DJ Barry Hammond Posted 30 January 2018 Author Posted 30 January 2018 9 minutes ago, Strokes said: Yeah that’s pretty much how I see it, this government has been in for a long time now anyway and if they do the full term it will be 12 years. I think barring some miraculous events it’s highly likely they will be decimated at the polls next time out. There is no chance I will vote for them with TM at the helm. Agreed - but I also can’t see any ‘rebrand’ that could remove all the bagage either. The party needs a complete going over, much like Cameron did when he took over the party. Rees Mogg at a push might be the only one I could see that has enough distance from this cluster**** government to be given a chance... and if it’s was a short run to an election, he has enough charm the general public might think he’s a posh but harmless geek to put in charge of the country? Not convinced the party machine would really want Rudd in charge. Same with Borris now he’s tainted, Big Phil - no chance. Gove??? He’d be picked apart to easy from past misdemeanours - and it begs the point, why have Gove when you could go the full Rees Mogg? Trying to think if i’ve missed anyone obvious - Osborne? Hmmmm, imagine majority of public still think he’s a loser/twat. Javid - he’d have a decent chance actually, he has a Tory light feel, but I couldn’t see the party electing him as leader?
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 5 hours ago, foxinexile said: In the interest of offering a little balance, the Vote Leave campaign sent out their own "Project Fear" message that Turkey (and 76 million Turkish people) would be one of five new countries joining the EU. You can find this falsehood on their website still: http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html We all know there we lies and inconsistencies on both sides of the referendum campaign. And just as the then-government sent out false statements, so did those who were not connected to the government but campaigned to leave the EU, and campaigned to gain people's votes with lies. I look forward to you calling for the leaders of the Leave campaign to be shown up too. All in the name of balance of course. They did. Despite Boris' earlier rather more supportive thoughts on the subject
Buce Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Rogstanley said: Edited 31 January 2018 by Buce
Buce Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 7 hours ago, Rogstanley said: Right wing terrorist tries to explain his way out of trouble by saying "a guy called Dave" was driving the van that crashed into and killed people in London last year. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42875216 Oh well if it was Dave driving we better let this guy go then. Also says his original targets were Jeremy Corbyn and Sadiq Khan. Hard to avoid the conclusion that the relentless hate-filled criticism of Corbyn and Khan from the current government, who really ought to be concentrating on doing their ****ing job, contributed significantly to this man's mindset. Blood on the tory's hands. 7 hours ago, Rogstanley said: I did think he might be a bit doolally, but then name-dropping Corbyn and Khan was so remiscent of every conversation I ever seem to have with right wingers these days. He really doesn’t seem that much different to your average Tory. I bet if they interviewed him much longer he’d have mentioned Venezuela and called McDonnell dangerous. Top trolling, Moose.
Rogstanley Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 5 hours ago, toddybad said: . 28 minutes ago, Buce said: Suspicious posts. Remember some people need to be careful. You don't know who at the club could be reading this site/thread. 2
Buce Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 6 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Agreed - but I also can’t see any ‘rebrand’ that could remove all the bagage either. The party needs a complete going over, much like Cameron did when he took over the party. Rees Mogg at a push might be the only one I could see that has enough distance from this cluster**** government to be given a chance... and if it’s was a short run to an election, he has enough charm the general public might think he’s a posh but harmless geek to put in charge of the country? Not convinced the party machine would really want Rudd in charge. Same with Borris now he’s tainted, Big Phil - no chance. Gove??? He’d be picked apart to easy from past misdemeanours - and it begs the point, why have Gove when you could go the full Rees Mogg? Trying to think if i’ve missed anyone obvious - Osborne? Hmmmm, imagine majority of public still think he’s a loser/twat. Javid - he’d have a decent chance actually, he has a Tory light feel, but I couldn’t see the party electing him as leader? Rees-Mogg would have a lot of support from the swivel-eyed party members, I think, but surely his views on gay marriage and abortion would come back to haunt him at the polls.
