Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Conservative Leadership Elections

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • https://order-order.com/

    latest polling reinforces the view that a Boris led Conservative Party would likely win an election while one led by Florence is likely to be destroyed.

    First round of voting is tomorrow, will be interesting to see if the latest polling has an effect on MPs choices.

    it also gives Boris the choice of removing the traitors in the Party and calling an election to force through Brexit.
    "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

    Comment


    • Originally posted by m kenny View Post

      You obviously have no idea how the Honours System works. No Politician is going to block an opposition recommendation because if they do then they could be 'blocked' when their turn comes around.
      You have no idea how much this sort of bauble is coveted. The ageing 1960s rock-stars who were once against the system are nearly all now in it. Elvis Costello is the latest to have to try and explain away his double-standards and is claiming his mother made him accept it.!

      https://ultimateclassicrock.com/elvis-costello-o-b-e/
      You have no sense of reality ;if there is an election without Brexit , it is over for the Conservatives .
      1 If Corbyn becomes PM ,thus a loss for the Conservatives of at least 50 seats, it is very unlikely that the Honours System will survive with a Marxist as PM.
      2 If Farage becomes PM, which means a gain from at least 326 seats, less than 50 Conservatives will remain in the Commons, and they will be divided in at least 2 or even more groups . Thus how many of them will have honours ?
      And about Brexit : the opponents of Brexit have prevented a soft Brexit since 2016, why would they now accept a hard Brexit ?
      The only chance for Brexit is a PM with balls who threatens the backbenchers with a general election if they oppose Brexit .
      May was to soft to blackmail them, she did concessions to the anti Brexiteers . And we know what happens when you do concessions : in politics making concessions is an indication of weakness,and weak people do not remain PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

        You keep saying that but it is factually incorrect. The Queen has the authority to Prorogue Parliament. While she only does so at the request of the PM the PM cannot compel her to do so.
        The PM does not need to agreement of their cabinet in order to make the request.
        A PM who prorogues Parliament without the agreement of the Cabinet,ceases to be PM .
        The Queen does what the PM tells her to do : the last monarch who acted independently was William IV.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by MarkV View Post

          I doubt you really understand democracy (or English or logic etc) but the swamp of Whitehall is the Civil Service and not Parliament. Troll off and come back when you actually understand how things work.
          I did my best to have a rational discussion with him but I failed due to my use of logic and facts.
          "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
          validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
          "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Surrey View Post
            https://order-order.com/

            latest polling reinforces the view that a Boris led Conservative Party would likely win an election while one led by Florence is likely to be destroyed.

            First round of voting is tomorrow, will be interesting to see if the latest polling has an effect on MPs choices.

            it also gives Boris the choice of removing the traitors in the Party and calling an election to force through Brexit.
            It's good to see a Brexiteer back who is knowledgeable on the topic. I do think your use of the word traitors very loaded. Since when is someone who disagrees with a particular policy within a democratic party a traitor? I know there's a lot of emotion around Brexit but that's when moderation and reason are most important.
            "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
            validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
            "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

            Comment


            • Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

              It's good to see a Brexiteer back who is knowledgeable on the topic. I do think your use of the word traitors very loaded. Since when is someone who disagrees with a particular policy within a democratic party a traitor? I know there's a lot of emotion around Brexit but that's when moderation and reason are most important.
              And that, my Gaelic friend, will be the downfall of small-d democracy as we know it: this all-or-nothing approach to 'most any policy question at hand. Nuance is veritably a four-letter word these days, and the notion of "compromise" is downright vulgar. "You're either with us or against us." What kind of mass-participatory civil society can function under such a paradigm? Ancient Athens so twisted herself into irreconcilable camps -- when Alcibiades led a Spartan army into Attica. The Roman Republic so imploded -- when Sulla took to torturing senators who doubted the legality or the desirability of his dictatorship. Our freedoms aren't being taken by our political class: we're giving them away -- with both hands. If I confess to being fearful of the future, I'm understating my apprehension geometrically.
              I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                And about Brexit : the opponents of Brexit have prevented a soft Brexit since 2016, why would they now accept a hard Brexit ?
                You have it completely the wrong way around. Brexit has been 'prevented' because of the loonys who want a complete and total break from everything to do with the EU. It is the Brexiteers who want the most extreme form of 'Leave' who are the problem.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

                  I do think your use of the word traitors very loaded. Since when is someone who disagrees with a particular policy within a democratic party a traitor?
                  Its a mindset. 'Anyone who does not reflect my extreme views is a 'traitor''. Its an American political disease that seems to be infecting UK politics. A very bad sign.


                  Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                  And that, my Gaelic friend, will be the downfall of small-d democracy as we know it: this all-or-nothing approach to 'most any policy question at hand. Nuance is veritably a four-letter word these days, and the notion of "compromise" is downright vulgar. "You're either with us or against us." .................... If I confess to being fearful of the future, I'm understating my apprehension geometrically.
                  That is the problem. Extremists who think they are mainstream. People who not only want to win but want to completely crush all opposition and get the losers to admit they were 'wrong'.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by m kenny View Post
                    Its a mindset. 'Anyone who does not reflect my extreme views is a 'traitor''. Its an American political disease that seems to be infecting UK politics. A very bad sign.
                    I do believe that such paradigms were known to the ancient Greeks and Romans, about oh so two thousand years before the founding of the United States . . . . I do believe that England and Scotland went through similar violent spasms during the 17th century, no?

