For the first time I agree with Theresa May, quoted as saying:
"The choice is between me and Jeremy Cornyn and no one wants that."
Agreed, no one wants you.
On 'who would be the best prime minister' polls amazingly she's still slightly ahead, I don't particularly want either. Survey just about sums it up, 36% May, 33% Corbyn and 22% neither!
For the first time I agree with Theresa May, quoted as saying:
"The choice is between me and Jeremy Cornyn and no one wants that."
Agreed, no one wants you.
On 'who would be the best prime minister' polls amazingly she's still slightly ahead, I don't particularly want either. Survey just about sums it up, 36% May, 33% Corbyn and 22% neither!
Makes sense, in that she actually is the prime minister! Also, although I voted labour (tactically I might add) I can't quite shake the suspension that he'd be shit
For the first time I agree with Theresa May, quoted as saying:
"The choice is between me and Jeremy Cornyn and no one wants that."
Agreed, no one wants you.
On 'who would be the best prime minister' polls amazingly she's still slightly ahead, I don't particularly want either. Survey just about sums it up, 36% May, 33% Corbyn and 22% neither!
It's like asking who would last longer against a pack of wolves, you can make an educated guess but you know both will be ripped to shreds within seconds.
When the knife in the back attack finally does for May just who do we think will be the next Tory leader ? The runners and riders present an amazing list of misfits and weirdos.
Someone somewhere has the wherewithall to be a decent political leader in this country, the trouble is they're probably about 17 at the moment. I don't know the breadth and depth of 'talent' in the Conservative party, but it looks like very slim pickings, as well as Labour I might add. To hear talk the other day (after Question Time) of Rees Mogg is simply another fashionable conversation, not long ago it was all Dan Jarvis wasn't it? At a time when we could do with some intelligent and shrewd politicians we are led by a freak show.
For the first time I agree with Theresa May, quoted as saying:
"The choice is between me and Jeremy Cornyn and no one wants that."
Agreed, no one wants you.
On 'who would be the best prime minister' polls amazingly she's still slightly ahead, I don't particularly want either. Survey just about sums it up, 36% May, 33% Corbyn and 22% neither!
Makes sense, in that she actually is the prime minister! Also, although I voted labour (tactically I might add) I can't quite shake the suspension that he'd be shit
For me it is that I know that May is dreadful as PM and that the Tories have become/continued the nasty party, they seem to be lacking in ideas or a vision. The upper echelon seems to be packed with the worst type of politician (with some exceptions).
With Labour we just don't know with Corbyn, we won't until (if) he actually does the job. Labour seem to have a vision and some ideas and I think the shadow cabinet has a fresh look to it (with some exceptions).
I entered the election wholly disillusioned with our political class but have some small amount of optimism that things might be turning from the abyss with all sides.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. @Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please @mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Someone somewhere has the wherewithall to be a decent political leader in this country, the trouble is they're probably about 17 at the moment. I don't know the breadth and depth of 'talent' in the Conservative party, but it looks like very slim pickings, as well as Labour I might add. To hear talk the other day (after Question Time) of Rees Mogg is simply another fashionable conversation, not long ago it was all Dan Jarvis wasn't it? At a time when we could do with some intelligent and shrewd politicians we are led by a freak show.
Fully agree. Those who I believe would be good (not being party-generic) are Jess Phillips, Ruth Davidson, Dan Jarvis and .... mmm ... struggling now. Sadiq Khan may be interesting once he gives up the mayoralty.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
Indeed, that is what made you resident chief tormentor on the old thread.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
Indeed, that is what made you resident chief tormentor on the old thread.
To paraphrase Homer Simpson, you can prove anything with facts.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
Don't take it as harsh as I have I think you do both, but I would also say that you do more so now you crossed the floor in terms of presenting evidence.
I purposely didn't use absolute terms as obviously there are exceptions and I wouldn't class you (or anybody here) as a politician. But I stand by belief that the right are far better at quick put downs, ignoring the other side (right or wrong), soundbites and sounding common sense (but not bearing up to closer examination).
