Got to admire the chutzpah of the likes of the Daily Getsworse and the Daily Fail.
Apparently, another MP crossing the floor to leave the Tories and join the Labour Party is proof of splits in the Labour Party.
You couldn't make it up. Either these papers are incredibly stupid. Or they believe their readers are the sort of people that would believe you if you told them the word "gullible" wasn't in the Dictionary.
Got to admire the chutzpah of the likes of the Daily Getsworse and the Daily Fail.
Apparently, another MP crossing the floor to leave the Tories and join the Labour Party is proof of splits in the Labour Party.
You couldn't make it up. Either these papers are incredibly stupid. Or they believe their readers are the sort of people that would believe you if you told them the word "gullible" wasn't in the Dictionary.
Not necessarily a great addition.
Depends on your viewpoint. I'm not a fan.
But the MP for Dover, central to the "small boats" stuff, saying it is not working is worth a lot, politically. And she is not standing at the next election.
Here's a suggestion for Corbyn and Abbott and their fans. Say they will promise not to stand at the next Election. And, in return, have the whip restored.
Got to admire the chutzpah of the likes of the Daily Getsworse and the Daily Fail.
Apparently, another MP crossing the floor to leave the Tories and join the Labour Party is proof of splits in the Labour Party.
You couldn't make it up. Either these papers are incredibly stupid. Or they believe their readers are the sort of people that would believe you if you told them the word "gullible" wasn't in the Dictionary.
Not necessarily a great addition.
Depends on your viewpoint. I'm not a fan.
But the MP for Dover, central to the "small boats" stuff, saying it is not working is worth a lot, politically. And she is not standing at the next election.
Here's a suggestion for Corbyn and Abbott and their fans. Say they will promise not to stand at the next Election. And, in return, have the whip restored.
Because it has worked for Elphicke.
Its all a bit pointless if she is not standing. I am not a fan either. May do Labour more harm than good. I am not a fan of the other two either.
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
I thought that the selection process was similar for both parties. I thought that they have a national committee that interviews candidates. Those that are successful are then placed on a list, that the local party choose their candidate from. So my point was that how could the same people choose Starmer, and Corbyn. Or Braverman, and say Dominic Grieve.
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
I thought that the selection process was similar for both parties. I thought that they have a national committee that interviews candidates. Those that are successful are then placed on a list, that the local party choose their candidate from. So my point was that how could the same people choose Starmer, and Corbyn. Or Braverman, and say Dominic Grieve.
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
I thought that the selection process was similar for both parties. I thought that they have a national committee that interviews candidates. Those that are successful are then placed on a list, that the local party choose their candidate from. So my point was that how could the same people choose Starmer, and Corbyn. Or Braverman, and say Dominic Grieve.
Labour have already selected their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Dover.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
I think that both parties have a selection problem when it comes to MPs. Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed. Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected. A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected. Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
I would hope so.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
I thought that the selection process was similar for both parties. I thought that they have a national committee that interviews candidates. Those that are successful are then placed on a list, that the local party choose their candidate from. So my point was that how could the same people choose Starmer, and Corbyn. Or Braverman, and say Dominic Grieve.
You seem to be confusing "PM" with "MP"...
1. Applications To apply to stand as a Conservative MP, prospective candidates must first join the national ‘approved list’. Prospective candidates must complete an application form and attend a parliamentary assessment board (PAB) – an event to test the skills and attributes the party want from their candidates. Due diligence checks are also carried out at this stage. Candidates who make it onto the approved list are then able to apply to individual constituencies.
In theory, the Parliamentary MPs narrow the field down to 2, and then the Party Members (average age about 106) decide.
The Party Members didn't get to decide in 2 of the last 4 elections. As secret deals were done, so that only 1 person in the whole country wanted to run it. May and Sunak. Rather than risk letting the Members have a say. Particularly, they didn't want to risk asking the Members whether they preferred Sunak or Johnson.
The 2 where the Members decided? They chose Johnson over Hunt. And Truss over Sunak. In the last one of those, it was an open secret that whoever came 2nd in the MP ballot (Truss or Mordaunt) would win.
That is the system whereby the last 4 PMs have been "elected"
In theory, the Parliamentary MPs narrow the field down to 2, and then the Party Members (average age about 106) decide.
The Party Members didn't get to decide in 2 of the last 4 elections. As secret deals were done, so that only 1 person in the whole country wanted to run it. May and Sunak. Rather than risk letting the Members have a say. Particularly, they didn't want to risk asking the Members whether they preferred Sunak or Johnson.
The 2 where the Members decided? They chose Johnson over Hunt. And Truss over Sunak. In the last one of those, it was an open secret that whoever came 2nd in the MP ballot (Truss or Mordaunt) would win.
That is the system whereby the last 4 PMs have been "elected"
In theory, the Parliamentary MPs narrow the field down to 2, and then the Party Members (average age about 106) decide.
The Party Members didn't get to decide in 2 of the last 4 elections. As secret deals were done, so that only 1 person in the whole country wanted to run it. May and Sunak. Rather than risk letting the Members have a say. Particularly, they didn't want to risk asking the Members whether they preferred Sunak or Johnson.
The 2 where the Members decided? They chose Johnson over Hunt. And Truss over Sunak. In the last one of those, it was an open secret that whoever came 2nd in the MP ballot (Truss or Mordaunt) would win.
That is the system whereby the last 4 PMs have been "elected"
I was talking about the selection of MPs.
Whereas I, and at 1 point you, were talking about PMs.
There are always going to be times when you get a strange MP. As I understand it, the choice for Conservative Candidate for West Suffolk boiled down to a choice of 2 at one stage:-Matt Hancock or Natalie Elphicke
In theory, the Parliamentary MPs narrow the field down to 2, and then the Party Members (average age about 106) decide.
The Party Members didn't get to decide in 2 of the last 4 elections. As secret deals were done, so that only 1 person in the whole country wanted to run it. May and Sunak. Rather than risk letting the Members have a say. Particularly, they didn't want to risk asking the Members whether they preferred Sunak or Johnson.
The 2 where the Members decided? They chose Johnson over Hunt. And Truss over Sunak. In the last one of those, it was an open secret that whoever came 2nd in the MP ballot (Truss or Mordaunt) would win.
That is the system whereby the last 4 PMs have been "elected"
I was talking about the selection of MPs.
Whereas I, and at 1 point you, were talking about PMs.
There are always going to be times when you get a strange MP. As I understand it, the choice for Conservative Candidate for West Suffolk boiled down to a choice of 2 at one stage:-Matt Hancock or Natalie Elphicke
Tough call
My point is that the local party have to choose their candidate from the national list. The national list is produced by the same people. And they effectively choose every candidate.
There is probably less excuse than ever before, for choosing a duff candidate. There is probably more information available on each candidate than ever before. Social media etc. Yet the Labour Party still managed it at Rochdale. No excuse, that was just lazy.
My original question still stands. How can the same people choose candidate with such diverse views.
From people hiding their views until elected. To people doing the choosing having similar diverse views.
Because active members of political parties tend to be more diverse than your typical MP.
And, as a nation, we do tend to be very judgmental. I don't think (for example) that a Tweet from 10 years ago when someone was both rather young and rather drunk should be forever used as a stick to beat someone with. It should be the basis for searching questions-not prejudgment.
We will always have some MPs with diverse views. Nothing wrong with that. Thousands of people share the views of a Corbyn or a Braverman. Just because I don't doesn't make them wrong. Likewise, it is mean to castigate the Workers Party (or even the Greens) for failing to vet properly, when they don't have the resources.
You set high standards for Public life. Sadly, unrealistically high.
To people doing the choosing having similar diverse views.
Change them?
Because active members of political parties tend to be more diverse than your typical MP.
But the committees are chosen.
And, as a nation, we do tend to be very judgmental. I don't think (for example) that a Tweet from 10 years ago when someone was both rather young and rather drunk should be forever used as a stick to beat someone with. It should be the basis for searching questions-not prejudgment.
I agree. I am not saying they should be unfair. We shouldnt judge someone by the odd tweet.
We will always have some MPs with diverse views. Nothing wrong with that. Thousands of people share the views of a Corbyn or a Braverman. Just because I don't doesn't make them wrong. Likewise, it is mean to castigate the Workers Party (or even the Greens) for failing to vet properly, when they don't have the resources.
Is this down to not having the resources, or not using sufficient resources? I am more concerned about the major 2, that do have the resources.
You set high standards for Public life. Sadly, unrealistically high.
I am not setting any standards. What I am saying is that those that run the major 2 political parties, should take a more joined up view. Assuming they know what it takes to win an election, then they should plan their strategy better. I dont think that we could have elected a far right, or far left party during my lifetime, or are likely to anytime soon. If either of them were chasing my vote, it would be impossible with the likes of Corbyn, or Braverman as their leader. Or even with the likes of them in the majority in their Cabinet. Neither of them could play a prominent role, or become leaders, if they were not selected in the first place.
Quote of the day regarding Labour accepting Tory MPs:-
Labour’s shadow health secretary Wes Streeting has told the Independent he has spoken to Conservatives contemplating defection because of the “division and incompetence” of Mr Sunak’s government.
He insisted that Labour would not take just any Tory MP, adding: "If Liz Truss were to want to cross the floor, and I don't imagine she would, I would rather take the lettuce."