Alf Bentley Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) I'm hearing more about this bloke Dave implicated in the Finsbury Park attack. Apparently he's a smooth operator. Just strolled over to the bloke now facing charges, said "Call me Dave" and took the wheel of his van. He has a track record for such offences. On 23 June 2016, he caused a car crash that disrupted the whole continent. Police are looking for a tall, heavily-built man with dark hair, a pudgy face and an oily manner. Edited 31 January 2018 by Alf Bentley
Guest MattP Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 9 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Agreed - but I also can’t see any ‘rebrand’ that could remove all the bagage either. The party needs a complete going over, much like Cameron did when he took over the party. Rees Mogg at a push might be the only one I could see that has enough distance from this cluster**** government to be given a chance... and if it’s was a short run to an election, he has enough charm the general public might think he’s a posh but harmless geek to put in charge of the country? Not convinced the party machine would really want Rudd in charge. Same with Borris now he’s tainted, Big Phil - no chance. Gove??? He’d be picked apart to easy from past misdemeanours - and it begs the point, why have Gove when you could go the full Rees Mogg? Trying to think if i’ve missed anyone obvious - Osborne? Hmmmm, imagine majority of public still think he’s a loser/twat. Javid - he’d have a decent chance actually, he has a Tory light feel, but I couldn’t see the party electing him as leader? If Rees-Mogg wants the job he would comfortably win a vote among the membership, I'm still unsure he does though, I think he wants to be speaker of the house. Hammond, Rudd or Hunt would only get the job if they didn't put it over to the membership again, they simply wouldn't vote for a remainer unless it was one against another. Boris is still the one I think who would get it, his name recognition is outstanding and far beyond any other politician - Pointless last Friday asked people to name members of the cabinet, May and Hammond were joint second on 14 and Boris was top with 56, his reach is incredible, I spoke to the specials odds complier at Bet365 a few weeks ago and he says the Tories would move 5pts in the betting ahead of Labour if Johnson got the top job. Osborne? As a Conservative? I think if he wants to return to politics he should be looking for a Lib Dem membership card, no Tory association would take him, he's persona non grata now after what he's done to a Conservative PM, using his position to attack, insult and undermine the leader at such a crucial stage over a personal vendetta - not to mention being the architect of Project Fear. 3 hours ago, Buce said: Rees-Mogg would have a lot of support from the swivel-eyed party members, I think, but surely his views on gay marriage and abortion would come back to haunt him at the polls. We all thought Corbyn would be haunted at the polls because of his horrible views, turned out that a lot of people didn't mind. I think people want authenticity now, sick of spin politics and if that means politicians who are honest but hold some dodgy beliefs I think they'll tolerate it. I don't think Mogg's image will be a problem at all, anyone who wouldn't vote for him because he's posh, toffish etc isn't the sort of person who would ever vote Conservative anyway.
Guest MattP Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) Here's the odds for next PM from Paddy Power, Gove and Johnson and well worth bets at these prices. Next Prime Minister After Theresa May Hide Jeremy Corbyn 3/1 Jacob Rees Mogg 4/1 Boris Johnson 8/1 Andrea Leadsom 11/1 Amber Rudd 11/1 David Davis 12/1 Michael Gove 14/1 Gavin Williamson 16/1 Jeremy Hunt 16/1 Ruth Davidson 16/1 Phillip Hammond 20/1 Priti Patel 25/1 Sajid Javid 33/1 Edited 31 January 2018 by MattP
Buce Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 3 minutes ago, MattP said: Here's the odds for next PM from Paddy Power, Gove and Johnson and well worth bets at these prices. Next Prime Minister After Theresa May Hide Jeremy Corbyn 3/1 Jacob Rees Mogg 4/1 Boris Johnson 8/1 Andrea Leadsom 11/1 Amber Rudd 11/1 David Davis 12/1 Michael Gove 14/1 Gavin Williamson 16/1 Jeremy Hunt 16/1 Ruth Davidson 16/1 Phillip Hammond 20/1 Priti Patel 25/1 Sajid Javid 33/1 I think Boris would be popular among the members but he'd hav to win through the nomination process first, and I don't think he's popular enough with the Tory MPs for that. I don't know about Gove but he's pretty poisonous to the electorate, I think.
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 Biggest cowboys in town with a profit warning Shares in UK government contractor Capita plunge 40% after profit warning https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/31/shares-in-uk-government-contractor-capita-plunge-40-after-profit-warning?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 8 minutes ago, MattP said: Here's the odds for next PM from Paddy Power, Gove and Johnson and well worth bets at these prices. Corbyn favorite? Also, do the Tories not have an up and coming young MP? Somebody unexpected in the wings that might spark some sort of renewal within the party? That list is just predictable and dull.