On the left we tend to examine everything, look at all sides and then debate a bit more.
Some Tories like Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have different politics to me but take the time to explain, see the other side and admit failings which is probably why I am bother to listen to them. On the other side Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell out Toried the Tories to some extent.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
Don't take it as harsh as I have I think you do both, but I would also say that you do more so now you crossed the floor in terms of presenting evidence.
I purposely didn't use absolute terms as obviously there are exceptions and I wouldn't class you (or anybody here) as a politician. But I stand by belief that the right are far better at quick put downs, ignoring the other side (right or wrong), soundbites and sounding common sense (but not bearing up to closer examination).
On the left we tend to examine everything, look at all sides and then debate a bit more.
Some Tories like Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have different politics to me but take the time to explain, see the other side and admit failings which is probably why I am bother to listen to them. On the other side Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell out Toried the Tories to some extent.
I think it's more a case of people (and I mean everyone, not just you) giving more scrutiny to views that don't match their own. I don't think I have changed at all in the way I approach debate but from your perspective I have gone from being a rabid right-winger to a well-adjusted left-winger. Likewise Brexiters are far more willing to believe lies from their corner but any "experts" denouncing Brexit were roundly written off.
The old adage is true: opinions are like arseholes; everyone has one and everyone else's stinks.
Believe me, having been on both sides of various divides, there is little difference between the left and right in terms of idiots who refuse to consider their views or any views opposing their own. I can point to plenty of prominent leftists who certainly refuse to consider the opposite point of view.
After reading many posts on the hypocrisy of Corbyn asking for discipline within his own party, I wish it was a surprise to me that I haven't seen a single one about the hypocrisy of May telling her cabinet to stop briefing against each other. I can't really remember an argument as public as the one that occurred between her and Gove.
I had a morbid fascination with the old How does Labour need to change? thread, it was pretty grim reading being a Labour supporter, but I couldn't stop reading or posting in it. I thought this thread was going to be a lot more fun than it has but I suppose watching the Tories tearing themselves apart makes up for it.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
Slightly harsh, I've always put forward evidence to support my views and answered any question put to me. I don't think question dodging or not being able to present evidence is exclusive to any side of the political spectrum. Some of the most embarrassing examples on Twitter are of the left (evil torwees etc).
Don't take it as harsh as I have I think you do both, but I would also say that you do more so now you crossed the floor in terms of presenting evidence.
I purposely didn't use absolute terms as obviously there are exceptions and I wouldn't class you (or anybody here) as a politician. But I stand by belief that the right are far better at quick put downs, ignoring the other side (right or wrong), soundbites and sounding common sense (but not bearing up to closer examination).
On the left we tend to examine everything, look at all sides and then debate a bit more.
Some Tories like Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have different politics to me but take the time to explain, see the other side and admit failings which is probably why I am bother to listen to them. On the other side Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell out Toried the Tories to some extent.
I think it's more a case of people (and I mean everyone, not just you) giving more scrutiny to views that don't match their own. I don't think I have changed at all in the way I approach debate but from your perspective I have gone from being a rabid right-winger to a well-adjusted left-winger. Likewise Brexiters are far more willing to believe lies from their corner but any "experts" denouncing Brexit were roundly written off.
The old adage is true: opinions are like arseholes; everyone has one and everyone else's stinks.
Believe me, having been on both sides of various divides, there is little difference between the left and right in terms of idiots who refuse to consider their views or any views opposing their own. I can point to plenty of prominent leftists who certainly refuse to consider the opposite point of view.
I wouldn't go so far as to say well-adjusted.
I take your point but stand by my belief that there are very different debating/argument styles between right and left, not just on here but in our political classes too.
A perfectly healthy friend of mine was on holiday in the USA 20 years ago. Somewhere on their road trip a pick up bowled into their vehicle and left him fighting for his life.
He survived, but walks with a stick, has very little use of his left arm and still finds speech difficult. He cannot walk very far or stay on his feet for too long. He has memory problems.
This could happen to anyone. No matter how well off you are today, in twenty months or twenty years time it could be totally different.
