Gove drops support for Boris and decides to stand!

[tzijlstra]

This type of response is a tactic often used by unintelligent people who don't understand reasonable discourse/ or logic, though probably without their knowledge to be fair to them. However, in this case as an intelligent poster responding with this type of response, I see it as wriggling out of answering the post... intelligent politicians use this tactic

 

-

 

As to your question, of course I do, it's ridiculously toff.

 

However my point was that by judging someone by a name... something that's given to someone by their parents - just like their race, their heritage, their place of birth, right down to their genes - it strikes me as a bit hypocritical.

 

If you were the boss looking to hire someone, and you instantly have a negative thought due to their name, then you are no better than a racist boss, who looks a the name 'Mr Brown Skin', and thinks the same. I just see it at double-standards, that's all

 

Not going to lie, you read my hand like I opened it face-up. Good job Ash

[*_ash_*]

Not going to lie, you read my hand like I opened it face-up. Good job Ash

 

I am a reasonably successful poker player, and know when someone is trying it on, bluffing, or trying to worm out of things. Good job Tim

 

 

 

Night.

[Guest sibon]

 

 

I'd prefer Gove, I've seen him a few times, and I think he'd be the best choice so far, and I thought he handled the questions programmes better than others too.

 

You'd prefer someone who, by his own admission, doesn't have the qualities to do the job? That's a bit odd really.

 

I saw Gove close up during his time as Education Sec. He had some very good ideas, but he found it really difficult to communicate them properly and to build support for them. I'd fear for the country if he won.

[*_ash_*]

You'd prefer someone who, by his own admission, doesn't have the qualities to do the job? That's a bit odd really.

 

I saw Gove close up during his time as Education Sec. He had some very good ideas, but he found it really difficult to communicate them properly and to build support for them. I'd fear for the country if he won.

 

Why is is odd? Because I'm not privy to information that you have and I don't? I haven't seen the news much in the last few days, been workin' - and wasn't aware of this from before that time. If he's said this, then I'd go for May.

 

I was just judging on what I've seen of him live (positive), and his education policies which I saw were extremely unpopular (negative), hence why I said I thought he'd be unpopular in general - Economy/Jobs/NHS/Education are always the 3 main important things for people, and he is known negatively for one of these.

 

I don't think I be fearful for the country though. I think that's a bit extreme.

 

What I think is interesting today on the radio and then coming on here, is that all the talk is of the PM, and no one has even mentioned yet the potential future ChallExch. For me this is a far more important question, since Osborne is unlikely.

[Lex Luthor]

I still can't believe Cameron is getting away with wriggling away from this. Carney has said we need stability. Cameron has said he wasn't going anywhere no matter what the result and he said he was the best man to negotiate a Brexit. The last thing that we should be having at the moment is such uncertainty for weeks and a leadership contest in our government. He has absolutely no conscience when it comes to causing further instability and thus damage to the economy. Why haven't journalists asked him why he is knowingly causing further unnecessary uncertainty? As Russell Kane pointed out tonight, whatever is happening within the Labour party is a sideshow, this is supposed to be our actual government! And why hasn't Cameron been asked about Boris's pathetic actions? Boris is a member of his party after all!

 

There is something very strange going on.

[El Cid]

 

I was just judging on what I've seen of him live (positive), and his education policies which I saw were extremely unpopular (negative), hence why I said I thought he'd be unpopular in general - Economy/Jobs/NHS/Education are always the 3 main important things for people, and he is known negatively for one of these.

 

I don't think I be fearful for the country though. I think that's a bit extreme.

 

 

I dont think anything has changed since Gove left Education, the teachers are still second class citizens, the NUT are on strike next week.

[Blackbeard]

I dont think anything has changed since Gove left Education, the teachers are still second class citizens, the NUT are on strike next week.

 

There is a book by "Gove" available from Amazon "Everything I know about teaching" I recommend you use the Amazon look inside feature. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Everything-I-know-about-teaching/dp/1492912417/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1467355494&sr=1-1&keywords=michael+gove

[runningman1]

I dont think anything has changed since Gove left Education, the teachers are still second class citizens, the NUT are on strike next week.

 

I absolutely agree. It's a shame that Nelson Mandela wasted his life fighting inequality in SA. The bigger fight was over here, fighting on behalf of relatively well paid people who only get 13 weeks holiday a year.

[Eater Sundae]

The last minute decision by Gove to run, and then the very last minute decision by Boris to not run got me thinking...

 

I wonder if there was anyone else that might have considered running but didn't put themselves forward simply because they thought Boris was running (for whatever reason). However, as his announcement was so late, it was impossible for anyone else to stand.

 

A bit like bidding on Ebay, timing seems to be everything.

[Gamston]

I still can't believe Cameron is getting away with wriggling away from this. Carney has said we need stability. Cameron has said he wasn't going anywhere no matter what the result and he said he was the best man to negotiate a Brexit. The last thing that we should be having at the moment is such uncertainty for weeks and a leadership contest in our government. He has absolutely no conscience when it comes to causing further instability and thus damage to the economy. Why haven't journalists asked him why he is knowingly causing further unnecessary uncertainty? As Russell Kane pointed out tonight, whatever is happening within the Labour party is a sideshow, this is supposed to be our actual government! And why hasn't Cameron been asked about Boris's pathetic actions? Boris is a member of his party after all!

 

There is something very strange going on.

 

The referendum was not about Cameron's future, but about whether the UK should remain in the EU or leave the EU. If Cameron had said he would resign immediately ,if the UK vote to leave the EU, then that would have been another unofficial side issue in the referendum campaign. Cameron did the honourable deed by resigning and has behaved impeccably since the referendum result.

 

It makes common sense to me to for Cameron to leave the triggering of Article 50 to his successor, then no time is lost in the negotiations which are fixed at 2 years once Article 50 is invoked. In the mean time, the department of trade and industry should be discussing future trade agreements with the rest of the World which is much bigger than the EU.

 

Boris Johnson wasn't given any position of authority by Cameron, other than being allowed to choose which way he wished to campaign during the referendum campaign which all party members were free to do, so there is no need for him to comment about Boris Johnson or answer any questions.