Boris Johnson

[gcreptile 10,234]

He's not gone yet, he will need to be escorted out. And the locks need to be changed

[markb4 795]

Can we get Jim Hacker now?

 

 

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,688]

Andrea Jenkyns having a normal one

 

 

[The Old Crem 3,174]

The big risk for the Tories picking someone not well known is how the public react to an unknown name being pm. May and Johnson were both very well known before they became PM.

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

8 minutes ago, The Old Crem said:

The big risk for the Tories picking someone not well known is how the public react to an unknown name being pm. May and Johnson were both very well known before they became PM.

 

Problem they've got is, pretty much everyone we know, we hate.

[maryportfuncity 10,017]

1 hour ago, The Old Crem said:

The big risk for the Tories picking someone not well known is how the public react to an unknown name being pm. May and Johnson were both very well known before they became PM.

 

 

Hmm, Major rose quickly so he wasn't that well known when he replaced Thatcher but went on to win an election against expectations. Cameron was an alternative to aged big beasts and a couple of chancers who'd failed to deliver as leader - heard it said this morning he got the job because less people disliked him than the other candidates. 

[Bibliogryphon 8,660]

10 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

 

 

Hmm, Major rose quickly so he wasn't that well known when he replaced Thatcher but went on to win an election against expectations. Cameron was an alternative to aged big beasts and a couple of chancers who'd failed to deliver as leader - heard it said this morning he got the job because less people disliked him than the other candidates. 

 

Iain Duncan-Smith was a relative no-one but at the time the ABC strategy was applied

[The Old Crem 3,174]

14 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

 

 

Hmm, Major rose quickly so he wasn't that well known when he replaced Thatcher but went on to win an election against expectations. Cameron was an alternative to aged big beasts and a couple of chancers who'd failed to deliver as leader - heard it said this morning he got the job because less people disliked him than the other candidates. 

He had been chancellor for a year so still had a fair bit of name recognition surely. How many people know who Tugendhat or Braverman are?

[Sean 5,998]

Chris Pincher should run.He would take a very hands on approach and form intimate connections with the electorate.

[Sean 5,998]

3 hours ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

Cleverly to Education ffs 

 

 

 

James Stupidly

[Summer in Transylvania 1,618]

Boris has quit. 

[maryportfuncity 10,017]

Major now amongst those suggesting he goes immediately "for the good of the country"

 

History will remember him for some of the wrong reasons

[Joey Russ 7,119]

7 minutes ago, Summer in Transylvania said:

Boris has quit. 

No, really? I never would’ve guessed…

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

YouGov snap poll of 700 Tory party members sees Wallace closely ahead of Mordant and None of the Above in the stakes.

 

 

[Bibliogryphon 8,660]

I think it will be a pretty crowded field initially but as we go through it would be interesting to see the order in which they are eliminated and who they throw their support behind once they go

 

Only two names go to the party membership but it will be interesting to see which ones they are

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

2 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

I think it will be a pretty crowded field initially but as we go through it would be interesting to see the order in which they are eliminated and who they throw their support behind once they go

 

Only two names go to the party membership but it will be interesting to see which ones they are

 

On today's emergency Newscast, Chris Mason suggested that the murmurings are the 1922 Committee could set a high threshold for entry to the contest, say 20 nominations, to reduce the contenders quickly. Think it's inevitable it will have to go to the members, I can't see them coalescing around a single candidate any time soon, and given the bloodletting involved this week, and what's a stake for the constituency parties, they'll demand a say in who takes over. But the MPs decide their choices, which could be crucial.

[msc 17,762]

4 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

On today's emergency Newscast, Chris Mason suggested that the murmurings are the 1922 Committee could set a high threshold for entry to the contest, say 20 nominations, to reduce the contenders quickly. Think it's inevitable it will have to go to the members, I can't see them coalescing around a single candidate any time soon, and given the bloodletting involved this week, and what's a stake for the constituency parties, they'll demand a say in who takes over. But the MPs decide their choices, which could be crucial.

 

350 odd MPs divided by 20 could still be up to 15 or so candidates passing that threshold. It's going to be messy - too many people this is likely their last shot at being PM.

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,688]

If you did it by preferential transferable voting you'd whittle it down quickly enough. Least amout of votes after each round of counting drops out and their votes distrubuted to whoever until there's 2 left

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

2 minutes ago, msc said:

350 odd MPs divided by 20 could still be up to 15 or so candidates passing that threshold. It's going to be messy - too many people this is likely their last shot at being PM.

 

They won't neatly divide between every contender, though. I suspect no more than 10 contenders being able to gain the numbers, and they're suggesting 2 ballots a day to reduce the field. But it's still going to take the summer to decide between the final two.

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

4 minutes ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

If you did it by preferential transferable voting you'd whittle it down quickly enough. Least amout of votes after each round drops and their votes distrubuted to whoever until there's 2 left

 

They don't do it like that though. Thresholds for each round and if all pass the threshold then the lowest is ejected, repeat until 2 left. Contenders can also withdraw at any point, whether due to knowing the numbers don't add up, or due to a deal with a better contender.

[msc 17,762]

5 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

They won't neatly divide between every contender, though. I suspect no more than 10 contenders being able to gain the numbers, and they're suggesting 2 ballots a day to reduce the field. But it's still going to take the summer to decide between the final two.

 

I know they wont, but 3 candidates is enough for a party fight as history shows. We have around 10 announced already, not including some likely big hitters. I expect at least 8 names in the first round ballot, and a lot of inter-Tory fighting.

[RoverAndOut 3,473]

3 minutes ago, msc said:

I know they wont, but 3 candidates is enough for a party fight as history shows. We have around 10 announced already, not including some likely big hitters. I expect at least 8 names in the first round ballot, and a lot of inter-Tory fighting.

 

55 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

Well you can immediately remove Gove and Raab from the above list, as they've suggested they're not running. You can potentially add Shapps and definitely add Bravermann, maybe Steve Baker too. Not a chance Barclay or Patel get enough votes.

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,688]

Patel is also having too much "fun" at the Home Office. I'd say she's betting she won't be moved anywhere by the next PM which is probably shrewed thinking  as unless she's put somewhere like the Treasury or FCO  anywhere else would be seen a demotion and it's possible she wouldn't accept which would mean the new PM having her on the backbenches

[The Old Crem 3,174]

4 minutes ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

Patel is also having too much "fun" at the Home Office. I'd say she's betting she won't be moved anywhere by the next PM which is probably shrewed thinking  as unless she's put somewhere like the Treasury or FCO  anywhere else would be seen a demotion and it's possible she wouldn't accept which would mean the new PM having her on the backbenches

Her polling figures with the public are awful. A majority of people think she would be a bad pm including those who said don’t know. A new PM would be bonkers to promote her to chancellor. 

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,132]

12 minutes ago, The Old Crem said:

Her polling figures with the public are awful. A majority of people think she would be a bad pm including those who said don’t know. A new PM would be bonkers to promote her to chancellor. 

You wouldn't have her licking the fecal crusts out of a tramps ring piece so the chances of her having a top job, any job, in the cabinet under the new PM is remote.