Comments
But the MP for Dover, central to the "small boats" stuff, saying it is not working is worth a lot, politically. And she is not standing at the next election.
Here's a suggestion for Corbyn and Abbott and their fans. Say they will promise not to stand at the next Election. And, in return, have the whip restored.
Because it has worked for Elphicke.
I am not a fan either.
May do Labour more harm than good.
I am not a fan of the other two either.
She is just 1 of about 100 Tory MPs who are preparing to do something else with their lives.
The current Left Wing of the Labour Party is comprised of people whose time has come and gone-much like many Tory MPs.
I was never a fan of Corbyn. Abbott? Liked her, but prone to gaffes, and her time has gone. Same for McDonnell. Where is the Standard-Bearer for the Left Wing under the age of 60?
Any selection process that can give you, for example, Jeremy Corbyn, or Suella Braverman surely has to be flawed.
Particularly if your party has ambitions of getting elected.
A Labour Party led by Corbyn couldnt get elected.
Neither could a Tory Party led by Braverman, I hope.
Trouble is, Tory PMs do tend to be selected by Tory faithful-not the wider electorate.
Since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 and deposed by the Tory faithful in 1990, there have been 9 leaders of the Conservative Party.
6 of those 9-Major, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak-have become Prime Minister. Precisely 1 of those-Cameron-first became PM as the result of a General Election. Precisely 2 of those-Cameron and Major-won an election and served a full term.
So-who says Braverman needs to win a General Election to become PM?
I detest Braverman's policies. But she is more capable than Liz Truss...
I thought that they have a national committee that interviews candidates.
Those that are successful are then placed on a list, that the local party choose their candidate from.
So my point was that how could the same people choose Starmer, and Corbyn.
Or Braverman, and say Dominic Grieve.
To apply to stand as a Conservative MP, prospective candidates must first join the national ‘approved list’. Prospective candidates must complete an application form and attend a parliamentary assessment board (PAB) – an event to test the skills and attributes the party want from their candidates. Due diligence checks are also carried out at this stage. Candidates who make it onto the approved list are then able to apply to individual constituencies.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/general-election-candidate-selection
In theory, the Parliamentary MPs narrow the field down to 2, and then the Party Members (average age about 106) decide.
The Party Members didn't get to decide in 2 of the last 4 elections. As secret deals were done, so that only 1 person in the whole country wanted to run it. May and Sunak. Rather than risk letting the Members have a say. Particularly, they didn't want to risk asking the Members whether they preferred Sunak or Johnson.
The 2 where the Members decided? They chose Johnson over Hunt. And Truss over Sunak. In the last one of those, it was an open secret that whoever came 2nd in the MP ballot (Truss or Mordaunt) would win.
That is the system whereby the last 4 PMs have been "elected"
There are always going to be times when you get a strange MP. As I understand it, the choice for Conservative Candidate for West Suffolk boiled down to a choice of 2 at one stage:-Matt Hancock or Natalie Elphicke
Tough call
The national list is produced by the same people.
And they effectively choose every candidate.
There is probably less excuse than ever before, for choosing a duff candidate.
There is probably more information available on each candidate than ever before.
Social media etc.
Yet the Labour Party still managed it at Rochdale.
No excuse, that was just lazy.
My original question still stands.
How can the same people choose candidate with such diverse views.
From people hiding their views until elected. To people doing the choosing having similar diverse views.
Because active members of political parties tend to be more diverse than your typical MP.
And, as a nation, we do tend to be very judgmental. I don't think (for example) that a Tweet from 10 years ago when someone was both rather young and rather drunk should be forever used as a stick to beat someone with. It should be the basis for searching questions-not prejudgment.
We will always have some MPs with diverse views. Nothing wrong with that. Thousands of people share the views of a Corbyn or a Braverman. Just because I don't doesn't make them wrong. Likewise, it is mean to castigate the Workers Party (or even the Greens) for failing to vet properly, when they don't have the resources.
You set high standards for Public life. Sadly, unrealistically high.
What I am saying is that those that run the major 2 political parties, should take a more joined up view.
Assuming they know what it takes to win an election, then they should plan their strategy better.
I dont think that we could have elected a far right, or far left party during my lifetime, or are likely to anytime soon.
If either of them were chasing my vote, it would be impossible with the likes of Corbyn, or Braverman as their leader.
Or even with the likes of them in the majority in their Cabinet.
Neither of them could play a prominent role, or become leaders, if they were not selected in the first place.
Labour’s shadow health secretary Wes Streeting has told the Independent he has spoken to Conservatives contemplating defection because of the “division and incompetence” of Mr Sunak’s government.
He insisted that Labour would not take just any Tory MP, adding: "If Liz Truss were to want to cross the floor, and I don't imagine she would, I would rather take the lettuce."