The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,531
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 30, 2020 11:47:28 GMT
The Feet was not a particularly successful political dynasty. Sir Hugh Foot was a Liberal diplomat who was Governor of Cyprus for three years. His son Paul Foot wrote for Private Eye and was seen a a supporter of the SWP. Dingle Foot was a Liberal who moved to the Labour Party and was MP for Ipswich. John Foot was a Liberal who never made it ultimately the Commons but was made a life peer. Michael Foot was a Labour MP for many years and eventually was selected as a compromise candidate to lead the Labour Party to avoid having Denis Healey or a hard line left winger. Just how four brothers (one generation) from different political parties constitutes a ‘political dynasty’ is a mystery that tells us more about the confusion in mind the original poster than anything else. Michael began as a Liberal before ending as an illiberal.And how did he do that exactly? There's a credible claim to be made he was a "small l" liberal all his life.
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Nov 30, 2020 12:50:39 GMT
Michael began as a Liberal before ending as an illiberal.And how did he do that exactly? There's a credible claim to be made he was a "small l" liberal all his life. I was really pointing out that the family was a dynasty in that they all started out in the same party - although it would still have applied if they hadn't.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,491
|
Post by johng on Nov 30, 2020 13:48:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by MacShimidh on Dec 1, 2020 22:26:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Dec 1, 2020 22:48:29 GMT
This seems....in character!
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 1, 2020 23:40:01 GMT
And how did he do that exactly? There's a credible claim to be made he was a "small l" liberal all his life. I was really pointing out that the family was a dynasty in that they all started out in the same party - although it would still have applied if they hadn't. Can you have a dynasty lasting two generations as with the Feet? A similar, if not better, case could be made with the Benn family (ongoing) and the Cryers: Husband, Wife, and Son all became MPs. A proper dynasty should be three generation or more such as the Churchill/Sandys clan. Or, dare I mention the Amery family of Leo and Julian (after John was hung for treason). You could also add the Baldwins - Stanley and Oliver - but they were in different parties.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Dec 2, 2020 0:19:24 GMT
What about Paul Foot? And also Tom Foot, not a politician but very influential in Camden politics as news editor of the CNJ.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Dec 2, 2020 0:19:47 GMT
I was really pointing out that the family was a dynasty in that they all started out in the same party - although it would still have applied if they hadn't. Can you have a dynasty lasting two generations as with the Feet? A similar, if not better, case could be made with the Benn family (ongoing) and the Cryers: Husband, Wife, and Son all became MPs. A proper dynasty should be three generation or more such as the Churchill/Sandys clan. Or, dare I mention the Amery family of Leo and Julian (after John was hung for treason). You could also add the Baldwins - Stanley and Oliver - but they were in different parties. House of York: 2 generations - Edward IV and Richard III (brothers) plus (in between, briefly) Edward V (son/nephew) Danish kings: 2 generations - Cnut, his sons Harald Harefoot and Harthacnut House of Lancaster: 3 generations - Henries IV, V and VI (grandfather, father, son) Norman dynasty: 3 generations - William I, his sons William II and Henry I, then the latter's daughter Matilda and/or nephew Stephen Tudor dynasty: 3 generations - Henry VII, Henry VIII (son) Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth (children of HVIII)
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Dec 2, 2020 8:24:00 GMT
Can you have a dynasty lasting two generations as with the Feet? A similar, if not better, case could be made with the Benn family (ongoing) and the Cryers: Husband, Wife, and Son all became MPs. A proper dynasty should be three generation or more such as the Churchill/Sandys clan. Or, dare I mention the Amery family of Leo and Julian (after John was hung for treason). You could also add the Baldwins - Stanley and Oliver - but they were in different parties. House of York: 2 generations - Edward IV and Richard III (brothers) plus (in between, briefly) Edward V (son/nephew) Danish kings: 2 generations - Cnut, his sons Harald Harefoot and Harthacnut House of Lancaster: 3 generations - Henries IV, V and VI (grandfather, father, son) Norman dynasty: 3 generations - William I, his sons William II and Henry I, then the latter's daughter Matilda and/or nephew Stephen Tudor dynasty: 3 generations - Henry VII, Henry VIII (son) Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth (children of HVIII) and in the case of the case of the House of Lancaster, two of the Henries come in Parts.....
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,380
|
Post by Crimson King on Dec 2, 2020 9:11:17 GMT
House of York: 2 generations - Edward IV and Richard III (brothers) plus (in between, briefly) Edward V (son/nephew) Danish kings: 2 generations - Cnut, his sons Harald Harefoot and Harthacnut House of Lancaster: 3 generations - Henries IV, V and VI (grandfather, father, son) Norman dynasty: 3 generations - William I, his sons William II and Henry I, then the latter's daughter Matilda and/or nephew Stephen Tudor dynasty: 3 generations - Henry VII, Henry VIII (son) Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth (children of HVIII) and in the case of the case of the House of Lancaster, two of the Henries come in Parts..... indeed, I was getting major flashbacks reading that. What about hardlycanute and rathercanute?
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Dec 2, 2020 21:44:55 GMT
House of York: 2 generations - Edward IV and Richard III (brothers) plus (in between, briefly) Edward V (son/nephew) Danish kings: 2 generations - Cnut, his sons Harald Harefoot and Harthacnut House of Lancaster: 3 generations - Henries IV, V and VI (grandfather, father, son) Norman dynasty: 3 generations - William I, his sons William II and Henry I, then the latter's daughter Matilda and/or nephew Stephen Tudor dynasty: 3 generations - Henry VII, Henry VIII (son) Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth (children of HVIII) and in the case of the case of the House of Lancaster, two of the Henries come in Parts..... Sadly, those parts don't come with assembly instructions.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,491
|
Post by johng on Dec 23, 2020 0:36:50 GMT
Latest census estimates update was released today. Based on the 2020 election, it would be a GOP +5 gain over the Dems. Given the Republicans control advantage of state legislatures, it would be a greater GOP gain in the House. For the Dems, looking at the margins, only relatively small changes in population are needed to see the GOP only +3.
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Dec 28, 2020 0:07:03 GMT
An interesting map/video showing these changes visually. I note that this guy has only -1 for NY, with the other state to lose a vote being Alabama. Not sure where he got his info from; but either way the continuing population drift in traditional Dem areas towards (mainly) traditional GOP states must be a concern.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,491
|
Post by johng on Jan 9, 2021 2:04:37 GMT
Trump 2024 gaining MSM attention. Make American Great Again... Again.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,531
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 9, 2021 11:27:19 GMT
Yes, but by only a bare majority the Senate could impeach him and prevent him from ever running again. And they don't have to do this by Jan 20th either.
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Jan 11, 2021 12:50:22 GMT
Nebraska State Senator Julie Slama (R-Auburn) has introduced LB 76. It would eliminate the Nebraska law that lets each U.S. House district choose its own presidential elector. Instead, if the bill passed, Nebraska would imitate the 48 states with winner-take-all elector elections. In last year’s election, one Nebraska district voted for Joe Biden, while the other two districts voted for Donald Trump.
Wisconsin state representative Gary Tauchen (R-Bonduel) is about to introduce a bill to let each U.S. House district choose its own presidential elector.
Although state legislatures are barely beginning to work, in at least eight states bills have been introduced for the National Popular Vote Plan. They are Florida (HB 39), Kansas (HB 2002), Minnesota (SF 18), Missouri (HB 267), Pennsylvania (HB 2922), South Carolina (HB 3187), Texas (SB 130), and Virginia (SB 1101).
Of these eight states, the only one with a Democratic majority in each house of the legislature is Virginia. Virginia also has a Democratic Governor
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 13, 2021 21:01:01 GMT
On the topic of Trump’s health or otherwise, he appears to be a very angry shouty man. On that basis I would bet on Biden outliving him. Is there much evidence that those who do not drink alcohol live longer once the George Best-type binge drinkers are eliminated? he asked hopefully. I shall predict that neither Trump nor Biden will contest 2024. Harris v Haley would be easy on the eye. You're easily pleased - you could have gone for Gabbard v Trump (Ivanka)
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 13, 2021 21:09:09 GMT
Which one? Kamala Harris I don't find attractive at all - that isn't a deal breaker but it's not a likely scenario anyway. The question as to whether I 'would' and the question of whether a woman is easy on the eye are quite separate. Some superficially 'ugly' women can have a sexual appeal and some classically beautiful women can be quite uninspiring, but that's a different issue. At my time of life*, if they're easy on the eye they've almost certainly got a better offer. I just require them to be easy *most other times too come to think of it
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Jan 13, 2021 21:47:54 GMT
Which one? Kamala Harris I don't find attractive at all - that isn't a deal breaker but it's not a likely scenario anyway. The question as to whether I 'would' and the question of whether a woman is easy on the eye are quite separate. Some superficially 'ugly' women can have a sexual appeal and some classically beautiful women can be quite uninspiring, but that's a different issue. At my time of life*, if they're easy on the eye they've almost certainly got a better offer. I just require them to be easy *most other times too come to think of it Unbelievably crass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2021 22:16:50 GMT
|
|