Strokes Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 13 minutes ago, MattP said: Here's the odds for next PM from Paddy Power, Gove and Johnson and well worth bets at these prices. Next Prime Minister After Theresa May Hide Jeremy Corbyn 3/1 Jacob Rees Mogg 4/1 Boris Johnson 8/1 Andrea Leadsom 11/1 Amber Rudd 11/1 David Davis 12/1 Michael Gove 14/1 Gavin Williamson 16/1 Jeremy Hunt 16/1 Ruth Davidson 16/1 Phillip Hammond 20/1 Priti Patel 25/1 Sajid Javid 33/1 I know he is toxic amongst the hard left on here but I think Hunt is well priced too. At least he was clear when he said if there was a referendum tomorrow he would now back leave. That gives him allies in both camps.
Guest MattP Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Buce said: I think Boris would be popular among the members but he'd hav to win through the nomination process first, and I don't think he's popular enough with the Tory MPs for that. I don't know about Gove but he's pretty poisonous to the electorate, I think. Agree on both counts. 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: Corbyn favorite? Also, do the Tories not have an up and coming young MP? Somebody unexpected in the wings that might spark some sort of renewal within the party? That list is just predictable and dull. Yeah of course, the leader of the opposition is always the favourite, I don't know why people are talking about "young and up and coming MP's" as if it's needed - look around the World and the ones who seem to enthuse the electorate for something different have been old men, Trump, Sanders, Corbyn etc - I think the need for youth is a relic from the Blairite/Cameron era. Only Macron goes against the grain. Edited 31 January 2018 by MattP
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 2 minutes ago, Strokes said: I know he is toxic amongst the hard left on here but I think Hunt is well priced too. At least he was clear when he said if there was a referendum tomorrow he would now back leave. That gives him allies in both camps. Reality is that the tory party are going to have to move away from cuts as they're just overseeing a nation in decline. Whoever they pick needs to be somebody not tainted by austerity politics. Hunt will never live down nhs failures. It's presumably why Boris keeps running to the papers about how we should spend more.
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 2 minutes ago, MattP said: Imagine being part of a party where Liam Fox is considered the 4th best leadership option
Izzy Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 "On the bog with Jacob Rees Mogg" Gotta love Viz 1
Strokes Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 5 minutes ago, toddybad said: Imagine being part of a party where Liam Fox is considered the 4th best leadership option 5th
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 4 minutes ago, toddybad said: Reality is that the tory party are going to have to move away from cuts as they're just overseeing a nation in decline. Whoever they pick needs to be somebody not tainted by austerity politics. Hunt will never live down nhs failures. It's presumably why Boris keeps running to the papers about how we should spend more. There are only 2 ways they can spend more money: 1. Raise Taxes a lot for everyone 2. Spend Money they don't have in the hope (myth) that it would drive unprecedented growth not seen anywhere in the developed world post crash. The second option is a non starter, so pretty much any political party in power if they want to spend more on public services needs to raise taxes. Of course we could instead offer a programme of radical reform for all public services and private contracts to idiots like Capita to see if we are getting value for money and efficiency from certain services and to see if the some of the services are fit for purpose in the modern world. I am going to make a bold claim that even if Labour come to power and increase funding to the NHS there will still be crisis after crisis year after year as we have other issues that need to be analysed and addressed that no infinite amount of money will ever solve. The solution to problems is not always more money, throwing extra money into the public sector now will just see a return to the inefficiency and waste seen in the past.