                    Originally posted by m kenny View Post
                    That is the problem. Extremists who think they are mainstream. People who not only want to win but want to completely crush all opposition and get the losers to admit they were 'wrong'.
                    They want to crush their opponents, and completely bar them from any kind of meaningful political participation in perpetuity, make them stand at the side with their hands in their pockets and their heads down -- shut out forever. It's like giving Genghis Khan the keys to the ballot box.
                    I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                      I do believe that such paradigms were known to the ancient Greeks and Romans, about oh so two thousand years before the founding of the United States . . . . I do believe that England and Scotland went through similar violent spasms during the 17th century, no?



                      x.
                      Which is how it got to the Americas. It was very much a habit of the 17th century extreme puritanical sects The Pilgrims didn't get on the Speedwell because they believed in the freedom of all to worship how they wished they did so because they were being stopped from forcing others to follow their rules. Some of my ancestors were involved. One of them founded Gloucester MA but later had to flee back to England because he had objected to the hanging of a woman because she was a Quaker and was called a traitor and threatened with hanging himself as a result.
                      Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                      Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by MarkV View Post

                        Which is how it got to the Americas. It was very much a habit of the 17th century extreme puritanical sects The Pilgrims didn't get on the Speedwell because they believed in the freedom of all to worship how they wished they did so because they were being stopped from forcing others to follow their rules. Some of my ancestors were involved. One of them founded Gloucester MA but later had to flee back to England because he had objected to the hanging of a woman because she was a Quaker and was called a traitor and threatened with hanging himself as a result.
                        Any relation -- theological or otherwise -- to this lass?

                        Anne Hutchinson (née Marbury; July 1591 – August 1643) was a Puritan spiritual adviser, religious reformer, and an important participant in the Antinomian Controversy which shook the infant Massachusetts Bay Colony from 1636 to 1638. Her strong religious convictions were at odds with the established Puritan clergy in the Boston area, and her popularity and charisma helped create a theological schism that threatened to destroy the Puritans' religious community in New England. She was eventually tried and convicted, then banished from the colony with many of her supporters. . . . .

                        Hutchinson and many of her supporters established the settlement of Portsmouth with encouragement from Providence Plantations founder Roger Williams in what became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. After her husband's death a few years later, threats of Massachusetts taking over Rhode Island compelled Hutchinson to move totally outside the reach of Boston into the lands of the Dutch. Five of her older surviving children remained in New England or in England, while she settled with her younger children near an ancient landmark called Split Rock in what later became The Bronx in New York City. Tensions were high at the time with the Siwanoy Indian tribe. In August 1643, Hutchinson, six of her children, and other household members were massacred by Siwanoys during Kieft's War. The only survivor was her nine year-old daughter Susanna, who was taken captive.

                        Hutchinson is a key figure in the history of religious freedom in England's American colonies and the history of women in ministry, challenging the authority of the ministers. She is honored by Massachusetts with a State House monument calling her a "courageous exponent of civil liberty and religious toleration." She has been called the most famous—or infamous—English woman in colonial American history. . . . .

                        Wikipedia
                        From whence we get the Hutchinson River, and the Hutchinson River Parkway, which brings millions of visitors to the Bronx Zoo every year.

                        I don't know if today's dingdongs get the news, but I heard that the Reformation ended some time ago . . . .
                        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by m kenny View Post

                          You have it completely the wrong way around. Brexit has been 'prevented' because of the loonys who want a complete and total break from everything to do with the EU. It is the Brexiteers who want the most extreme form of 'Leave' who are the problem.
                          You are wrong : a Coalition of Cameronites and Labour could have made possible a soft Brexit . May asked the help from Labour to male a soft Brexit possible, but Corbyn refused .
                          The supporters of a no deal Brexit were a minority : proof is that three years after the referendum,there is still no Brexit .
                          If Cameron wanted a soft Brexit, Brexit would have happen in 2016 . But he did not want a soft Brexit .
                          In March a no deal Brexit was refused by the Commons.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by MarkV View Post

                            I doubt you really understand democracy (or English or logic etc) but the swamp of Whitehall is the Civil Service and not Parliament. Troll off and come back when you actually understand how things work.
                            1 The British people wanted in 2016 a Brexit .
                            2 The Commons refused to accept the decision of the British people, although their only raison d' étre is to do what the British people want .
                            3 The reason that there is still no Brexit is the influence of the invisible government on the MPs
                            4 Conclusion :the Commons are a swamp, as is the European parliament .

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                              Any relation -- theological or otherwise -- to this lass?



                              From whence we get the Hutchinson River, and the Hutchinson River Parkway, which brings millions of visitors to the Bronx Zoo every year.

                              I don't know if today's dingdongs get the news, but I heard that the Reformation ended some time ago . . . .
                              Nope

                              My ding dongs were John Robinson who appears in a painting of him praying on the Speedwell which now hangs on Capitol Hill. He never actually went and is buried somewhere in Leyden but at least one of his sons did go and one of his descendants signed the declaration. At least another son returned to England and became part of the extreme wing of the puritanical movement during the Civil War, The one I referred to was named Wheelwright
                              Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                              Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                                1 The British people wanted in 2016 a Brexit .
                                2 The Commons refused to accept the decision of the British people, although their only raison d' étre is to do what the British people want .
                                3 The reason that there is still no Brexit is the influence of the invisible government on the MPs
                                4 Conclusion :the Commons are a swamp, as is the European parliament .
                                Not quite. The problem is that people told of multiple different Brexit scenarios. And they probably voted for one of those. They didn't vote as a majority for any single Brexit scenario and quite clearly did not vote for the Brexit as it ended up being represented. It is rather intellectually dishonest to try to represent the referendum result as an endorsement of any single type of Brexit (or Brexit scenario) - it wasn't. And that really is the part of the problem. The Commons decided not to back down from Brexit (so they clearly were not against it) but just like with the British people there is no majority for any single type of Brexit.
                                It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X