Conservative Leadership Contest 2016 Official Thread

Scroll to see replies

So 150,000 Tory members get to pick the PM, how democratic that is. I trust whichever right wing Thatcherite gets the job that they call a general election immediately and allow the whole country to choose.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 61

stevey396

It'd be great to have a PM who opposes the minimum wage - this is meant to be the Conservative party after all. I'm sick of so-called "Conservatives" championing lefty concepts such as the minimum wage, welfare state and NHS.

Reply 62

Aj12

Original post by Midlander

That's the system. We had the same thing with labour and brown. You pick the party not nessecarily the man.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 63

Midlander

Original post by Aj12

That's the system. We had the same thing with labour and brown. You pick the party not nessecarily the man.

Posted from TSR Mobile

You and I both know that changing the PM changes the circumstances considerably, in addition to the small matter of the referendum. Another election must be called by whoever wins.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 64

A1112787

Original post by Midlander

Constitutionally, no election is required. The Party has the mandate and the PM is not directly elected.

Calling an election would inevitably lead to an increased (perhaps substantially increased) Tory majority, though, so I'm not entirely against it.

Reply 65

Midlander

Original post by A1112787

OK let's have 150,000 toffs decide the Prime Minister.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 66

Aj12

Original post by Midlander

It's been clearly established throughout our history that changing the PM does nothing of the sort. You make an excellent point about the referendum, even more reason to avoid an election. The result needs to be implemented sooner rather than later, the instability of an election won't help that. All parties have committed to respecting the result, except the lib dems, so there is little reason for it.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 67

Midlander

Original post by Aj12

I did not agree with Gordon Brown becoming PM without a mandate and I do not agree with Maggie Mk II becoming PM on the same basis.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 68

Aj12

Original post by Midlander

I did not agree with Gordon Brown becoming PM without a mandate and I do not agree with Maggie Mk II becoming PM on the same basis.

Posted from TSR Mobile

So you feel the PM should be directly elected?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 69

A1112787

Original post by Midlander

OK let's have 150,000 toffs decide the Prime Minister.

Posted from TSR Mobile

How typically spiteful. I'm far from a toff. Most Tories are. If you're so desperate to see the Conservatives returned with an increased majority then let's do it (although Labour MPs would almost certainly vote down the early election vote under the FTPA).

Reply 70

Midlander

Original post by Aj12

So you feel the PM should be directly elected?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I feel that people voted for a Conservative party led by David Cameron and with Britain inside the EU. Both those things either have changed or have had a mandate to change and for me that changes the goalposts enough to warrant another election once the Tories decide on their new leader.

Reply 71

Midlander

Original post by A1112787

Most of the Tory membership are middle class white men over the age of 50. It is hardly a representation of the electorate. Quite frankly why any young people vote Conservative at all considering the disdain they show for our age group is beyond me, but that is another matter.

The point is I do not want 150,000 people deciding the leader of 65 million. Is there anything objectionable about that?

Reply 72

A1112787

Original post by Midlander

There is. We live in a parliamentary democracy and it is simply ridiculous to think an election needs to be called every time a PM resigns (especially when the last election was less than 15 months ago).

It's also easy to say "let's have an election". The Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 makes it incredibly difficult to call an early election.

You choose to view this leadership process as 'unrepresentative' but that is not the prism of most reasonably well-informed people.

Reply 73

Midlander

Original post by A1112787

I will ask again, do you think it is fine for 150,000 people to decide who leads 65 million?

Reply 74

A1112787

Original post by Midlander

I will ask again, do you think it is fine for 150,000 people to decide who leads 65 million?

But your question is founded on an incorrect understanding of our democracy: the country elected the Conservative Party to lead. The leader of the winning party becomes PM by convention.

On that basis, it is correct that the winning party should choose its leader (ie the 150,000 or so Tories should elect Leadsom or May) who would then become PM (by convention).

If that PM then pursued a radically different agenda (thereby abandoning the manifesto the electorate voted for) then it would be necessary to hold an election. However, neither candidate would do this.

Reply 75

username878267

Original post by Rakas21

Does she actually want the minimum wa gone?

Arghh. Dam farming subsidies. She's also (like May sadly) not a fan of austerity either.

I'd not go that far however May got 63% of MP's in a field of three. I'd not be surprised to see her withdraw.

I think she has a decent chance. Tory membership is generally richer, More socially conservative and more right wing than*tory voters. Her stances on fox hunting, gay marriage and NMW will appeal.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 76

teenz111

Original post by stevey396

and it wasn't a Tory PM who kept these on, or that Tory ideology is subjective.

Reply 77

jamestg

Original post by Bornblue

I think she has a devent chance. Tory membership is generally richer. More socially conservative and more right wing than*tory voters. Her stances on fox hunting, gay marriage and NMW will appeal.

This hits the nail on the head I think.

However... Conservative party members are quite rational and will see experience as of huge importance. Particularly in a time of huge change and uncertainty. Having someone who was described as "the worst government minister", heading the government seems ludicrous. Even Leadsom's 'boss', Amber Rudd, doesn't think she'll be capable.

I for one will be voting and campaigning for May. (time to get rid of my Gove TSR signature though...)

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 78

Rakas21

Original post by Bornblue

I think she has a devent chance. Tory membership is generally richer. More socially conservative and more right wing than*tory voters. Her stances on fox hunting, gay marriage and NMW will appeal.

True.

I have faith that the Tories are not Labour though, they won't elect Leadsom although the fact they are in power already concerns me (Tories care about power and so would vote May in opposition, they are in power either way now).

I may join James and start campaigning for May myself given the Labour and Liberal alternatives now..