Alf Bentley Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) 18 minutes ago, MattP said: Agree on both counts. Yeah of course, the leader of the opposition is always the favourite, I don't know why people are talking about "young and up and coming MP's" as if it's needed - look around the World and the ones who seem to enthuse the electorate for something different have been old men, Trump, Sanders, Corbyn etc - I think the need for youth is a relic from the Blairite/Cameron era. Only Macron goes against the grain. Interesting charts, Matt, this and the previous one. Interesting: - That Corbyn is the only Labour name on the other list, showing how secure he now is - That 2 of the 3 with negative ratings on this list were sacked in the recent reshuffle (May paying attention to members?) - Surprising that Fallon is rated so highly (though he's gone now, too) - I'd imagine that Davis' rating will slide down unless he gets a surprisingly good deal out of the EU - Interesting that Gove is rated higher than Boris; as a Lab supporter, he could be a difficult opponent as he's shrewd - but can he get over the Robin Cook problem ("too ugly to be PM")? - Ruth Davidson would be a nightmare opponent for Labour, but presumably unlikely to get leadership any time soon, as not an MP and too pro-Remain? - How would the electorate react to Rees-Mogg if he wanted and got the leadership? Massive risk for the Tories as he could be seen as ridiculous, but politics is now partly about entertainment for some voters... Edited 31 January 2018 by Alf Bentley
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: There are only 2 ways they can spend more money: 1. Raise Taxes a lot for everyone 2. Spend Money they don't have in the hope (myth) that it would drive unprecedented growth not seen anywhere in the developed world post crash. The second option is a non starter, so pretty much any political party in power if they want to spend more on public services needs to raise taxes. Of course we could instead offer a programme of radical reform for all public services and private contracts to idiots like Capita to see if we are getting value for money and efficiency from certain services and to see if the some of the services are fit for purpose in the modern world. I am going to make a bold claim that even if Labour come to power and increase funding to the NHS there will still be crisis after crisis year after year as we have other issues that need to be analysed and addressed that no infinite amount of money will ever solve. The solution to problems is not always more money, throwing extra money into the public sector now will just see a return to the inefficiency and waste seen in the past. The myth is that they can't spend money. Even 2% growth over 15 years is worth in the region of £525-750billion to the economy. You can spend even without hugely increasing growth and also without increasing debt to GDP over the medium term. The bit about inefficiency is just soundbite nonsense the right falls for. Notice how there's never specifics about what the waste is and what it's worth. Edited 31 January 2018 by Guest
Innovindil Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 9 minutes ago, toddybad said: The myth is that they can't spend money. Even 2% growth over 15 years is worth in the region of £525-750billion to the economy. You can spend even without hugely increasing growth and also without increasing debt to GDP over the medium term. The bit about inefficiency is just soundbite nonsense the right falls for. Notice how there's never specifics about what the waste is and what it's worth. So you think all our services and all our contracts are the best value for money they could possibly be, no inefficiencies at all? Sounds optimistic tbh.
Guest Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Innovindil said: So you think all our services and all our contracts are the best value for money they could possibly be, no inefficiencies at all? Sounds optimistic tbh. I'm sure there are some but many are caused by pfis and other contracts. That's where you lose £300 for changing a lightbulb. In house costs less. I can only tell you that I've seen nhs trusts having to cut all sorts to stay afloat. They're having to sell off the family silver even when the savings are non-recurrent. It's nonsense. You can't just keep spending less and less (in real terms). If you don't keep maintaining and improving schools and hospitals they crumble. If you keep cutting salaries you lose workers. If you don't invest you don't stay ahead of the tech curve. If you don't have the best tech you are keeping inefficiencies in the system. Continuing as we are is simply overseeing the gradual decline of our country. Edited 31 January 2018 by Guest
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 31 January 2018 Posted 31 January 2018 42 minutes ago, toddybad said: The myth is that they can't spend money. Even 2% growth over 15 years is worth in the region of £525-750billion to the economy. You can spend even without hugely increasing growth and also without increasing debt to GDP over the medium term. The bit about inefficiency is just soundbite nonsense the right falls for. Notice how there's never specifics about what the waste is and what it's worth. Its not a myth its a fact. But we will not get into that loop again. I disagree fundamentally on your views on debt and it supposedly triggering extra growth. I am yet to see examples of this working long term before a country falls into a massive debt spiral and untold poverty. Of course the public sector is perfect (must remember) thou shalt not criticise the perfect sector! Of course there are inefficiencies, there are many! there have been many examples given previously of needless job roles, bad management, waste within the NHS, bad procurement, private companies costing more than doing it in house. We need a serious independent review across the board of services offered. My feeling is that spending more money on it wont help unless we reform services and understand how they need to work to deliver the best service. If somebody somewhere in politics could come out and admit this it would be good. We have a whole host of services designed in the 1950s that need modernisation and reform to exist and say relevant. It hardly surprising we are bottom in productivity given our love for legacy. What I am saying here is we need to review the services we offer, if we need more of them or to nationalise them, if it means they offer abetter more cost effective service to the tax payer then so be it but creating more debt whatever your views on it is not the solution here. By all means if you want more public service and inefficient public service pay more tax but not take on debt that will take generations to repay.
Recommended Posts