Posted on 06/20/2019 10:57:06 AM PDT by FewsOrange
After more than a week of campaigning, intriguing and infighting among Conservative Party lawmakers, Britain’s foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, won the right on Thursday to take on his more famous and charismatic predecessor, Boris Johnson, in the final phase of the race to become the next prime minister.
Mr. Hunt was the second choice of Tory lawmakers, well behind Mr. Johnson, and now the two men will compete for the votes of around 160,000 members of the party who will next month select a successor to Prime Minister Theresa May. Mr. Johnson won 160 votes, and Mr. Hunt 77.
Mr. Johnson, whose optimistic, bombastic and entertaining speeches at party conferences have made him a favorite of activists, is supremely well placed to win the vote. The party members are disproportionately older, whiter and more male than the general population and appear to favor Brexit at any cost, something that Mr. Johnson has championed since a 2016 referendum that he helped win.
According to the rumor mill, the mild-mannered Mr. Hunt was the candidate that Mr. Johnson most wanted to face in the runoff, and all day Thursday there was speculation in Parliament of tactical voting by his supporters to eliminate Michael Gove, the environment secretary.
Mr. Gove was Mr. Johnson’s nemesis in 2016, the last time the Conservative leadership was contested, and in the first of two votes held on Thursday, Mr. Hunt had fallen slightly behind Mr. Gove.
Yet, it was Mr. Gove who sunk Mr. Johnson’s push for the top job in 2016, and some lawmakers feared the consequences for the party of a vicious fight between the old rivals. By early evening it was announced that Mr. Hunt had pushed Mr. Gove into third place in the final ballot, with 75 votes, eliminating him from the contest...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That’s what the odds at bookies’ there say. He’s alleged to have made comments behind closed doors to a smaller group admitting to a possibility of pushing Brexit as far ahead as 2021 though.
LOL. That’s actual idiocracy in action:)
Expect betrayal from the corrupt British uniparty - they need a fresh-faced stooge to continue May’s work, deliver Brexit w/o delivering Brexit.
Boris has too much baggage, don’t be surprised if Hunt wins.
Mr. Hunt was the second choice of Tory lawmakers... Mr. Johnson won 160 votes, and Mr. Hunt 77... The party members are disproportionately older, whiter and more male than the general population and appear to favor Brexit at any cost, something that Mr. Johnson has championed since a 2016 referendum that he helped win... there was speculation in Parliament of tactical voting by [Hunt's] supporters to eliminate Michael Gove, the environment secretary... in the first of two votes held on Thursday, Mr. Hunt had fallen slightly behind Mr. Gove... some lawmakers feared the consequences for the party of a vicious fight between the old rivals. By early evening it was announced that Mr. Hunt had pushed Mr. Gove into third place in the final ballot, with 75 votes, eliminating him from the contest...
Thanks FewsOrange. As you said, Boris will win. Ordinarily, the fix would be in by now, as it was last time, but it didn't effin' wohk.
A NY Times writer who can't write. In this, case he can't conjugate the verb "sink."
The correct usage here would be "sank" as in "it was Mr. Gove who SANK Mr. Johnson's push."
All this said, perhaps there is an informal use of the past participle "sunk" that I am unfamiliar with...like the passive participle usage of the verb sink, as in "I'm sunk."
Input invited from English teachers hereabouts.;-)
Thx. Will check that out later...off to the gym.
::He’s alleged to have made comments behind closed doors to a smaller group admitting to a possibility of pushing Brexit as far ahead as 2021 though.::
~~~~~~~~~~~
I am hoping that is fake news.
J school is more like J kindergarten now. They color pictures and learn to disregard their previously acquired capitalist grammar.
Me too. As always, time will tell.
No, Rooster is correct. The form “sunk” is not acceptable here. The sentence calls for the simple past tense of “sink”, which is “sank”.
The past participle “sunk” is used with an auxiliary verb only. Example: The boat had sunk before rescuers could reach the scene.
[Mr. Hunt was the second choice of Tory lawmakers, well behind Mr. Johnson, and now the two men will compete for the votes of around 160,000 members of the party who will next month select a successor to Prime Minister Theresa May. Mr. Johnson won 160 votes, and Mr. Hunt 77. ]
That’s if the Tory party survives
Most likely Boris will win. BoJo for PM. The best choice since Berlusconi! I’m looking forward to his premiership
“This is the first time the Tories have conducted what amounts to a party primary to select a PM.”
Not quite, May was elected in a similar process. However after the field was reduced to two, her supposed opponent Andrea Leadsom withdrew meaning that the party membership vote did not happen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election#Results
You are correct. It should have been sank or had sunk.
Show off.
I hate you sooooo much.
Just kidding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.