The Tories don't care about you now, and won't care about you then.
Here's his wonderful wife's facebook update from today:
"Oh joy Paul back to work assessment form has come through! Goody I look forward to filling in reams of paper to a deadline and then the worry that they'll say yeah you can work and take away his benefit. This is what we go through people! More than once a doctor who has assessed him has made a note that his award should be lifetime. But no, this govt knows better. Let's stress out the genuine people eh?!"
When the knife in the back attack finally does for May just who do we think will be the next Tory leader ? The runners and riders present an amazing list of misfits and weirdos.
When the knife in the back attack finally does for May just who do we think will be the next Tory leader ? The runners and riders present an amazing list of misfits and weirdos.
boris in 12 months
The transformation of Charlton (under the regime) into the Nasty Party (and vice versa) will be complete when the Tories have a new leader every 9 months or so.
I think if May holds on for 12 months then she will probably hold on for two years or more. I don't think Boris will replace her as he is detested by large parts of the Tory parliamentary party, although that might be giving them too much credit.
If they have any sense then it will be a safe pair of hands, but hard to see who that will be and hard to assume that they have any sense. It could be a youngish outsider in the Cameron mould.
TBH all political parties in England are a coalition. The Tories are a mix of Patrician country types, the very wealthy, big business, free market liberals (in the classic use of liberal relating to economics), One Nation types, and Thatcherites (a mix of the socially conservative and people committed to free market solutions for most things, except defence and immigration and resolutely anti-EU). Most of the time this coalition holds together but it does come under strain (I'd characterise UKIP as basically a Thatcherite Party and the splits the Tories have had over Europe mirror the eternal question for socialists over whether they should stay in Labour, with UKIP representing the external faction and people like Fox and Davis those on the inside). The trouble they have going forward is that it is no longer guaranteed that this coalition will deliver power: this is again similar to Labour's problems in that the left-wing appeal of Corbyn works in much of London and the cities, but not yet in Scotland and is unlikely to make that much headway in smaller towns or rural areas. The Tory coalition held together in London through a mix of the very wealthy (Kensington, Westminster), the quite wealthy (Wandsworth and leafy suburbs) and the Thatcherites (Romford, Chingford, the less leafy parts of Bexley) and it was these strongholds that guaranteed 2 terms for Boris. At present, I think it is unthinkable that there could be a Tory mayor in London, just because a lot of those elements in that coalition look like they are separately weakening - demographic changes in the Outer London boroughs are happening faster than the inner and a lot of the gentrifiers in places like Peckham or Hackney do not yet identify with the Tories (at least in part because of their "nasty party" image). How do they need to change? I think whatever way they go is difficult for them because of the way that the EU is so toxic for them. Make the concessions that big business and the wealthy want and risk alienating the Thatcherites. Or vice versa. I think the other big problem for them is that after a while, the narrative of a safe pair of hands economically begins to lose any power, and we are there now, particularly after discovering the "magic money tree" to stay in power with the DUP deal. Any change has to come about with an idea of what they are for: a narrative that can be sold to voters *. I think they underestimated Corbyn's ability to do this, hence the early election which was disastrous for them. I don't see any of the main players in the Tory Party being able to come up with such a narrative, so it may well fall to a new generation. I'd be interested in what anyone who is a Tory supporter or close to them would think of what big idea would engage people more widely in supporting them.
Edited to add: * the Tories were most successful in Scotland, under a leader who drove a narrative of "Vote Tory to keep the Union". I can't imagine Ruth Davidson appealing to that wide a group in England, but you never know.
