So, just a knife Gove candidate then?

??

126 thoughts on “So, just a knife Gove candidate then?”

  1. It could be –two bitches in league.

    Leadsom would have to be pathetically weak to fold like this without something in the background.

    The main issue now is Brexit and smashing the sabotage crew.

  2. The Meissen Bison

    It was a democratic oddity that the next prime minister was to have been chosen by 150,000 Conservative Party members.

    Now, it’s to be selection by 150 MPs instead. I don’t think this is going to end well.

  3. I just think Leadsom was not quite what I thought she was when I first heard of her about a week ago.

    TMB – We have a constituency system. People didn’t vote for Cameron, they voted in their constituencies. I don’t see it being a major issue, and it’s happened often enough before.

    I now want to see May’s feet held to the fire. If she wavers we will get a no confidence vote and an election I’d have thought.

  4. No.

    I think it’s pretty obvious that Team Leadsom were facing a universally hostile media and poltiical environment.

    The fix is in. But if I’m certain that if I’m certain of anything, Leadsom was a genuine candidate who has withdrawn due to a perception of insurmountable odds. Whether that was the right perception we will never know, of course. The problem was that Leadsom wasn’t fighting for the votes of the population, but only Tory Party members, so an insurgency was much more difficult to effect.

    I’d like to know what transpired between Team May and the Mail and Telegraph. We’ll never know that either.

  5. No it’s not an issue. The party has a competent, experienced person who can definitely win. Leadsom put the party first and we all got a good compromise rather than a bad or at very least messy. Brexiteer MPs were always a minority. Boris is the one potential candidate that may have got remain backbenchers to support him and he would have had a fairly decent shot at the membership.

  6. Once Gove went I was a lukewarmish Leadsomite but I didn’t have a vote and thus I could be cavalier.

    I was such on the basis that she had extensive City experience and was firmly Brexit, but I’m not totally sure about either of those things now, and I think it may actually be better to send May (who at least has the appearance of someone who knows her way to 10 Downing Street) to Europe than Leadsom, who was starting to look (to me) very lightweight.

    Not a May fan by a long chalk but we are where we are.

  7. > Leadsom would have to be pathetically weak to fold like this

    She is pathetically weak. Thinking she could take on the leadership role was a classic case of Dunning–Kruger effect.

  8. Once again FUCK THE REMAINER MPs. Those treasonous scumbags can piss up their legs and play with the steam. We tell them what to do not vice versa. All of them need de-selecting and if the Tories want to survive they need MP recall and no more central office parachutists.

  9. Pogo, open to changing that assessment. Last time i asked for elaboration from someone not keen on Theresa it was about not being popular with bobbies. I haven’t asked my police friend yet, next time i see him in a couple of weeks bbq.

  10. So the bastards have stopped the members having a vote. Looks like an establishment stitch-up.

    Why can’t it now revert to May vs Gove as the highest polling remaining challenger?

  11. I think we just lost the chance of a great Prime Minister. Instead, we’re lumbered with another Blairite managerialist.

    The Quislings win again.

  12. I have to say Ian that folding as she has I no longer think that she is suitable material. Either she is way too weak or this was a put up job against Gove.

  13. From the Conservative Party constitution:

    “Upon the initiation of an election for the Leader, it shall be the duty of the 1922 Committee to present to the Party, as soon as reasonably practicable, a choice of candidates for election as Leader.”

    “Shall”. That looks like they have to give the members a ballot with at least two candidates. May vs Gove?

  14. TIS: Exactly so.

    But we can only start from where we are.

    Everybody write to the bitch and tell her there will be no sell out.

    Yeah–one letter means nothing –but 10 million would show that people are willing to continue taking action to force Brexit. Much more so than petitions or one time marches. If 10 million people wrote one pressuring letter a week until Article 50 goes in that would terrorise them. We won the vote so they know it is no bluff.

    They rely on us going back to sleep. If we don’t–they lose

    As time moves on Brexit will keep growing stronger as the economic/cultural death of the EU brings more economic remainers over to our side

    .

  15. A weaselly lawyer could argue that the ’22 have presented two candidates – one has withdrawn, which was always a possibility. Job done!

  16. fellas it’s over, done and dusted. Conservative members and conf goers will be fine with it.
    As for Brexit, well its going to happen and its going to be ‘more’ than Cameron’s compromise i.e. what Remain were campaigning for. I would have liked a guarantee in writing that access to single market is not to be gained by limiting UK access to any other markets or limiting access to the UK market.

  17. ““Shall”. That looks like they have to give the members a ballot with at least two candidates. May vs Gove?”

    Agree, they need to present a choice to the members. If not then it looks too much like a stitch up, and they will pay at the next GE.

    “As for Brexit, well its going to happen and its going to be ‘more’ than Cameron’s compromise i.e. what Remain were campaigning for. I would have liked a guarantee in writing that access to single market is not to be gained by limiting UK access to any other markets or limiting access to the UK market.”

    Don’t believe anything that May says. If she is going to deliver a true exit from the EU then why did remain try so hard to game the contest, and why are they so strongly behind her? Remember who supported May, and vote against them at the next opportunity. It is a stitch up, and will result in a horrible compromise.

  18. I have a horrible feeling this mess had nothing to do with the referendum outcome but, from a Westminster bubble perspective, trying to demonstrate the Conservative party is better at running itself than the Labour party. The Conservatives have got on with their leadership ‘contest’ and produced a result. Labour aren’t even sure how to go about theirs.

    Yet I see that Corbyn and his vast support are at odds with the bulk of the parliamentary Labour party. It may take time but the party and PLP getting aligned (eg through a great number of de-selections and by-elections) is better in the long run. The Conservatives can’t even agree on what ‘eurosceptic’ means.

  19. The fix is in, May is PM, there won’t be any more contest. Let’s not descend into Second Referendum type thinking.

    Leadsom at least now has a raised profile as a Brexit champion in the Commons.

    But for now, it’s May as PM, that slug Gideon staying on as Chancellor and a general “change means no change” while they all sit around thinking up ways to make Brexit more difficult and less successful. Oh, it’s so very difficult, we can’t even start yet…

  20. Ian B>

    And you lot wondered why I said the referendum was an irrelevance. We wouldn’t have been allowed a vote if the two choices were actually different.

    “change means no change”

    Quite. The only change that’s going to come from the Brexit vote is that now we’re going to join Schengen…

  21. The Meissen Bison

    I was never interested in her tax return – but I do look forward to reading Leadsom’s updated CV.

    Interested: People didn’t vote for Cameron, they voted in their constituencies. I don’t see it being a major issue, and it’s happened often enough before.

    Up to a point, Lord Copper. They voted for the party of which David Cameron was the leader so in that sense the future PM was a known quantity.

    For Cameron, a remainer, to be replaced in a ‘coronation’ by another remainer is hard to justify. It rather looks as though most Conservative MPs have not understood what the Brexit vote was telling them.

  22. Dave–May is stupid–but doubtful that anybody could be that stupid. Except –possibly–you.

  23. If May doesn’t negotiate a Brexit she and the party are finished. She knows that. Fortunately, being concerned almost entirely with her own advancement and position she must know that Brexit is the only path she can follow which doesn’t fuck that up.

  24. The fix well yes but its not changed the result. We can for once read a politician’s statement at face value. May was probably going to win and had the MPs with her and had committed to a Brexiteer to lead negotiations so why prolong it? Personally i wouldn’t mind Hague as negotiator but it’s going to be Letwin isn’t it?

  25. Be fair Ian–Hague probably negotiated a reduced room rate for that room he was sharing for economy reasons with his driver.

  26. No… i think he’s a good details man as is Letwin but he’s also good at the diplomacy.

  27. Hague as negotiator? You’re having a fucking laugh aren’t you?

    I think I’d prefer someone with more ‘testicular fortitude’.

    William Haigh is and always has been a total cock.

  28. Imagine a private company appointing negotiators on the basis that they didn’t want to do it, saw nothing but problems ahead and will do anything to avoid starting.

    I mean, for fuck’s sake.

  29. I was once stitched up by Hague when we shared an office together at a mutual client. In his McKinsey’s role, he blamed me (another consultant at a different firm) for his own mistake in front of the board of a major listed company when I was not there.

    So, he’s basically a fucking cunt

  30. I can’t believe you’re all going on about a fix. Three weeks ago you all moaned that Remain had rigged the contest; then for a few days Boris had fixed the whole thing to become PM. Make your bloody minds up.

    Theresa will do just fine. She wouldn’t have been my first choice, but she’s competent and has the experience. Leadsom was hopelessly out of her depth.

  31. Well, if she serves Article 50 before the end of July, I’ll be happy enough, although I still suspect her motives.

    I think her unrestrained principle will be to go for the Norway option, but if BRExiteers are in charge then WTO or similar is more likely.

    Bloody hope so anyway.

  32. Well i don’t see it as a brexiteer vs remain that much anymore. I see it as the course has been charted, we need to avoid the rocks. In any case Hague’s not in the picture if he was not an out and out remainer so the point is moot.

  33. Bloke in North Dorset

    Is Ian B Andrea Leadsom’s toyboy?

    Anyway, its not much of choice but we may have dodged a bullet with Leadsom. From Chris Snowdon
    :

    The Rt. Hon. Theresa May MP

    • Voted against smoking ban in public places (2006)

    • Absent on tobacco displays vote (2009)

    • Absent for David Nuttall’s Private Members Bill on exempting pubs and private members clubs from smoking ban, where food is not served. (2010)

    • Voted against smoking ban in cars (2014)

    • Absent on plain packaging in (2015)

    Andrea Leadsom MP

    • Voted against David Nuttall’s Private Members Bill on exempting pubs and private members clubs from smoking ban, where food is not served. (2010)

    • Voted in favour of smoking ban in cars containing 18 year olds and under (2014)

    • Voted in favour of plain packaging (2015)

    Advantage May, I think you’ll agree. Moreover, Theresa May was one of the cabinet ministers who put pressure on David Cameron to drop minimum pricing for alcohol back in 2013. I’m unable to find any comment from May on the sugar tax but I did find this from [from Leadsom’s twitter “Sugar tax to pay for more school sport. A real double win for our children …”]

  34. but it’s going to be Letwin isn’t it

    My radar hasn’t pinged Letwin for some time. He’s a politician, so it is fairly certain he is a useless cock-womble but how useless a cockwomble is he?

  35. Oh, and EFTA rather than Norway or WTO? EFTA seems to exclude most of the really appalling crap from the EU:

    The EEA Agreement does not cover the following EU policies:
    Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies (although the Agreement contains provisions on various aspects of trade in agricultural and fish products);
    Customs Union;
    Common Trade Policy;
    Common Foreign and Security Policy;
    Justice and Home Affairs (even though the EFTA countries are part of the Schengen area*); or
    Monetary Union (EMU).

    * As long as we can stay out of Schengen, of course.

