Boris will not stand.
Five are currently in the race:
Stephen Crabb
Liam Fox
Michael Gove
Andrea Leadsom
Theresa May
UK PM: Leadership Race
Boris will not stand.
Five are currently in the race:
Stephen Crabb
Liam Fox
Michael Gove
Andrea Leadsom
Theresa May
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
So current word is that Boris went cool on Brexit, and won't stand on that platform.
Is he playing the long game?
Call me ignorant, but I know neither, but cool names. Leadsom sounds the most promising.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
The article he wrote in the Daily Telegraph wasn't sufficiently xenophobic for the Brexit crowd, so they've ditched him and put Gove up instead.
Or... Gove asked for a job and didn't get one and entered the race himself. Or... God knows what's going on at this point. I guess a few years down the line there'll be dozens of books written about this period of British history by people who were involved it, so we'll have to wait till then to get the real picture.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Will working class conservatives be okay with voting for a Conservative party led by a woman, esp. one that wanted to stay in the EU and that can be expected to push for a deal that will allow Polish vermin to enter the UK and maybe even let Pakis stay? I dunno. I think Fox, Crabb and Gove, in that order.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Working class conservatives won't get a vote unless the next leader calls a snap election, which they probably won't.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Ah okay I'd forgotten that the next election is a long way away unless RB gets his wish.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Boris out? Well, that confirms pretty much what we already suspected about him doesn't it?
Congratulations America
I think you can safely say that May isn't exactly fond of the EU, but in her job saw some of the upsides and most of all thought Remain would win so by her luke-warm support she could keep her job out of the line of fire. I think she should be ok-ish with the hardcore europhobes.
Congratulations America
According to the Guardian, Boris's decision to stand down is largely as a result of Gove's decision to stand.
Michael Gove’s sensational entry to the Tory leadership race has electrified a contest that had hitherto been proceeding predictably enough towards a final round between Theresa May and Boris Johnson. The justice secretary’s statement tore up the script and, extraordinarily, persuaded the former London mayor not to run.
Gove’s announcement is remarkable in three primary respects. First, that it exists at all. As he himself concedes: “I have repeatedly said that I do not want to be prime minister.” In interview after interview, Gove has insisted that he lacks the stamina, temperament and other qualities he admires in David Cameron.
Instead, he has preferred to be seen as an intellectual lieutenant, a brilliant consigliere, rather than a leader-in-waiting. So this is a significant change of heart – or, perhaps, an admission of an ambition long-nursed in private that is only now bursting out into public.
Second, Gove is positioning himself explicitly as the “change” candidate. Not a word of praise for Cameron – unusual for Gove – but instead a call for “a bold break with the past”. To this extent, the new challenger is acknowledging that last week’s vote was, as much as anything, an expression of dissatisfaction with the status quo, and a call for change in a sense much broader than exit from the EU.
But what sort of change? Like Cameron’s former aide Steve Hilton, Gove is a radical reformer who believes that institutions and services are improved only by constant combat with the forces of inertia – the “Blob”, as he called his bureaucratic foes when he was education secretary. His schools reforms were predictably disliked by teachers, and Gove’s consequent unpopularity scared Cameron into moving him to the role of chief whip – a role that made poor use of his many talents.
Third, and most unexpectedly, he declares explicitly that he is entering the race because: “Boris cannot provide the leadership or build the team for the task ahead.” During the referendum campaign, it had become commonplace to speak of the “Johnson-Gove axis”, and to assume that the formidable duo had forged a bond that might sweep them to No 10 and control of the government.
Not so, it would appear. Yesterday’s leaked email from Gove’s wife, the journalist Sarah Vine, hinted that all was not well in Borisland. In the message, she reminded her husband that his presence on the ticket was intended to reassure press barons who did not warm to Johnson. In return, she said, Boris must give “SPECIFIC assurances” to Gove. One surmises that those assurances were not forthcoming – or that yesterday’s “crucial meetings”, referred to in the email, yielded additional problems.
For Johnson, to be abandoned by the guarantor of his candidacy and his most exalted supporter – and at this particular stage – is the worst setback in his political career. He faced direct competition with a man who, so to speak, knows where all the ballots are buried.
In the end, it was enough to drive him from the field. Johnson had taken a gamble in backing the leave campaign, and gave it zest and panache. But he also made Vote Leave look like a leadership campaign in waiting – too much so, perhaps. As effective as Johnson’s campaigning was, it eroded trust in his motives and posed a series of questions about the seriousness of his commitment to the Brexit cause.