TBH all political parties in England are a coalition. The Tories are a mix of Patrician country types, the very wealthy, big business, free market liberals (in the classic use of liberal relating to economics), One Nation types, and Thatcherites (a mix of the socially conservative and people committed to free market solutions for most things, except defence and immigration and resolutely anti-EU). Most of the time this coalition holds together but it does come under strain (I'd characterise UKIP as basically a Thatcherite Party and the splits the Tories have had over Europe mirror the eternal question for socialists over whether they should stay in Labour, with UKIP representing the external faction and people like Fox and Davis those on the inside). The trouble they have going forward is that it is no longer guaranteed that this coalition will deliver power: this is again similar to Labour's problems in that the left-wing appeal of Corbyn works in much of London and the cities, but not yet in Scotland and is unlikely to make that much headway in smaller towns or rural areas. The Tory coalition held together in London through a mix of the very wealthy (Kensington, Westminster), the quite wealthy (Wandsworth and leafy suburbs) and the Thatcherites (Romford, Chingford, the less leafy parts of Bexley) and it was these strongholds that guaranteed 2 terms for Boris. At present, I think it is unthinkable that there could be a Tory mayor in London, just because a lot of those elements in that coalition look like they are separately weakening - demographic changes in the Outer London boroughs are happening faster than the inner and a lot of the gentrifiers in places like Peckham or Hackney do not yet identify with the Tories (at least in part because of their "nasty party" image). How do they need to change? I think whatever way they go is difficult for them because of the way that the EU is so toxic for them. Make the concessions that big business and the wealthy want and risk alienating the Thatcherites. Or vice versa. I think the other big problem for them is that after a while, the narrative of a safe pair of hands economically begins to lose any power, and we are there now, particularly after discovering the "magic money tree" to stay in power with the DUP deal. Any change has to come about with an idea of what they are for: a narrative that can be sold to voters *. I think they underestimated Corbyn's ability to do this, hence the early election which was disastrous for them. I don't see any of the main players in the Tory Party being able to come up with such a narrative, so it may well fall to a new generation. I'd be interested in what anyone who is a Tory supporter or close to them would think of what big idea would engage people more widely in supporting them.
Edited to add: * the Tories were most successful in Scotland, under a leader who drove a narrative of "Vote Tory to keep the Union". I can't imagine Ruth Davidson appealing to that wide a group in England, but you never know.
Very good post and I agree with all of it. At present all the Tories have is to spend their energy attacking Corbyn. It would seem to me that they currently have nothing positive to offer.
Politics for a myriad of reasons has never been so interesting.
TBH all political parties in England are a coalition. The Tories are a mix of Patrician country types, the very wealthy, big business, free market liberals (in the classic use of liberal relating to economics), One Nation types, and Thatcherites (a mix of the socially conservative and people committed to free market solutions for most things, except defence and immigration and resolutely anti-EU). Most of the time this coalition holds together but it does come under strain (I'd characterise UKIP as basically a Thatcherite Party and the splits the Tories have had over Europe mirror the eternal question for socialists over whether they should stay in Labour, with UKIP representing the external faction and people like Fox and Davis those on the inside). The trouble they have going forward is that it is no longer guaranteed that this coalition will deliver power: this is again similar to Labour's problems in that the left-wing appeal of Corbyn works in much of London and the cities, but not yet in Scotland and is unlikely to make that much headway in smaller towns or rural areas. The Tory coalition held together in London through a mix of the very wealthy (Kensington, Westminster), the quite wealthy (Wandsworth and leafy suburbs) and the Thatcherites (Romford, Chingford, the less leafy parts of Bexley) and it was these strongholds that guaranteed 2 terms for Boris. At present, I think it is unthinkable that there could be a Tory mayor in London, just because a lot of those elements in that coalition look like they are separately weakening - demographic changes in the Outer London boroughs are happening faster than the inner and a lot of the gentrifiers in places like Peckham or Hackney do not yet identify with the Tories (at least in part because of their "nasty party" image). How do they need to change? I think whatever way they go is difficult for them because of the way that the EU is so toxic for them. Make the concessions that big business and the wealthy want and risk alienating the Thatcherites. Or vice versa. I think the other big problem for them is that after a while, the narrative of a safe pair of hands economically begins to lose any power, and we are there now, particularly after discovering the "magic money tree" to stay in power with the DUP deal. Any change has to come about with an idea of what they are for: a narrative that can be sold to voters *. I think they underestimated Corbyn's ability to do this, hence the early election which was disastrous for them. I don't see any of the main players in the Tory Party being able to come up with such a narrative, so it may well fall to a new generation. I'd be interested in what anyone who is a Tory supporter or close to them would think of what big idea would engage people more widely in supporting them.