  36. Bloke in North Dorset

    Cameron always made it clear that he would be going after the referendum so there’s no need for a GE, but it would be fun to have a snap one while Labour is in such turmoil.

  37. BNiD–Your list is irrelevant now and crap. Leadsom responsible for the Snooper’s charter and 11 times the number of migrants supposed to arrive actually arriving was she?

    Brexit is all that matters now. According to North at EU Ref site time is needed to sort out the negotiations anyway. Maybe–but it gives remain cunts more time to undermine.

    We need to be on them like stink on shit as the Yanks say.

  38. After reading Chris Snowdon’s post I’m starting to think that May will be better than Cameron. Never thought I’d say something positive about May. I feel a little unclean now…

  39. There won’t be a snap GE. The Tories now have all the power they need to run the country into the ground. I bet Clarke and Heseltine are dancing a creaky jig to the Ode To Joy right now.

  40. My understanding is Letwin is the guy they get to do most of the manifesto heavy lifting and now keeping depts on course for delivery. Yes it’s behind the scenes but as he’s in Cabinet without portfolio he probably already chairs a cabinet sub-committee on Brexit prep.

  41. “I bet Clarke and Heseltine are dancing a creaky jig to the Ode To Joy right now.”

    They can’t get around the vote. This is May’s swansong and after 2020 she won’t be around. But Brexit’s power can only grow. The EU is going down and nothing can stop that. Remain is set to diminish because the ESpew has nothing to offer but toil and trouble. A stitch-up is just increasing the pressure inside the cooker.

  42. You’ll all be thrilled to know that May has announced she’s going to put “consumers and workers” on company boards. Thank God we haven’t got a Labour government, eh?

  43. The answer to that is for companies to say “No you fucking aren’t”.

    It would be kind of hard for her to hand out long sentences in the face of mass refusal. Over trivial shite that no one but her cares about anyway. And even to her it is just a stupid CM soundbite.

    The more you take the more they dish out.

  44. Ian B – oh dear that sounds not very pleasing, by workers does she mean trade unions? By consumers does she mean Which#?

  45. Cameron has announced that May will be PM by Wednesday evening. I’m not normally one for conspiracy theories, but wow, the way this has unfolded has been incredibly convenient for the Remain faction.

  46. “You’ll all be thrilled to know that May has announced she’s going to put “consumers and workers” on company boards.”

    A new Companies Act to be introduced?

    What would be amusing would be watching her own party vote against it, yet whole heartedly supported by Labour, Lib Dems, SNP and Lucas.

    I don’t think even May could be that stupid.

  47. We erred in believing that there really was a BluLab “leave” grouping. It could easily be–with hindsight–that all of them were in this to attack Brexit should it get the vote.

    Anyway we shall see–she won’t hold an election and she can’t brazenly say “Fuck you from the EU” to the voters. Nor can she pull a scam that won’t be noticed. This is her turn at the Purple so she won’t care about 2020 but the rest probably do so interesting times.

    We must work to make their lives Hell unless they get the message.

  48. The Meissen Bison

    Ian B: We don’t need any kind of deal.

    That’s absolutely right and it’s the only sensible negotiating position for the UK.

    Any of these EEA, EFTA, Norway arrangements involve some sort of quid pro quo in terms of free movement of people or budget contributions in return for concessions on tarriffs.

    Junker, Schulz and even Tusk positively drool at the prospect of giving the UK punishment beatings. Merkel and Hollande would like there to be some pain pour décourager les autres but pressure from EU exporters to the UK won’t stand for any of that nonsense and nor will their trade unions.

  49. I share the view that there’s nothing to negotiate, that we just say “So long, thanks for giving us the chance to give you all the fish”, then let them do what they want, while we continue buying BMWs, or whatever it is that Mr Average Briton buys* when he’s not, in Harry Hutton’s immortal words, walking round Tesco with his mouth hanging open.

    But Whitehall is full of clever people. Maybe not terribly competent people, but clever. I am sure those clever people know this.

    The only explanation I can think of for the reluctance to say “goodbye” which, after all takes only a second or two, is (and stop me if you’ve heard this one before) they don’t want to do it.

    I am increasingly gloomy.

    * I buy Alfas, obviously.

  50. @Andrew M

    ‘I can’t believe you’re all going on about a fix.’

    I’m not. I never said the vote was fixed either, which it patently wasn’t. We’re not all paranoid, you know.

    This is the issue with Ecksy, who is in spirit almost entirely right in spirit but who ruins it all by expecting the left to leap out at him like Cato at every possible moment.

  51. This is the issue with Ecksy, who is in spirit almost entirely right in spirit but who ruins it all by expecting the left to leap out at him like Cato at every possible moment.

    I disagree that Ecks ruins it. IMHO every cause needs one or two “no compromise” campaigners to push things along in the right direction.

    For example, many in the Open Source world deride Richard Stallman for never budging from his principles. But without him, we wouldn’t have nearly so much quality free software.

    I’m not saying an anonymous ranter on an obscure blog has the same sort of impact, but if Ecks is as passionate in meatspace then he will have some effect.

  52. May is clearly interested in broadening and deepening the leftie “stakeholder” bullshit. I.e. companies are “public institutions” who should be forced to take orders from people who have no fucking business giving them orders. Yes, it’ll be NGOs and Unions. I doubt I’ll be asked onto the Sainsburys board because I buy my spuds there. Typical corporatism in the Fascist-Left stylee.

    And Whitehall in general I think just can’t bear to say goodbye to their buds in Brussels. I think I’ve made this analogy before; it’s like the coalminers. The mine wasn’t just a job, it was a way of life, a social centre. Working mens clubs, brass bands and choirs, son follows father down the pit, the union (till the day I die), the centre of life.

