[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[usernamed]

I completely agree. More people who change their vote according to the performance and beliefs of what they are voting for would make the world a better place.

I suppose it's part of the legacy of us being a tribal species that we seek to define ourselves with reference to political organisations, football teams, ideologies, or other societal subcultures. And I think that's fine as long as this choice to define yourself is revocable if that organisation is changing your values rather than reflecting them.

Political parties want guaranteed support that they can count on, to shrink the pool of swing voters, and to squeeze out any smaller parties that may (given enough oxygen) develop into a threat.

If a party can portray their ‘brand’ as aspirational, while denigrating the opposition, a lot of voters won’t dig into the policy detail, or even know what the policies are, they’ll just think “this brand reflects my values” and cast their vote for them, when, if they looked at what they were actually voting for, they may find that party does not reflect their values at all, and use their vote very differently.

Blind tribalism is what enables Trump and Biden in the US and is the explicit aim of those like Lynton Crosby and his ilk.

 

[Gwylan]

It's interesting that Johnson is instigating a three line whip on the vote for Contempt of the House. If he was so confident in his 78 majority (or has it gone down to 77 now?) he would allow a free vote and then be able to brag about how all his MPs love him.

It's 75 at the moment.

It wouldn't shock me to see a few abstentions but I can't see many Tories voting against him. They're holding themselves hostages to fortune if there are any more fines heading his way

 

[Lever]

I had this however the email from Williams included the email addresses of other people which is surely a breach of data protection!!!

Obviously it is a clumsy error which could and perhaps should be exposed for the reason you mention.... but I am reluctant to blight the career prospects of a twenty two year old Tory researcher from Haywards Heath, even though I find his message (and I am sure it is written by him) vacuous.....

 

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet]1516775683652997122[/tweet]

 

[drew]

Obviously it is a clumsy error which could and perhaps should be exposed for the reason you mention.... but I am reluctant to blight the career prospects of a twenty two year old Tory researcher from Haywards Heath, even though I find his message (and I am sure it is written by him) vacuous.....

Apparently they have already reported themselves. That said, he's chosen to get into bed with a tory with no morals/integrity so gets what is coming!!

 

[stewart12]

Just my one annual post on politics to repeat my confusion how people 'have' political parties.

"Oh. I'm a tory voter".

What the hell does that even mean!? No matter what their policy, what they say, how they conduct themselves, you vote for them because you've declared so?

I find it STAGGERING that people feel the desperate need for belonging. I appreciate I am writing this on a football message board where we all follow the same team, but if someone said something negative about my team, I wouldn't defend it if I felt they had a point.

Yet, when it comes to politics, the idea of sticking to a party who can literally change their policies/beliefs is bonkers to me. And with that declaration, comes an almost cult following where those within the party have to be defended no matter what.

I can't fathom how ANYONE can defend him, 'tory' (whatever that means) or not.

agreed

I think I've voted for a different party at each election. Can't for the life of me work out why someone would vote for the same people regardless of the leadership etc

Labour under Blair=completely different to Labour under Corbyn
Tories under Cameron=completely different to Tories under Johnson

 

[Since1982]

Similar to the response I received, except that somehow, either intentionally or deliberately, the email was forwarded from 'William Todd' her young parliamentary researcher! She really does herself no favours.......

This was 'her' message...

Good afternoon,


Thank you for your email. I have had many constituents write in to share their wide ranging thoughts, which include messages of support for the Prime Minister and Chancellor, as well as calls for changes. Rightly, I have wanted to review these approaches in full before coming back to you as swiftly as I could – this continues to be an evolving situation.

I share my constituents’ anger and real disappointment about what happened in Downing Street during the pandemic when Covid regulations were broken. However, the PM and the Chancellor have rightly apologised for the breaches. They made a mistake and both have faced the consequences.

Since these events, there has been a welcome major overhaul of the Downing Street operation and it is important to stress much has changed. It is also important to wait for Sue Gray’s full report into what was happening two years ago.

I continue to support Boris Johnson as we tackle serious domestic challenges around the cost of living and the war in Ukraine. His international leadership as our PM in response to the Russian invasion has been excellent, as President Zelensky acknowledged when the two met in Kyiv recently and we must continue to lead in our defence of peace in Europe .

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me.

Kind regards,


Mims

Yes, had the same followed by a panicky email asking me to delete it!

 

[vegster]

It's 75 at the moment.

It wouldn't shock me to see a few abstentions but I can't see many Tories voting against him. They're holding themselves hostages to fortune if there are any more fines heading his way

There needs to be a sudden huge number of MP'S that vote for the enquiry, for it to be passed ...you can tell that the average calibre of MP'S is spineless as most of them are quite happy to trot out the shameless official Downing St WhatsApp lines. " got all the big decisions right, vaccines rollout, more people in work ever, leading the world response to Russia.. biggest economic bounce back in G7....etc. "

He's not going anywhere though despite him moaning about his wage ( Chickenfeed ) his Downing St flat ( a craphole ) and having to pay for food at Chequers..I don't know why he does the job, he's crap at it and does as little work as he can.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Similar to the response I received, except that somehow, either intentionally or deliberately, the email was forwarded from 'William Todd' her young parliamentary researcher! She really does herself no favours.......

This was 'her' message...

Good afternoon,


Thank you for your email. I have had many constituents write in to share their wide ranging thoughts, which include messages of support for the Prime Minister and Chancellor, as well as calls for changes. Rightly, I have wanted to review these approaches in full before coming back to you as swiftly as I could – this continues to be an evolving situation.

I share my constituents’ anger and real disappointment about what happened in Downing Street during the pandemic when Covid regulations were broken. However, the PM and the Chancellor have rightly apologised for the breaches. They made a mistake and both have faced the consequences.

Since these events, there has been a welcome major overhaul of the Downing Street operation and it is important to stress much has changed. It is also important to wait for Sue Gray’s full report into what was happening two years ago.

I continue to support Boris Johnson as we tackle serious domestic challenges around the cost of living and the war in Ukraine. His international leadership as our PM in response to the Russian invasion has been excellent, as President Zelensky acknowledged when the two met in Kyiv recently and we must continue to lead in our defence of peace in Europe .

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me.

Kind regards,


Mims

The consequences [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

, if you get a chance ask her, her views on the whether the consequences of a £50 fine is proportionate for someone who is meant to be leading a country by example!

 

[Lever]

The consequences [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

, if you get a chance ask her, her views on the whether the consequences of a £50 fine is proportionate for someone who is meant to be leading a country by example!

This was my reply.... and I encourage everyone who agrees that our leaders should be decent, honest and trustworthy to write something similar to their PM-supporting local Tory MP....


Dear Mims Davies,

Your reply is noted with deep disappointment and anger.

Implicitly you have chosen to excuse the Prime Minister's dishonesty rather than defend the integrity of your difficult but extremely privileged role.

I disagree with your comment that the Chancellor and Prime Minister have 'faced the consequences'.

It gives me no pleasure to repeat that both the Conservative Party as a whole and you as our representative now face reputational consequences which rightly could and should be reflected in the ballot box when the opportunity arises.

I am genuinely sorry that you have chosen to take up such an inexcusable position over this matter.

 

[vegster]

This was my reply.... and I encourage everyone who agrees that our leaders should be decent, honest and trustworthy to write something similar to their PM-supporting local Tory MP....


Dear Mims Davies,

Your reply is noted with deep disappointment and anger.

Implicitly you have chosen to excuse the Prime Minister's dishonesty rather than defend the integrity of your difficult but extremely privileged role.

I disagree with your comment that the Chancellor and Prime Minister have 'faced the consequences'.

It gives me no pleasure to repeat that both the Conservative Party as a whole and you as our representative now face reputational consequences which rightly could and should be reflected in the ballot box when the opportunity arises.

I am genuinely sorry that you have chosen to take up such an inexcusable position over this matter.

You could add something along the lines of.. " if you believe the PM is of good character and did not mislead the House then please vote for his actions to be scrutinised by the House Standards Committee, it will be a chance to clear his name for once and for all and " move on with the important business of government.. " he should be grateful for this opportunity...

 

[Since1982]

You could add something along the lines of.. " if you believe the PM is of good character and did not mislead the House then please vote for his actions to be scrutinised by the House Standards Committee, it will be a chance to clear his name for once and for all and " move on with the important business of government.. " he should be grateful for this opportunity...