Consider, too, that Gove’s popularity with the Tory membership has soared during the referendum campaign. He is a seasoned cabinet minister, a brilliant orator, and a Conservative moderniser untainted by the “metropolitan” label. He was initially regarded as George Osborne’s right-hand man, latterly as Johnson’s. But, like Margaret Thatcher emerging from Keith Joseph’s shadow, he is now top of his own ticket. Thatcher, of course, went on to win the Tory leadership and become prime minister. Is history about to repeat itself?
I'm a member and have a vote.
I'd quite happily vote for Gove. Always respected him, even when he was just a Times columnist. Done great work in education and justice and is a modern Cameroon.
Leadsom is a dark horse, I don't know much about her but she was unrelentingly kind and positive during the recent campaign, not nasty at all. Even if she did say "as a mother ..." to death every question during the debates.
May on a good day is good but I found her party conference speech last year uncharacteristically nasty and I lost respect for her there. Not forgiven her for that.
Crabb on a good day is good too but he's too religious for my taste. Voted against gay marriage.
Fox can foxtrot oscar. Hopefully he doesn't even reach the ballot but if he does then my vote is ABF.
You are betraying your own gross ignorance here.
Conservatives elected a woman 41 years ago, won three General Elections led by a woman and generally consider a woman to be the most totemic leader since WWII.
You seem too want to start a meme of Poles = vermin, you did it last night in another thread and I rolled my eyes and ignored you then. Nobody has said that or thinks that.
This appeal to sexism and xenophobia says more about your own prejudices than anyone else. Take the mote out of your own eye.
Yes, I am well aware there once was a woman called Thatcher. What's your point? Are all conservatives the same? Are today's working-class conservatives the same as the ones back then? Is the makeup of the Conservative party the same as it was then?
Roflmao. You seem to want to ignore reality.You seem too want to start a meme of Poles = vermin, you did it last night in another thread and I rolled my eyes and ignored you then. Nobody has said that or thinks that.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
To be fair, I guess the question might be moot if working class Tories are an endangered species and I guess many of the people calling for pest-control are closer to Labour.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The BBC's coverage is spot on, as usual.
There's a man goin' 'round, takin' names
And he decides who to free and who to blame
Surprising to see Rand support a man most responsible for creating a fact-free zone in the UK. Who needs to listen to those smelly Nazi-like experts when governing anyway?
Hope is the denial of reality
o ho ho
This sort of incisive commentary is why the Tories required the BBC to put that content behind a paywall.
There's a man goin' 'round, takin' names
And he decides who to free and who to blame
Great work? He really didn't do a very good job as Education Secretary. My sisters, both on the ground in the teaching profession, thought he was terrible and that it was a godsend when he was moved on to be Chief Whip.
Far more interested in engaging newspapers than the profession itself. Full of ideas, which made the headlines, when really it was patience and the ability to listen that was needed; two traits in which he seems to be lacking.
And the reforms he brought about led to nothing but extra paperwork for teachers, taking them away from what they should be doing; teaching.
His programme of Free Schools has had a modicum of measured success however.
Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, summed up his time in office pretty well:
David Cameron has, belatedly, realised that Michael Gove's ideological drive is no substitute for measured, pragmatic reform of the education system.
Time after time he has chased newspaper headlines rather than engage with teachers.
The dismantling of the structures which support schools, the antagonism which he displayed to the teaching profession and the increasing evidence of chaos in the bodies he established - in particular the Education Funding Agency - has led Cameron to one conclusion - Gove is more of a liability than an asset.
Or Russell Hobby, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers:
Michael Gove had a radical and sincere vision for transforming education but he largely failed to bring the profession with him.
His diagnosis was frequently astute, but his prescriptions were hard to swallow.
Yes, Education Secretary is recognised as a tough job, and criticism will be leveled at you no matter what you do, but to say he did great work is wide of the mark. Very wide.
The impression I got of Gove from his time as secretary of education was that he was an ideologue and small c conservative who was more interested in bringing back a more old-fashioned style of education - with a lot of tests and memorization of dates and so on - because his ideology told him that was the best way to education children rather than listening to what professionals and the evidence had to say about the matter.
Sound familiar?
His time as a secretary of state for justice was more productive, he rolled back a few of the more despicable and insane decisions of Chris Graying. He's absolutely not PM material though, as he himself had repeated stated until now. The general consensus is that the only reason he threw his hat into the ring was to stop Boris Johnson, so I suppose the country can thank him for at least that.
Last edited by Steely Glint; 06-30-2016 at 06:40 PM.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Gove on the idea of running for PM:
The time when he was ‘constitutionally incapable’
“No, I’m constitutionally incapable of it. There’s a special extra quality you need that is indefinable, and I know I don’t have it. There’s an equanimity, an impermeability and a courage that you need. There are some things in life you know it’s better not to try.”
March 2012
The time when he offered to ‘sign in blood’
“There are so many different ways in which he [a prime ministerial candidate] can deny it. And everyone tries to look at those denials and say was he leaving open the door, or was she trying to suggest she might wriggle out of it at some point… I don’t know what I can do in a way but if anyone wants me to sign a piece of parchment in my own blood saying I don’t want to be prime minister, then I’m perfectly happy to do that.”
August 2012
The time when he ‘wasn’t equipped’
“There are lots of other folk, including in the cabinet, who could easily be prime minister. I’m not one of them. I could not be prime minister. I’m not equipped to be prime minister. I don’t want to be prime minister.”
October 2012
The time when he didn’t have the stamina
“I don’t have what it takes... I have seen David close up on a variety of occasions: he just has an equanimity and a stamina, a sense of calm, good judgment... The pressure of the job is phenomenal and it takes a toll on you and your family and I don’t think I could do that.”
March 2014
The general consensus is that the only reason he threw his hat into the ring was to stop Boris Johnson, so I suppose the country can thank him for that at least that.
~
TM 4 PM
So he's really in it to get Theresa in power ?
Congratulations America
He's on an 'Anyone But Boris' kamikaze run.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Bizarre. How can opinion be so divided as to the question of whether or not he did a good job managing the UK's education system? One side describes a brilliant visionary, the other describes the Ben Carson of education. Which portrait is the most accurate?
I'm not sure if this is the kind of man who should be leading a nation:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06...hael-gove-met/
The style of analysis is familiar but also disconcerting. This is a man with a powerful personal RDF and I feel he is better suited to leading PR-campaigns than a nation full of those guys that tore up Marseilles even though leaders may need to be visionaries to some extent.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
No, I think today's Conservative Party Members will be more enlightened not less than those of two generations ago. Other than your prejudices have you got any reason to believe otherwise?
I don't see a single one of those said by a Conservative Party Member. Perhaps you could name a couple of Conservative Party Members, or provide a link to a story about them, who have said this?
Hopefully the next Prime Minister be confident enough to determine when they've had enough of so-called experts and ignore them as required, there is many a case study as to when the "experts" were wrong. That's why it is the job of leaders to lead and take responsibility at the end of the day.
A lot of reformers aren't as liked by those within the profession. Gove was reforming for the benefits of pupils first and parents second, while many education secretaries look at teachers first. I'm not suggesting that your sisters don't put pupils first, there are a number of teachers in my family too.
This may surprise you but I wholeheartedly disagree with this. I think Gove had put in his reforms and was moved on as he was antagonising those who weren't necessarily keen on the reforms but, and this is important, even without Gove there the reforms have remained. The Free Schools program and other reforms he put in place have survived and accelerated even without him. That is a good legacy for a reformer.Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, summed up his time in office pretty well:
David Cameron has, belatedly, realised that Michael Gove's ideological drive is no substitute for measured, pragmatic reform of the education system.
Time after time he has chased newspaper headlines rather than engage with teachers.
The dismantling of the structures which support schools, the antagonism which he displayed to the teaching profession and the increasing evidence of chaos in the bodies he established - in particular the Education Funding Agency - has led Cameron to one conclusion - Gove is more of a liability than an asset.
Then why are his reforms still there?Yes, Education Secretary is recognised as a tough job, and criticism will be leveled at you no matter what you do, but to say he did great work is wide of the mark. Very wide.
I don't think this is a bad legacy: http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/03/t...-michael-gove/
Yes Rand, the experts that disagree with you are wrong and should be ignored; the experts that agree with you are correct and their advice should be heeded.
Hope is the denial of reality
Exactly what everyone does yes.
No, just politicians and the dishonest.
Hope is the denial of reality
No everyone cherrypicks what suits their agenda, even if subconciously.
How do you propose to deal with expert groupthink regularly being wrong? Should we abolish democracy for technocracy?
It takes a very honest person to stand up and say "this is what I believe is right despite" what so-called experts are saying.
Which is why you've been doing the exact same thing as Rand with the reverse sets of experts?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote