General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
This is the dream. A Tory minority government led by Boris and another election in Autumn.
Perhaps he's seen that Trump gets away with any amount of faux pas, so Boris believes he can take power despite his flaws.
"For the Tories, Surrey seems to be the hardest word" - Jeremy Corbyn
He went big on corbyn being the enemy of the country, threw in a reference to zaphod beeblebrox and told some lies. Normal stuff, but it was all theatrical, very much a 'look at me I'm a leader' style.
I don't know - she got the job by default and is clearly unsuited to the leading role but you could say the same of John Major and he survived 7 years as PM. As @montpelier suggests, the alternatives are not exactly first rate material either and have made a lot of enemies.
Those feel right to me. Prove me wrong, youthfolk!
Indeed. Many of these businesses are not making money, and the idea presumably is to reduce costs or profits further. Privatisation isn't always a bad thing.
Well, the rail franchises are going to expire and then not be leased again. Much of the rest, I don't think is every going to happen entirely. It's a 20 year project to nationalise the energy market, probably more.
But you know, the UK does have a lot of assets we don't talk about when discussing the budget and the debt. We could sell off Gibraltar to America, I'm sure they would quite like to put a Military base there. We could raid the Bank of England vault for their gold. Or use our own. Or maybe we could sell off the Queen...
I joke, but the UK Government does have around £1.3 trillion in assets according to this economist article.
Or maybe Corbyn is planning on saving the £2 billion a year it cost to run trident, and slowly buy our National Assets back over 50 years.
What Labour are actually thinking, who knows.
Maybe, they are thinking they will be the first government since 2001 to actually balance the budget, and they will reinvest the profits? (The Conservatives haven't had a balanced budget since 1990, despite being in power 17/27 years)
Seriously though, it will be a slow asset swap.
Last edited:
Boo to reality.
It's the kind of thing political heads like to discuss, but forcibly replacing a leader immediately after an election win would be incredibly difficult and politically dangerous.
Dr May: I am prescribing you some medicine, don't be put off by the smell. No, you can't have a lollipop.
Dr Corbyn: Nah, you'll be fine, no need for any treatment. Please, take a Werther's Original with my compliments.
Usual shite then- actually not seen much of him during the election campaign.
Provided that she isn't seen to be wilting in Brexit negotiations, the opposition within the party would bide its time until that is over i think. Revolts on specific motions are likely to be worse however.
It's got a lot of assets, but a truckload of debt too. In one sense I admire Corbyn for making ambitious very long-term plans, it's just that even if gets a five year term, the next PM can obviously scrub them.
Feck it. Will sort this tomorrow am off for a pint. Thanks for pointing that out.Le Problem
Hah fair enough. Ignore my previous ^^
It wouldn't look great, no, and I guess with 11 days til the negotiations start, any leadership would need to be quick.
Yeah, our Government debt is around 90% of GDP isn't it, around £1.8 trillion. I guess it puts that £1.2 trillion in assets to bed.
But that's not going to come down until we
a) have a Government that can nearly balance the budget
or b) Get some proper Growth
Tories are the worst at both.
It would be fascinating to see what a minority government would mean for Brexit negotiations. And hilarious considering the reason for this election.
I like the idea of a competition, but fear it may need a caftard with some intelligence to institute it. Which just about leaves @Damien I suppose. No disrespect alto, you could put your heads together.
Also needs a definition of majority for the fick people like me.
Let's face it, unless the Tories increase their majority May is toast. She didn't have to call this election but thought she could increase the power of her party and take more seats. Anything less than that and she should be hunted in the press for what is a poor leadership decision. Won't happen but hey ho.
Boris Johnson told to "please stop talking" on Radio 4.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ohnson-bbc-radio-4-today-mishal-hussain-audio
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ohnson-bbc-radio-4-today-mishal-hussain-audio
I'm too lazy. I have full faith that alto knows what he's doing.
They will do. I have no doubt about that. I doubt we'll see any real change in the cabinet either.
Her majority could be 1 and "the press" wouldn't give her anything. The only number they're interested in is 2, with the word Leveson in front of it. They want it gone and she's promised to make it so.
The press will definitely hound her if she loses seats. The rightwing press like winning above all else.
I can't see many leader resignations this time round, only one and that'll either be Corbyn or May.
What if both parties make minor gains?
We were the top-performing G7 economy last year!
Nuttall maybe.
I think winning the election is what matters, unless of course there's a hung parliament which could be a game changer but I don't see that happening.
If an outside country is going to intervene, it needs to have a clear plan of what it is to do. Terrorise the population into submission. Colonise and run the country as a direct military dictatorship. Install a friendly local despot and ensure an arms supply for him to keep his population in control. Find a mass movement with support, preferably across ethnic lines, and help them militarily, with supplies or more directly. All are viable courses of action for an invader.
I can't remember a single ME intervention that did the last thing (unless the Kurds in Syria count) and the 1st 2 are increasingly difficult to do (in a political sense). In hindsight, none of these invasions had a plan (or they had an awful plan) after toppling the existing regime. The west left Libya quickly but were in Iraq and especially Afghanistan for years, andnone of them are shining examples of intervention.
I said nothing about Christian, though Bush's adventure in Iraq seemed to be a mix of religious fervour and daddy issues.
He has bigger fish to fry anyway, he's just been offered Neil Armstrong's place on Apollo 11.
You don't think she'd take the chance to get rid of Hammond?
Maybe. I was thinking more with people hoping Jeremy Hunt would be axed. He's made of Kevlar.
He's practically her only friend.
After he managed to make HS2 cost £20bn less than predicted, why would anyone get rid of him?