I went with “ Can you explain what will it take for you to lose confidence in the PM – we know it is not criminal behaviour, lying to the Queen, public and parliament, breaking the Ministerial Code, ignoring the recommendations of his own ethics advisor with regards to the workplace bullying by the Home Secretary – how low does he have to stoop for you to be concerned?”

No reply as yet.

 

[Audax]

Reports this morning that the government whips have backed down, the inquiry will happen - question will be on timing. Labour's motion calls for it to start after the police investigation is complete, Tory's will apparently amend it to stipulate after both the police investigation is complete and the Sue Gray report is released. The latter is important, as Boris controls the timing of when (indeed: if) that report gets released.

Also appears that Labour's Bryant has stepped aside as chair of the relevant committee as a result of previous criticisms he's made about Boris, and it's likely he'll be replaced in the chair by a Tory (note: I'm sure I saw a tweet yesterday indicating that the committee in question *must* be chaired by an opposition MP). All part of making supporting the motion more palatable for Tory backbenchers and also not supporting it more untenable for them. Result of that being that the gov whips got nervous and backed away from whipping against the motion.

IMO, this all goes to show how weak Boris' hold is despite that massive majority. Even in cases where they are confident they have the numbers, they're so worried about sizeable rebellions via abstention (or indeed voting with the opposition) and the optics of that, that they will back away from a winnable vote to save face.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Reports this morning that the government whips have backed down, the inquiry will happen - question will be on timing. Labour's motion calls for it to start after the police investigation is complete, Tory's will apparently amend it to stipulate after both the police investigation is complete and the Sue Gray report is released. The latter is important, as Boris controls the timing of when (indeed: if) that report gets released.

Also appears that Labour's Bryant has stepped aside as chair of the relevant committee as a result of previous criticisms he's made about Boris, and it's likely he'll be replaced in the chair by a Tory (note: I'm sure I saw a tweet yesterday indicating that the committee in question *must* be chaired by an opposition MP). All part of making supporting the motion more palatable for Tory backbenchers and also not supporting it more untenable for them. Result of that being that the gov whips got nervous and backed away from whipping against the motion.

IMO, this all goes to show how weak Boris' hold is despite that massive majority. Even in cases where they are confident they have the numbers, they're so worried about sizeable rebellions via abstention (or indeed voting with the opposition) and the optics of that, that they will back away from a winnable vote to save face.

Great summary.

With Boris the Liar in control of the Sue Gray report, it gives him the power to delay until after the next election. But his problem will be the pressure on himself and his sycophants after the anticipated Tory councillor massacre next month.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Great summary.

With Boris the Liar in control of the Sue Gray report, it gives him the power to delay until after the next election. But his problem will be the pressure on himself and his sycophants after the anticipated Tory councillor massacre next month.

And further fines.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet]1517085181567451137[/tweet]

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Prime Minister's Conduct Debate is a breath of fresh air without the presence of BJ: calm, considered, dignified, respectful. Everything you'd hope from parliament in fact. The place is immeasurably improved by the absence of The Rogue PM

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Prime Minister's Conduct Debate is a breath of fresh air without the presence of BJ: calm, considered, dignified, respectful. Everything you'd hope from parliament in fact. The place is immeasurably improved by the absence of The Rogue PM

The "Crime Minister".

 

[jimhigham]

Great summary.

With Boris the Liar in control of the Sue Gray report, it gives him the power to delay until after the next election. But his problem will be the pressure on himself and his sycophants after the anticipated Tory councillor massacre next month.

Not sure we’ll get a Tory massacre at all. Most of the wards up for grabs this time around are predominately in Labour areas. The report suggesting the Tories could lose up to 800 councillors was published in the Telegraph, which smacks of expectation management; trying to paint anything south of that number as a success. Something closer to 400 seems more plausible.

 

[rippleman]

Great opportunity for Labour to take control of Worthing.

The former Tory stronghold is now NOC with Tories and Labour on 17 each, 2 LibDems and an Independent. The Leader of the Council is a Tory even though the opposition parties combined hold more seats. Not sure how that happens!

Unfortunately, the Green Party has seen fit to put candidates in every bloody Ward and I fear that they might attract votes away from the Labour Party letting in the Tory. There needs to be some joined up thinking. I will be p*ssed if any Tories get in because the Greens have split the anti-Tory vote.