    State and third sector structures are like that for the inhabitants of the Westminster Village. They can’t imagine life without them and will fight every bit as hard to keep them in place, and screw what is best for everyone else.

  53. We should by the way always remember that the sole purpose of the Conservative Party is to prevent conservative voters having a party of government to vote for.

  54. I think we just lost the chance of a great Prime Minister. Instead, we’re lumbered with another Blairite managerialist.
    The Quislings win again.

    ROFL! How deluded can you get, IanB? It’s always the same with you. Someone shreds your arguments with counter-arguments and evidence, or events prove you wrong, and you stick stubbornly to your preconceptions. In your solipsistic world, your ‘theories’ and preconceptions are reality, so they cannot be wrong or refuted.

    By contrast, Ecksy is capable of changing his mind when the facts change:
    I have to say Ian that folding as she has I no longer think that she is suitable material.

  55. Theo,

    I’m not sure you predicted that Leadsom would bail..:) and if you did, my unreserved apologies, I missed it.

    But which particular bit of this by Ian B is wrong?

    Instead, we’re lumbered with another Blairite managerialist.

    Again, I shall (genuinely) be delighted if you are right and Ian is proven wrong. But I perhaps shan’t hold my breath..;)

  56. PF-

    When Theo hasn’t got an argument he always posts this kind of high sounding non-specific denunciation, it’s par for the course.

    He seems particularly incapable of understanding what an opinion is, in particular. “I think X would have happened” being an example of one (if you’re reading this Theo).

  57. Minor London-y student-y trivia: as an undergraduate, in about ’92-3, I recall attending a lecture, out of hours, given by Prof Kenneth Minogue, now, I believe sadly departed. Sadly, because I think overall he was white hat. Anyhoo, I was in this tiered lecture theatre, right at the top/back, waiting for the good Prof to enter and develop his thesis on whether Conservatism had developed an ideology – ie. managerialism – and I was gazing down into the auditorium, absent-mindedly, not really thinking of anything, when I suddenly became aware of these electric blue eyes looking at me. Quite a jolt, I can tell you. I got back into focus, sharpish. To find myself locked in a star with Maggie. Reader, I sat up. She turned back to face the front. Ah, salad days.

    Buggered if I can recall now what Minogue said. Tempus fugit, et cet.

  58. Edward,

    I have to admit losing the sense of the story when you were locked in the star, after that none of it made any sense.

  59. Ian B:
    “We don’t need any kind of deal.”

    I think we probably do, in order to prevent the short term economic consequences of Brexit from becoming serious (and stretching into the mid term), thus threatening acceptance of Brexit.

    An ideological stance is of no use if it is self defeating.

  60. It’s not ideological, it’s practical. The problems will come if we get trapped in endless negotiations.

  61. “You’ll all be thrilled to know that May has announced she’s going to put “consumers and workers” on company boards.”

    Well, way to encourage foreign companies to come and do business here. What an utter moron. If she’s worried about the 2020 election, then start talking about that crap in 2019, after Brexit has been done and dusted and companies are happily doing business here. Stupid, stupid middling Geography student.

  62. Leadsom turned out not to have the mettle. An unpleasant and unwelcome surprise.

    There will, I think, be no surprises from May.

    Not yet in the door and she is spewing virtue-signalling CM crap.

  63. Ian B / PJF

    If any sort of win win can ease the potential passporting problem for the City (for example), I would suggest there is a lot of merit in exploring such issues.

    Surely what the EU and the UK want, ideally post Brexit, is a Europe that benefits from the sum arrangement rather than one which is damaged?

    If the EU simply wants to say “not interested”, then fine – we’ll have to make it work better for us without – but no point in not at least trying?

  64. PF

    I referred to the possibility of Leadsom withdrawing at 0913 on a different thread: “And if Leadsom withdrew her candidacy, May could be getting on with the job of brexit.” Not that it matters, whether I predicted it or not; but it was pretty to obvious to any unbiased observer – after the implosion of her campaign through her staggering naïveté – that her withdrawal was on the cards.

    As for May, sure she’s a managerialist, and “Blairite” in some respects. The truly risible part of IanB’s post was the claim that we’d lost the “chance of a great prime minister” when Leadsom was quite obviously a disaster in the making: –

    *more authoritarian than May (according to Christopher Snowdon)
    *car crash hustings where she rambled on about cranial massage for infants
    *car crash interview with The Times where she swallowed the journalist’s bait – hook, line and sinker, FFS!
    *multi-culti crap on her trite blog, and
    *a reported tendency to burst into tears when the going got tough.

    But, of course, in IanB’s world, Leadsom’s fall was due to “quislings”, not her own folly and stupidity. Forget Occam’s Razor, let’s have a conspiracy theory…

    IanB

    He seems particularly incapable of understanding what an opinion is, in particular. “I think X would have happened” being an example of one

    You don’t seem to understand that opinions (unlike hunches) require justification, if they are to be considered rational. You try to justify yours; but you retreat into dogmatism when your justifications are shown to be hollow.

    The opinion that Leadsom would have made a “great prime minister” is delusional. In what sort of alternative universe do the points I list above suggest a potentially “great prime minister”? Ecksy can now see that she was not up to the job. Why can’t you?

  65. I don’t think it had much to do with mettle. As I have said before, internal Tory politics makes the Kremlin look fair and liberal. It will have been made clear over the weekend that Team Leadsom were in a hopeless position; the grandees and May Team had already got the media in their pockets, so it would be nine weeks of mud slinging in only one direction and the press full of May puff pieces.

