Jacob Rees-Mogg
Discussion
easytiger123 said:
Couldn't disagree more with your first sentence.
I don't agree with his position on abortion in any circumstances, but at least he has an opinion, expresses it and doesn't bother tailoring it to suit whichever way the wind is blowing. Total contrast to the useless spin-doctored PM we are currently saddled with. I don't think his latest comments have done his future PM chances any harm at all.
wl606 said:
easytiger123 said:
Couldn't disagree more with your first sentence.
I don't agree with his position on abortion in any circumstances, but at least he has an opinion, expresses it and doesn't bother tailoring it to suit whichever way the wind is blowing. Total contrast to the useless spin-doctored PM we are currently saddled with. I don't think his latest comments have done his future PM chances any harm at all.
BlackLabel said:
A Roman Catholic turns out to be a Roman Catholic - what a huge shock.
His views on abortion and gay marriage do not belong to the 21st century however at least he's not trying to pretend his religion is something that it's not.
You clearly don’t know many Roman Catholics. I’ve met few (other than my grandparents’ generation) who hold such views, including priests.His views on abortion and gay marriage do not belong to the 21st century however at least he's not trying to pretend his religion is something that it's not.
Hayek said:
Troubleatmill said:
Independent said:
At the weekend Matthew Parris, the writer and gay former Conservative MP, used his Times newspaper column to declare: “For the 21st-century Conservative Party, Jacob Rees-Mogg would be pure hemlock.
“His manners are perfumed but his opinions are poison. Rees-Mogg is quite simply an unfailing, unbending, unrelenting reactionary.
“His record on every moral, social, sexual or reproductive issue I’ve looked at is brute moral conservative. He has been a straight-down-the-line supporter of every welfare cut I’ve checked.
I'm not sure if what Matthew Parris describes is quite accurate, but if it's in the ballpark then Rees-Mogg represents a set of views held by a great many people who haven't had anyone to vote for for a long long time.“His manners are perfumed but his opinions are poison. Rees-Mogg is quite simply an unfailing, unbending, unrelenting reactionary.
“His record on every moral, social, sexual or reproductive issue I’ve looked at is brute moral conservative. He has been a straight-down-the-line supporter of every welfare cut I’ve checked.
I like Rees-Mogg as a character, but I fear he is too right wing for the good of the party.
Edited by Andehh on Wednesday 6th September 10:08
Edited by Andehh on Wednesday 6th September 10:09
ou sont les biscuits said:
FN2TypeR said:
Neither can I but is gay marriage a deal breaker for the average voter? I wouldn't have thought that it was.
Well, it pretty much did for Tim Farron 
Andehh said:
hmm, I disagree. As hard as it is to swallow, the Tory vote is diminishing in the face of a young, left wing demographic.
No it is not.If you had said the right wing vote is diminishing (based on 2017) that would have been more accurate as the combined Tory/UKIP vote was lower in 2017 than in 2015.
However it is apparent many left leaning voters supported UKIP due to either their stance on the EU, or other matters, so this is not a clear diminishing of the right wing vote.
The Tories need to recognize the trends in voting patterns, far more divided by outlook and age than income as one obvious example, and plan accordingly. It should also be recognized that in terms of seat numbers Mansfield matters just as much as Kensington and Chelsea.
The Republicans currently manage to hold all three branches of the Federal government and 33 governorships while facing most of the same head winds as the Tories here in the UK.
desolate said:
Is it a serious "thing" that people believe he is a credible candidate for the leadership?
With the possible exception of Nicholas Soames, I can't think of someone less likely to command popular support. He seems to have quite a bit of support in NP&E on PH, which tells you everything you need to know about his chances in the real world.
Zod said:
You cannot apply thought to the Catholic Church’s position on abortion, gay marriage and contraception and conclude that it is intellectually or morally right.
Yet you can if you've royally ballsed up an opportunistic general election & subsequently require propping up at huge expense by a bunch of religious fundamentalists who, in less guarded moments, equate homosexuality with paedophilia,. In those circumstances, it's perfectly acceptable.Bring on the Mogg, it would be a fantastic electoral penance for the sins of this shower.
The media have promoted him to be "next potential leader of the Conservatives" on the back of some TV appearances / interviews in which he came across as well informed, articulate and honest.
In this interview, he was treated as a leader in waiting and was shot down for his beliefs.
This all despite him stating that there was 99% no chance of a leadership bid happening.
His position on gay marriage and abortion might be unpalatable to many but the fact of the matter is that he maintained his beliefs and principles (and did not deny his voting record) despite knowing it would be received well.
He clearly made the distinction between beliefs and law and acknowledged that nothing would change in law despite his own opinions. Did he have to answer the way he did? He did if he wanted to maintain his principles.
Farron was pilloried and eventually ousted due to the fact that he felt he had to apologise for his beliefs which seemingly came second to his political ambitions.
Are we really that dependent on soundbite politics delivered by people of little substance, who shift their positions in the wind that we decry it when it happens?
In this interview, he was treated as a leader in waiting and was shot down for his beliefs.
This all despite him stating that there was 99% no chance of a leadership bid happening.
His position on gay marriage and abortion might be unpalatable to many but the fact of the matter is that he maintained his beliefs and principles (and did not deny his voting record) despite knowing it would be received well.
He clearly made the distinction between beliefs and law and acknowledged that nothing would change in law despite his own opinions. Did he have to answer the way he did? He did if he wanted to maintain his principles.
Farron was pilloried and eventually ousted due to the fact that he felt he had to apologise for his beliefs which seemingly came second to his political ambitions.
Are we really that dependent on soundbite politics delivered by people of little substance, who shift their positions in the wind that we decry it when it happens?
Oakey said:
Zod said:
You clearly don’t know many Roman Catholics. I’ve met few (other than my grandparents’ generation) who hold such views, including priests.
So why is abortion still illegal in the RoI? Why is it difficult for women to get an abortion in Italy?Dazed and Confused said:
What a charmer Mr Rees-Mogg is.
Ideal contender to be running The Nasty Party.
Wash your mouth out! How dare you cast aspersions on that entirely honest & straight talking breath of fresh air.Ideal contender to be running The Nasty Party.
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/08/08/rees-mogg-...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff