Jump to content

UK Politics - Closing Down Sale


Derfel Cadarn
 Share

Recommended Posts

I get that Completely nuking things by calling for an election now would be a bad way of removing Truss for the Tories.  But if that is the only way they can get rid of her quickly it may be the best thing they can do for the party's future in the long term.  

I feel that the longer Truss is in charge the more damage she will do and the more likely swing voters will remember and blame all Tories in future elections.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Poobah said:

How much civil disorder do you need force a general election? Asking for a friend.

Depends,  If you get police backing on the side of the civil disorder probably a lot less than if the police actually try to maintain order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an outsider, two questions I have are:

1) Are there Tory MPs who maybe think a winning message for them personally might "Hey, I voted to kick Truss out by bringing down the government, re-elect me. I'm with you." ?

2) Are there Tory MPs in ultra safe districts who maybe think that it wouldn't be so bad if the party was nearly wiped out; because it would mean they would have enormously influence (as some of the only MPs left) in rebuilding the party in whatever direction they want? 

It would seem to me at least hypothetical possible that there could be enough in each camp to force an early election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Truss has nothing. I don't understand how she ever got picked or elected for anything.

I'm kind of stuck on this too. BoJo obviously should never have been elected, but I can at least explain to myself how it happened. But Truss? I cannot understand why anyone would want her to be in charge of anything and she has no ability to sell herself as a convincing leader. Describing her as nothing is about as accurate as one can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Fez said:

As an outsider, two questions I have are:

1) Are there Tory MPs who maybe think a winning message for them personally might "Hey, I voted to kick Truss out by bringing down the government, re-elect me. I'm with you." ?

2) Are there Tory MPs in ultra safe districts who maybe think that it wouldn't be so bad if the party was nearly wiped out; because it would mean they would have enormously influence (as some of the only MPs left) in rebuilding the party in whatever direction they want? 

It would seem to me at least hypothetical possible that there could be enough in each camp to force an early election.

well I live in a very safe Tory seat.  In the prediction posted earlier I'm in a Blue seat surrounded by other Blue seats.  My local MP is a minor Backbencher right now.  He is also party of the looney ERG who with Liz Truss is getting everything he wants.  So although removing her via General Election may give him more influence in the party while they are then in opposition I can easily see whoever remains of the Tory's working out they need to change direction and kick out most of the ERG and deselected them for the next General election after - allowing more moderate and possibly controllable MP's access to the few remaining safe seats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm kind of stuck on this too. BoJo obviously should never have been elected, but I can at least explain to myself how it happened. But Truss? I cannot understand why anyone would want her to be in charge of anything and she has no ability to sell herself as a convincing leader. Describing her as nothing is about as accurate as one can be.

I think Truss's appeal among some MP's in the contest.  at the start her lack of anything credible made her not a threat so could be removed in later voting rounds.   

and if your preferred candidates got removed early then Truss is the kind of person who should be easily lead and influenced maybe even controlled.  Which to those that want power is often very attractive if they can't be the leader themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm kind of stuck on this too. BoJo obviously should never have been elected, but I can at least explain to myself how it happened. But Truss? I cannot understand why anyone would want her to be in charge of anything and she has no ability to sell herself as a convincing leader. Describing her as nothing is about as accurate as one can be.

But what level of nothing is she?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

I think Truss's appeal among some MP's in the contest.  at the start her lack of anything credible made her not a threat so could be removed in later voting rounds.   

and if your preferred candidates got removed early then Truss is the kind of person who should be easily lead and influenced maybe even controlled.  Which to those that want power is often very attractive if they can't be the leader themselves.


That explains how she got leader, but not how she ever got to be an MP in the first place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Denvek said:

No, the yellow dot is Bath, which is already LD. JRM is NE Somerset, which is the big red one encircling it.

TY - of course, I was forgetting that it was 1 council, 2 parliamentary seats - either way, he's predicted to be out on his arse - which can only be a good thing.

 

 

As for Truss - I see the polls are bad enough that she's had to don the high-vis jacket and hard hat, to bring some supporters back onside, but not bad enough to wear a lab coat and get in the way of hospital treatments; and certainly not bad enough yet to get a photo-op with Zelenskyi

Edited by Which Tyler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with Truss and Kwarteng now floating the idea (via the right wing papers) of balancing the books on their tax cuts for high earners by cutting benefits, and Truss insisting publicly on the 'growing the pie' line yesterday, we are fully back in the 'the best way to help the poor is to take money from them and give it to the rich' territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a choice example of our government's economic literacy:

 

Someon does the maths a little down thread. Our first time buyer on £30K pa has indeed saved £12,700, but they'll need it, because their mortgage is £35K pa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well its poor peoples fault they are poor and its poor peoples fault that the economy is doing badly.  If only they were not poor they would be able to afford stuff and thus grow the economy.  Instead they want handouts shrinking it.  or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, mormont said:

This is a choice example of our government's economic literacy:

 

Someon does the maths a little down thread. Our first time buyer on £30K pa has indeed saved £12,700, but they'll need it, because their mortgage is £35K pa.

Seriously who wrote this? The Treasury is full of young people who live in London and don't get paid much (at least in comparison to other government departments).

They should know exactly how stupid this is.

Are they trolling Kwarteng or was this written by a etonion spad from a stupidly wealthy family, who's parents pay for everything? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the pound has jumped back to the pre-mini-budget exchange rate. Does that mean the markets quite like the idea of kneeing the poor to the head just after they've been bent over double by being kicked in the crotch by inflation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...