    Pretty hopeless situation for the challenger.

    This wasn’t a General Election, remember, where it could be offset with appeal to the country. The electorate were people like Theo.

    I’m disappointed, but I don’t blame Leadsom for standing down. Hopeless situation.

    On the bright side, May hasn’t got a clue, so she’ll probably go down in flames. Might well be another Gordon Brown.

  66. My second favourite Norway option is the one that John Galt and Surreptitious Evil mentioned.
    Of course, the best ever Norway option was the 1981 Norway/NATO combination of Inge Simonsen and Dick Beardsley, smiles.

  67. PF @ 8.29pm

    Quite so. And there are many other issues to discuss apart from trade – from residency rights to university research funding.

    Brexit is a process of disengagement, of which our formal departure is just the start. That process might well last several years.

  68. Theo-

    Sigh. “Quisling Right” is a term coined years ago by Sean Gabb of the Libertarian Alliance to refer to the Tory Hierarchy who block actual conservatism. It’s a similar term to the American “RINO” (Republican In Name Only).

    I don’t have to agree with every policy to consider somebody great. I hardly agree with anything Attlee did, but he was a great prime minister. My statement was an impression of her character which I developed before she’d even stood for the leadership (I emailed her to encourage her to by the way). She was certainly inexperienced, but so was Thatch when she started. I think there are times when the the person and the historical moment coincide (Churchill, a bloody awful minister, was the Great Man in 1939 for instance). This was one of those moments. But it’s gone now.

    It’s just an opinion. But I’m sticking by it, rather than back-pedaling like other people.

    There are only a handful of MPs (two I can think of in fact) who are in any sense libertarian and committed anti-nannies (Steve Baker and Philip Davies). Ant-smoking legislation, much as I care about it, was not the issue at this juncture. Plus, the Telegraph is tipping ultra-nanny proggie Sarah Wollaston as Health Minister under May. Anyone who thinks a May government is going to be even .01% libertine is in cloud cuckoo land.

    I’m sticking to my guns on this; just as Cameron was the wrong man at one opportunity (the end of New Labour), May is the wrong woman at this opportunity and I think Leadsom likely was the right one. But we’ll never know.

    I’m not going to do all this “oh, now I think about it I’ve changed my mind” crap.

  69. And on University funding, the best policy would be “you’re not getting any. Try selling your Cultural Marxism on the free market. Best of luck kthxbi”.

  70. It will have been made clear over the weekend that Team Leadsom were in a hopeless position; the grandees and May Team had already got the media in their pockets

    How reminiscent of the way socialists delude themselves: if only the press were not so biased, the electorate would have seen the truth of what we were saying!

    When a small ‘selectorate’ are choosing a PM, the press has a duty to interrogate the candidates and their weaknesses on behalf of the wider electorate. Leadsom was interrogated and found wanting – deeply wanting.

  71. Or to be more realistic, how many years are you planning to leave universities and resident EU citizens in limbo? How many years do we leave the borders open to the migrant columns? How many years before we choose a tariff regime. How many years before we can take those bloody blue flags down?

    “We must mak haste sloly sa Headmaster”.

  72. When do you think they were going to start “interrogating” La May, Theo? When they’d run out of her family album pictures and sympathy punts about her barren womb?

  73. And on University funding, the best policy would be “you’re not getting any. Try selling your Cultural Marxism on the free market. Best of luck kthxbi”.

    I said university research funding. There are many cross-EU scientific research programmes – none of which to my knowledge are infected with cultural Marxism – and their continued funding will need to be negotiated.

  74. It’s just an opinion. But I’m sticking by it, rather than back-pedaling like other people….I’m sticking to my guns on this…I’m not going to do all this “oh, now I think about it I’ve changed my mind” crap.

    Your irrationality and rigidity suggest to me that you need treatment. Seek help now.

  75. “It’s not ideological, it’s practical. The problems will come if we get trapped in endless negotiations.”

    Drivel. The problems (short term economic) are already here and real. If you think we can extract ourselves from 40+ years of tight interaction with the EEC/EU, our major political/economic project for the best part of half a century, without having to carefully negotiate a path out – then you’re ideologically deluded.

    The Remainers will be quite happy to burn the country down to keep it in the EU. If they can get politically witless Brexiters to do it for them, all the better (for them).

  76. Ian, you should live a little. Being locked in a star was … how can I put it? Worth remembering 23 years later.

    Plus, Alan Clark, the dirty bastard, was right about her.

  77. PJF, how on earth, then, did we join, painlessly and overnight in 1973? What happened to the previous 900 years’ development?

  78. I have seen no reason to change my opinion Theo. Your belief that the definition of rationality is agreement with yourself suggests a deep degree of narcissism. We can continue trading cod-psychology insults as long as you like.

    PJF-

    I think this is a statist delusion; that the government somehow generates the economy rather than standing in its way. Our links with the EU do not enable anything, they impede. That’s why you cut them as fast as possible.

    Sometimes there really are simple solutions. This is one of them.

  79. PJF, how on earth, then, did we join, painlessly and overnight in 1973? What happened to the previous 900 years’ development?

    Indeed.

  80. By the way, Ian B, our disagreement is academic.

    Just to be clear, I think May (either by nature or by (prime) ministerial capture) is a Remainer who will happily see the country burn in order to stay in the EU. Unless some way (which I cannot currently foresee) is found to hold her feet to the Brexit fire, then the escape is foiled.

    This is a chess game, and the people behind May are Grand Masters. A referendum resulting in 52 – 48 for Brexit is but the loss of a Knight.

    I have a small hope that May is politically astute and selfish enough to realise that a successful and low cost Brexit by 2019 is more beneficial to her than whatever the cunts surrounding her say is. It’s a very small hope.

  81. “…how on earth, then, did we join, painlessly and overnight in 1973? What happened to the previous 900 years’ development?”

    Strawman alert!

    We didn’t join what we’re in now overnight in 1973. It has built up over decades, with malicious stealth and guile to take over our economy, institutions and culture.

    Are you seriously proposing that we can exit that “overnight” without seriously damaging ourselves? Don’t you know the game they’ve been playing?

  82. ooh.. Dr Wollaston Health Minister.. Nurse Milton – who refused to commit to either remain or brexit won’t be pleased.

  83. Theophrastus:

    “There are many cross-EU scientific research programmes – none of which to my knowledge are infected with cultural Marxism – and their continued funding will need to be negotiated.”

    Hmm. Yet more pointless gilded-youth anecdata: a year or two after my Minogue/Thatcher moment, I read pol science at LSE (I know, I know). Anyway, this was around the time Giddens took over, or maybe a little before. The place was gearing itself as the go-to destination for international wannabe Enarques. It did it very well*. We had a Jean Monnet professor of, if memory serves, European Cohesion. He published a book. A nice little econometric number on the same subject, and plugged it in every lecture. He was the head honcho at something called, again if memory serves, the Centre for European Unity and Cohesion. Just the sort of, at best patronising, at worst monarchic/corporatist pabulum which has always raised my hackles. Well, I was young and a little niaive. I bought his sodding book**. But as young and impressionable as I might have been, this was a couple of years after the disgraceful Danish referendum (the first such of many), Booker and North were starting to document the micro-regulatory folly (not, I suspect, that this will change on Brexit), and Bernard Connolly published his magnificent octopus, so even I could sense ordure in the air: funded propagandists, the abolition of the search for verifiable truth in favour of the political mode du jour. I daresay this has happened before, and I was not the first to notice it. But notice it I did.

    Many, many years later, I saw a delicious piece of YouTubery, with Nige in Eire, being asked an ostensibly difficult question by a woman who said she was by profession an academic. By that sixth sense so well developed in pols, Nige, sensed a Jean Monnet professor in his questioner. By that gutsiness that is almost entirely his alone, he called her bluff: you’re not, by any chance, a Jean Monnet professor, are you? he asked.

    Oh, mirabile dictu, and so she was, and the bona fides of her question, which might otherwise have been worth an honest answer, were torpedoed. For seekers after truth, and fine politicians, it was a great moment.

    I’m not saying, Theophrastus, that all cross-border university cooperation*** is bad. I suppose our universities cooperate with the Canadians and Ecuadorians easily enough.

    But there is a rotten apple in the barrel.

    * Graffito on the wall of the one of the traps in the male half of the library, beneath mountains of abuse scrawled by Pakistanis, Malaysians, Saudis, Poles, you name it, someone had written: “new world order bulletin board”. Rather witty.

    ** He had a splendid print Piranesi on the wall of his room. Can’t have been all bad.

    *** None of the foregoing is intended to suggest public funding of universities is desirable, btw.

  84. “Your belief that the definition of rationality is agreement with yourself …”

    A pathetic response. Rationality involves evidence and logic, both of which you ignore when they clash with your opinions.

  85. PJF, you make a fair point. Where I work, there is a law library. It’s a quite astounding and rather beautiful thing. In Room H of that library there is a phalanx of shelves devoted to Acts of the British Parliament, and to Statutory Instruments of the British Parliament.

    I cannot recall, off the the top of my head, how far back these tomes go, but at least to the end of the 19th Century. And it takes only a few moments of glancing at them to appreciate the gluttonous ballooning of government ambition from the 1930s or 1940s: the tomes begin to swell, then, when they are too big, you get more than one in a year, then, each individual contributory yearly tome is larger than one for any previous year. The visual impact is sobering.

    It’s rather charming and quaint to go back and read an old Act, occupying little more than a single page.

    So, yes, government has got much, much, much bigger. And this trend has accelerated since our Accession. And, yes, this may have occurred anyway.

    But, I trade you 900 years’ accumulated modes of thought and being for 43 years’ of legal draftsmanship.

    Whaddya say?

  86. @Interested: Are you FUCKING KIDDING ME? Theresa May is a longtime enemy of freedom of speech, for the English, and she did NOTHING about the imported terrorists. She hates the British people as much as anyone without a pseudoGermanic surname. May needs to fucking die, at once. She is even worse than Cameron.

  87. The only question is if that evil, hatchet faced, barren cunt can be terminated before she sabotages British freedom from child rape and continental bureaucratic independence even further. Death to traitors.

  88. Paul Rain: an uncommonly vigorous attempt to put me on GCHQ’s radar.

    Golly. Loose talk of hempen rope is all very well, but “[she] needs to fucking die, at once”. I mean, what?

  89. Theo:

    This always happens. At some point you get angry, lose your shit, and start accusing me of being irrational and having no evidence. It’s getting rather tiresome. You give me nothing to reply to; I suspect this is deliberate because you can’t think of anything. Please stop.

    Regarding the salient point (or one of them anyway), that something has taken decades to build does not mean it takes decades to dismantle. The point here is that this decadally constructed superstructure is now redundant. I’d like to see an example of somtehing you even want years to sort out. As I said above, the status of EU citizens, and replacing EU funding, these things need to occur rapidly, so people know what’s happening.

    What is it we should be waiting for “years” to finalise? The EU rulebook still exists; our exporters will follow it as they do any other market’s regulations. The tariff question is simple; none at all. Joint projects will need their funding status sorted out very rapidly.

    What is it we’re waiting for?

  90. Ian B,

    “I’m sticking to my guns on this; just as Cameron was the wrong man at one opportunity (the end of New Labour), May is the wrong woman at this opportunity and I think Leadsom likely was the right one. But we’ll never know.”

    She’s the woman who came up with the term “the nasty party”, the ultimate surrender of the Conservative Party to the establishment, rather than defending what they had achieved for decades.

    I don’t think Leadsom had the experience. I’d have preferred Gove – I think he’d have really torn up government.

    Not sure what to do now. I think UKIP is going to implode. Will there be a new party that emerges of the harder right, or do I join the Tories to try and change them.

  91. Anon, the Tories are what they are, at an institutional level: a group of people dedicated to winning elections.And they’re good at it. It’s that simple. You can point to individuals and see hope, but they’ve all failed and will all fail.

    The Tories are bed-blockers against the emergence of a genuine English party of small government, because they continue to persuade significant numbers of people that they are the opposite of that or, at least, the best hope of the opposite of that. But they’re just a group of people who like winning elections and possess the discipline to achieve that goal.

    However long it takes, the Tories must be destroyed, electorally.

  92. @BraveFart

    “So, he’s basically a fucking cunt”

    Sounds like exactly the sort of chap we want to send in to bat against Jerry.

    This was also Gove’s appeal. He may be a bastard but he’s our bastard, and if he’ll do that to Boris, imagine what he’ll do to Jerry.

  93. @Ian B

    “It will have been made clear over the weekend that Team Leadsom were in a hopeless position; the grandees and May Team had already got the media in their pockets, so it would be nine weeks of mud slinging in only one direction and the press full of May puff pieces.”

    It seems blindingly obvious that what happened was she was stitched up in the interview and then Team May told her over the weekend that if she didn’t like that imagine what the next two months are going to be like.

    The problem is she should never have let herself get stitched up and it shows she couldn’t have done the job.

    Though I do think the Black Ops team took the pad quite badly when, having just committed their black op to make their opponent look like a bitch, they then demanded she sign up to a clean campaign pledge.

  94. “We should by the way always remember that the sole purpose of the Conservative Party is to prevent conservative voters having a party of government to vote for”

    Vote UKIP at every opportuity

  95. “How reminiscent of the way socialists delude themselves: if only the press were not so biased, the electorate would have seen the truth of what we were saying!”

    Try listening to LBC from today, particularly that cun1 James O’Brien. Then come back and tell me what you think.

    “When a small ‘selectorate’ are choosing a PM, the press has a duty to interrogate the candidates and their weaknesses on behalf of the wider electorate. Leadsom was interrogated and found wanting – deeply wanting”

    Leadsom was found to be inexperienced. I would rather take the chance than have the obvious establishment plant. This is such an engineered result that it should make you furious. That it does not is worrying.

  96. Bloke in North Dorset

    “… how on earth, then, did we join, painlessly and overnight in 1973? What happened to the previous 900 years’ development?”

    It certainly wasn’t painless. The debate was as acrimonious then as it is now, the difference being then it was Labour that was split, hence the 1975 referendum.

  97. Are you seriously proposing that we can exit that “overnight” without seriously damaging ourselves?

    Possibly: the Eastern Bloc walked away from the Soviet Union, and they were embedded more deeply in their puppet states as the EU is in theirs.

  98. It’s not only possible, it’s the proper way to exit. Anyone not comfortable with that shouldn’t be anywhere near the management of Brexit.

  99. IanB

    “At some point you get angry, lose your shit,”

    Angry? No, I find you a hilarious buffoon.

    “and start accusing me of being irrational and having no evidence. ”

    Er…you ignore evidence and logic when you are emotionally committed to a position – vide passim. As you said:

    “It’s just an opinion. But I’m sticking by it, rather than back-pedaling like other people….I’m sticking to my guns on this…I’m not going to do all this “oh, now I think about it I’ve changed my mind” crap.”

  100. “you ignore evidence and logic”

    Did you have a listen to James O’Brien on LBC? He had the Times journo who interviewed Leadsom on. Did you detect any bias?

  101. Sometimes I change my opinion. Sometimes I stick to my opinion. I change it when I see good reason to do so, but in this case I do not. I think my previous assessment remains valid. As such I’m not going to declare I’ve changed my mind just because (a) other people have changed theirs and (b) my preferred candidate dropped out.

    You on the other hand are the kind of pompous prat who thinks their own opinion is the same as “evidence and logic”. Which is why you never have any actual evidence and logic to offer.

    I think it’s particularly sad that you judge political validity on who can run the most underhanded and despicable smear campaign. If you don’t expect decency in high office, you don’t get it. And thus, the mess the country is in.

  102. There’s some good debate here, but the abuse-slinging between certain commentators constantly derails threads. Save your fighting for when you meet in person.

  103. IanB

    Which is why you never have any actual evidence and logic to offer.

    Most of my evidence against Leadsom is above at 0830 on 11/07. At 1455, BIND quoted Christopher Snowden’s evidence that Leadsom was even more authoritarian than May. But you still want to believe Leadsom would have been a “great prime minister”. Which shows you are impervious to logic and evidence.

    you judge political validity on who can run the most underhanded and despicable smear campaign

    I am not sure the Murphy-esque phrase “political validity” has any meaning, but you seem to be back with your usual conspiracy theory approach. Leadsom self-destructed under the pressure of press scrutiny because she is weak and naïve. May won because she was the better candidate. There was no “underhanded and despicable smear campaign” – apart, perhaps, from Leadsom’s ill-judged remarks about May’s childlessness – because briefing the press on your opponent’s genuine weaknesses is not a smear campaign (and both sides did it). Politics is a rough trade.

  104. “There was no “underhanded and despicable smear campaign” – apart, perhaps, from Leadsom’s ill-judged remarks about May’s childlessness – because briefing the press on your opponent’s genuine weaknesses is not a smear campaign (and both sides did it). Politics is a rough trade.”

    No that’s tripe Theo. The press went for Leadsom and fawned over “The Barreness” (kudos IanB for that one).

    It turns out you were correct about her weakness of nature. Had she any balls she would have emulated Trump’s “Shitlord” demeanour. She would likely have won–just as with Brexit.

    Before you congratulate yourself too much –you are wrong about May in every particular. She is sell-out candidate now ensconced with the Remain scum, who supported her for just that reason. She will have to make Brexit noises but it will be a sell-out.

    Now if Tory Central and Dumbing St start to get 10 million letters a week from Brexit fans promising to ride down vengeance on BluLabour if they even try to shaft us–well that might work. I’ve written 3 letters ready to go already.
    Even the Cabbage-Hag knows fear.-esp if every letter contains a promise that her nice retirement won’t be so nice once her pension is confiscated.

  105. I don’t think she will read them Ecks. Far better just to vote them all out at the next election and let UKIP get on with the job.

  106. Disagree with IanB about Leadsom being a potentially great PM. But I did hold that same opinion right up until the moment she apologized for the “motherhood” comment. At that point it was obvious she was out of her depth.

    First, she should never have apoligized for basically saying what she thought. She should have stood her ground and found a polite way to tell the politically correct press and the May supporting MPs to fuck off and die in a gutter. In that respect she could have done with a dash of Mr Ecks, to use her own silly cooking metaphor.

    Second, having stood as a candidate in the first place and even making the final two to be put to Tory members, she should have anticipated the dirty tricks and have already resolved herself to carrying her candidacy through to the members vote, irrespective of what the press or fellow MPs might have said or done. To withdraw after having made it to the final two was a disgrace.

    Third, the fact that she withdrew indicates that she didn’t understand what she was up against. You can’t have someone supposedly leading a “revolution” against politically correct fascism who doesn’t understand that that is what she is up against.

    Theo was right about Leadsom being unsuitable on account of being a “lightweight”.

    IanB is almost certainly right about the sort of “communications” that would have been put to Leadsom when she went up against May. There is no way the press would have given Leadsom a fair crack, but she absolutely should have carried on regardless of their conniving bullshit, having got as far as she did.

  107. Tomsmith: What you say is true. But millions of letters will put fear and anticipation of ruin on the remainer MP trash NOW.

    It won’t affect May. I would not be surprised if she drops out after none-too-long because she does not look well. Plus she could brass it out as HS and vanish for a while when the pressure grew–as in the Referendum Campaign. As PM she has no where to go and no way to avoid the pressure.

    She would have her name in the history books as once PM of the UK and the PM’s pension etc. I don’t think she will reach the 2020 election as PM–or perhaps even as a living being. Assuming she is one.

  108. “First, she should never have apoligized for basically saying what she thought. She should have stood her ground and found a polite way to tell the politically correct press and the May supporting MPs to fuck off and die in a gutter. In that respect she could have done with a dash of Mr Ecks, to use her own silly cooking metaphor.

    Second, having stood as a candidate in the first place and even making the final two to be put to Tory members, she should have anticipated the dirty tricks and have already resolved herself to carrying her candidacy through to the members vote, irrespective of what the press or fellow MPs might have said or done. To withdraw after having made it to the final two was a disgrace.

    Third, the fact that she withdrew indicates that she didn’t understand what she was up against. You can’t have someone supposedly leading a “revolution” against politically correct fascism who doesn’t understand that that is what she is up against. ”

    This is correct; she handled it very badly and looked like a total amateur. It doesn’t matter what they were threatening her with privately- having put herself there (instead of Gove FFS), she had an obligation to carry it through. I would love to ask her what on earth she was thinking.

    But it is a disgrace for the Conservative party to cheat their way out of a leadership election. It looks awful, it causes intense anger, and it is such obvious gerrymandering that it should make anyone, even remain supporters, furious, provided they have a shred of integrity. They are required to give a choice to the members, and they avoided it. Shameful.

  109. Dear Cunts,

    You can bet your bollocks to a barn dance you’re not backin’ out.

    Sincerely,

    Bricktop

  110. Ecksy

    “The press went for Leadsom”

    They did, savagely; because the media sharks sensed blood in the water. But there wasn’t a smear campaign against Leadsom. She self-destructed under pressure that a future PM should be able to cope with.

    What I dislike about her and her 84 MP backers is that they kept the Gover out of the final run-off. What motivated Bernard Jenkin and John Redwood? What made them so blind to Leadsom’s obvious failings?

    As to May, I dislike her deeply. Gove was my man. You rightly say brexiteers need to keep the pressure on May and her government. And, if we do, I think May’s government should deliver brexit. If it’s a half-way house, another government could make the separation deeper. Which is why I hope UKIP survives Farage’s departure (though I’m pessimistic), because they will provide the electoral pressure to keep brexit on course.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *