip side is, of course, constitutionally we never vote for a PM, so they can do what they want. And, of course, PM is not a constitutional role anyway, just one of convention.

And that's quite interesting because, practically, there's little doubt that the electorate are voting to varying degrees, for a PM and not necessarily the person who is their local representative. Such is the complicated nature of party politics, MP's and PM's.

So legally there are many differences with being "unelected" but for all real world discussions there's an element of it. I do think that an election is likely sooner rather than later depending on the outcome of Letwin's multi dimensional paper.

Chris Grayling's constituency voted In. If there is a vote in Parliament should he represent the views of his constituency as expressed in the referendum, those of the country as expressed in the referendum or should he vote based on his own conscience?

Well, see that's the most interesting thing in the whole setup. On a strict construction of what we vote our MP's in for, if we accept that we are voting for OUR MP, then Grayling should vote to defeat an Art 50 vote. But, somehow, he now has a responsibility for the constituents across the country because of the majority vote. And that's why referenda are generally avoided because they muddy the system.

Now, playing the other side, the practical truth is that we vote for parties and Prime Ministers whether that's conscious or sub conscious. The outcome of this will generate so many many books and articles. So, it's quite easily arguable that the MP, his/her personality etc is unimportant. Of course, both views are generalisations with no nuance as to how each individual makes their choice.

Whenever a decision is made we're going to see a very finely balanced decision in relation to political suicide. I was told it was "mind blowing" that anyone could contemplate MP's voting against democracy. It's not. I don't think it will ever happen though. So it could be political suicide, at a constituency level, for each remain MP to vote out.

kingstongraham

bendertherobot wrote:

Whenever a decision is made we're going to see a very finely balanced decision in relation to political suicide. I was told it was "mind blowing" that anyone could contemplate MP's voting against democracy. It's not. I don't think it will ever happen though. So it could be political suicide, at a constituency level, for each remain MP to vote out.

I think Grayling will be bricking it with only a 24,000 majority to defend. My MP Zac Goldsmith has already said he's going to vote against his constituents stated views. I can't see the Lib Dems making a dramatic comeback here next time, but you never know.

surrey_commuter

KingstonGraham wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Whenever a decision is made we're going to see a very finely balanced decision in relation to political suicide. I was told it was "mind blowing" that anyone could contemplate MP's voting against democracy. It's not. I don't think it will ever happen though. So it could be political suicide, at a constituency level, for each remain MP to vote out.

I think Grayling will be bricking it with only a 24,000 majority to defend. My MP Zac Goldsmith has already said he's going to vote against his constituents stated views. I can't see the Lib Dems making a dramatic comeback here next time, but you never know.

And then we are back to the local membership who can de-select their MP and stick the blue rosette on somebody else and still have a 24,000 majority. So is he more likely to follow the wishes of his local constituency members - which could be a couple of hundred people.

ugo.santalucia

Goldsmith is a leaver? Fuxxing twat... there should be a law that prevent anyone inheriting millions to get into politics... fuxxing shothed!

veronese68

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Goldsmith is a leaver? Fuxxing fool... there should be a law that prevent anyone inheriting millions to get into politics... fuxxing shothed!

I think he started out being in the Green Party, or was associated with it. How he's changed. At least he defied the Tory Party in the vote the other day and voted with Labour to commit to allowing people from the EU to stay and not use them as pawns. He's been very quiet since losing the mayoralty.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

How a political party chose or who, for their leader is THEIR business... this is not the case here, they are picking the next PM.

Outrageous that 150,000 unelected people will get a fundamental say in the direction of the country, had the system remained unchanged, at least the MPs doing the choosing would have been elected, which in a representative democracy would have been ok.

So who do you think should get a vote on the next Tory party leader?

Frank the tank

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

How a political party chose or who, for their leader is THEIR business... this is not the case here, they are picking the next PM.

Outrageous that 150,000 unelected people will get a fundamental say in the direction of the country, had the system remained unchanged, at least the MPs doing the choosing would have been elected, which in a representative democracy would have been ok.

So who do you think should get a vote on the next Tory party leader?

Mamba80, there was no election when Brown replaced Tory Blair.

mamba80

Frank the tank wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

I can't believe our next leader is being chosen by such a small secluded bunch of "swivel eyed loons"

Unlike the labour party leadership elections...

How a political party chose or who, for their leader is THEIR business... this is not the case here, they are picking the next PM.

Outrageous that 150,000 unelected people will get a fundamental say in the direction of the country, had the system remained unchanged, at least the MPs doing the choosing would have been elected, which in a representative democracy would have been ok.

So who do you think should get a vote on the next Tory party leader?

Mamba80, there was no election when Brown replaced Tory Blair.

2 wrongs dont make a right but in any case, the country wasnt facing the crisis it is today, GB carried on pretty much the policies Blair had won the GE with.

As i said, i dont give a xxxx who votes for the Tory party leader but they are voting for a PM who is going to have to lead the country in a direction totally different to that of DC and the Tory promises they won that election on, so have their election and then call a GE.

briantrumpet

Stevo 666 wrote:

So who do you think should get a vote on the next Tory party leader?

An interesting take here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07 ... n-theresa/

"There are 330 Conservative MPs currently in the House of Commons, representing a Party that secured more than 11 million votes at the general election last year. The idea that these MPs do not have a mandate to select their own leader, but can only secure “legitimacy” at a time of national crisis from a body of people just 150,000 strong, is strange indeed."

kingstongraham

mamba80 wrote:

As i said, i dont give a xxxx who votes for the Tory party leader but they are voting for a PM who is going to have to lead the country in a direction totally different to that of DC and the Tory promises they won that election on, so have their election and then call a GE.

Also, there seems to be an understanding that the direction the country will take will be very different dependent on who is the new PM. When the only thing in the manifesto about the EU was that there would be a vote about it, that shouldn't be left to the party members alone.

Also, if they vote Leadsom, it's showing that they think the only thing that matters is the relationship with the EU. It's very important, but there's more going on out there.

ugo.santalucia

The Daily Express front page was a massive Tory w-a-n-k about the next Margareth Thatcher... I bet they had they line ready for 25 years

briantrumpet

Someone ought to do a database of meaningless Leadsom quotes - I have a feeling she's going to say a lot of stuff which it'll be hard to pin any specifics to ... well, anything at all, apart from "waffle... waffle, speaking as a mother... waffle waflle... speaking as someone who's (claiming to have) managed hundreds of people and billions of pounds of funds... waffle waffle... speaking as somone who thinks we have a bright future out of the EU... waffle waffle..."