Edited to add: * the Tories were most successful in Scotland, under a leader who drove a narrative of "Vote Tory to keep the Union". I can't imagine Ruth Davidson appealing to that wide a group in England, but you never know.
Agreed, a good post. Davidson offered some kind of ideological idea to underpin her campaign, Corbyn offered some kind of ideology too. The rest of the Tories struggle to establish any kind of vision, let alone one that appeals. In the vacuum it is no wonder that others define the vision for them, nasty party, uncaring, or whatever. There is a case to be made, even if you end up disagreeing, but they didn't or don't bother with aspiration for Conservatism.
Three reasons where their dreadful policies have forced them to change but not before causing untold damage to peoples lives.
Reducing Mental Health staff by 15% before realising that this costs more money (and lives) than it saves and then announcing a half baked scheme to rectify it.
Reducing prison officer numbers so severely that not only are officers lives put in danger, prisoners lives put in danger but also the general public's as record numbers of prisoners are released by mistake. Then announcing a campaign to recruit loads of prison officers.
It's been bugging me all day. That Jacob Rees-Mogg... his views I know are from the Catholic Church . But i have listened to it and he just sounded like the crap from my father that I've listened to all my life.
Absolute bullshit!! And what makes it more upsetting is that he sounds like the person my father is.... if me or my sisters had come home pregnant out of wedlock ... well We would've been shown the door headfirst with plenty swear words.
I've seen it said on here that he's a national treasure
Really?? I don't normally read the political threads. Show me the person that writes his views and I'll point to that person and tell them I think they're talking crap.
Comments
I don't know the breadth and depth of 'talent' in the Conservative party, but it looks like very slim pickings, as well as Labour I might add.
To hear talk the other day (after Question Time) of Rees Mogg is simply another fashionable conversation, not long ago it was all Dan Jarvis wasn't it?
At a time when we could do with some intelligent and shrewd politicians we are led by a freak show.
With Labour we just don't know with Corbyn, we won't until (if) he actually does the job. Labour seem to have a vision and some ideas and I think the shadow cabinet has a fresh look to it (with some exceptions).
I entered the election wholly disillusioned with our political class but have some small amount of optimism that things might be turning from the abyss with all sides.
I started this discussion as a bit of a get back at the Tories (although I never read the other thread, to painful). If you look at my opening post and the opening post of the Labour one I have used almost the same words partly to show the ridiculousness of it all and partly as two fingers up.
I think people on the left are by nature more predisposed to putting forward an argument, listening to all sides and responding accordingly. Politicians on the right always seem more adept at the short put down, avoiding the question and not presenting evidence and imo that is reflected on here. @Fiiish is the nearest we have to that (from the left) and he obviously learnt his trade on the other side of the debate.
So please @mcgrandall post more things that give us the opportunity to laugh at the Tories because the rest of us are just reasonable to do it!
I purposely didn't use absolute terms as obviously there are exceptions and I wouldn't class you (or anybody here) as a politician. But I stand by belief that the right are far better at quick put downs, ignoring the other side (right or wrong), soundbites and sounding common sense (but not bearing up to closer examination).
On the left we tend to examine everything, look at all sides and then debate a bit more.
Some Tories like Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have different politics to me but take the time to explain, see the other side and admit failings which is probably why I am bother to listen to them. On the other side Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell out Toried the Tories to some extent.
The old adage is true: opinions are like arseholes; everyone has one and everyone else's stinks.
Believe me, having been on both sides of various divides, there is little difference between the left and right in terms of idiots who refuse to consider their views or any views opposing their own. I can point to plenty of prominent leftists who certainly refuse to consider the opposite point of view.
I take your point but stand by my belief that there are very different debating/argument styles between right and left, not just on here but in our political classes too.
He survived, but walks with a stick, has very little use of his left arm and still finds speech difficult. He cannot walk very far or stay on his feet for too long. He has memory problems.
This could happen to anyone. No matter how well off you are today, in twenty months or twenty years time it could be totally different.
The Tories don't care about you now, and won't care about you then.
Here's his wonderful wife's facebook update from today:
"Oh joy Paul back to work assessment form has come through! Goody I look forward to filling in reams of paper to a deadline and then the worry that they'll say yeah you can work and take away his benefit. This is what we go through people! More than once a doctor who has assessed him has made a note that his award should be lifetime. But no, this govt knows better. Let's stress out the genuine people eh?!"
I think if May holds on for 12 months then she will probably hold on for two years or more. I don't think Boris will replace her as he is detested by large parts of the Tory parliamentary party, although that might be giving them too much credit.
If they have any sense then it will be a safe pair of hands, but hard to see who that will be and hard to assume that they have any sense. It could be a youngish outsider in the Cameron mould.
Most of the time this coalition holds together but it does come under strain (I'd characterise UKIP as basically a Thatcherite Party and the splits the Tories have had over Europe mirror the eternal question for socialists over whether they should stay in Labour, with UKIP representing the external faction and people like Fox and Davis those on the inside).
The trouble they have going forward is that it is no longer guaranteed that this coalition will deliver power: this is again similar to Labour's problems in that the left-wing appeal of Corbyn works in much of London and the cities, but not yet in Scotland and is unlikely to make that much headway in smaller towns or rural areas. The Tory coalition held together in London through a mix of the very wealthy (Kensington, Westminster), the quite wealthy (Wandsworth and leafy suburbs) and the Thatcherites (Romford, Chingford, the less leafy parts of Bexley) and it was these strongholds that guaranteed 2 terms for Boris. At present, I think it is unthinkable that there could be a Tory mayor in London, just because a lot of those elements in that coalition look like they are separately weakening - demographic changes in the Outer London boroughs are happening faster than the inner and a lot of the gentrifiers in places like Peckham or Hackney do not yet identify with the Tories (at least in part because of their "nasty party" image).
How do they need to change? I think whatever way they go is difficult for them because of the way that the EU is so toxic for them. Make the concessions that big business and the wealthy want and risk alienating the Thatcherites. Or vice versa. I think the other big problem for them is that after a while, the narrative of a safe pair of hands economically begins to lose any power, and we are there now, particularly after discovering the "magic money tree" to stay in power with the DUP deal.
Any change has to come about with an idea of what they are for: a narrative that can be sold to voters *. I think they underestimated Corbyn's ability to do this, hence the early election which was disastrous for them. I don't see any of the main players in the Tory Party being able to come up with such a narrative, so it may well fall to a new generation. I'd be interested in what anyone who is a Tory supporter or close to them would think of what big idea would engage people more widely in supporting them.
Edited to add: * the Tories were most successful in Scotland, under a leader who drove a narrative of "Vote Tory to keep the Union". I can't imagine Ruth Davidson appealing to that wide a group in England, but you never know.
Politics for a myriad of reasons has never been so interesting.
Davidson offered some kind of ideological idea to underpin her campaign, Corbyn offered some kind of ideology too. The rest of the Tories struggle to establish any kind of vision, let alone one that appeals.
In the vacuum it is no wonder that others define the vision for them, nasty party, uncaring, or whatever.
There is a case to be made, even if you end up disagreeing, but they didn't or don't bother with aspiration for Conservatism.
Reducing Mental Health staff by 15% before realising that this costs more money (and lives) than it saves and then announcing a half baked scheme to rectify it.
Reducing prison officer numbers so severely that not only are officers lives put in danger, prisoners lives put in danger but also the general public's as record numbers of prisoners are released by mistake. Then announcing a campaign to recruit loads of prison officers.
Being challenged in court on the legality of rising costs of employment tribunal fees https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/26/union-supreme-court-fees-unfair-dismissal-claims and then saying they will end the practice and repay £27m.
Absolute bullshit!! And what makes it more upsetting is that he sounds like the person my father is.... if me or my sisters had come home pregnant out of wedlock ... well We would've been shown the door headfirst with plenty swear words.
Why any Tory thinks he could be a leader?