[Politics] Liz Truss **RESIGNS 20/10/2022**

[zefarelly]

Wonderful speech. Thats more like it Hopefully it isn't just talk though,

Cupid stunt

Shrinkie dinks is a more realistic outlook.

 

[sydney]

Didnt have permission, now getting into trouble over its use. Brilliant

i was referring to the post not the song ....M people should sue her.

 

[clapham_gull]

In terms of their morality of course not but in terms of their perception to the country at large "The Tory Corbyn" is a very apt description.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Nobody voted for a war either - Fracking is only being talked about again because of that.

It shouldn't be AT ALL. We need to invest in green energy, not bloody fracking. This could be solved so easily and at a cheaper cost.

 

[Hugo Rune]

In terms of their morality of course not but in terms of their perception to the country at large "The Tory Corbyn" is a very apt description.

I’m not sure that it true to be honest.

The media and the FPTP electoral system both hugely exaggerated the defeat Corbyn suffered. But in pure numbers, the Labour Party received 10,269,051 votes in 2019, Tony Blair’s Labour won 412 seats in 2001 with 10,724,953 votes for comparison. In his two elections, more people voted for Corbyn’s Labour than voted for Brown, Milliband or Blair’s Labour (in his final election win).

In addition, the popularity of Johnson was profoundly overplayed and exaggerated by those two factors also. Johnson only managed to get around 330,000 more votes than Theresa May in the 2017 election but FPTP gifted him 48 more seats. The comparison here is with Jo Swinson who’s Lib Dem’s increased their vote by 1.3m yet she ended up with one seat less in Parliament (her own).

If there were to be a snap election, the thought of 10,269,051 people voting for Liz Truss and her Tories is truly absurd, even with the inevitable campaign from the Right Wing media the profound influence of the richest 1% pushing her agenda. Labour have seen record leads in the polls. William Hague somehow convinced 8,357,615 people to vote for him in 2001, that is a record low for the Tories against comparable elections with a similar voting population/turn-out. Truss would struggle to get anywhere near that with her polling.

So in terms of popularity, you are way out. However, if your point of reference for ‘perception to the country at large’ is GB News, The Express, The Sun and The Daily Mail, your argument is actually sound. However, I’d reject that particular calculation of popular opinion.

Truss will become the most unpopular PM ever if she survives to 2024 according to current polls. She has the potential to destroy the Conservative Party (with the final bullet in the head being a new voting system such as PV). You simply can’t compare her to Corbyn who convinced 10m+ voters to back his party twice, Truss will struggle to get 7m behind her Party in the next election.

 

[sparkie]

In terms of their morality of course not but in terms of their perception to the country at large "The Tory Corbyn" is a very apt description.

It's a good and accurate nickname for Truss. I'll adopt it.

 

[vegster]

I’m not sure that it true to be honest.

The media and the FPTP electoral system both hugely exaggerated the defeat Corbyn suffered. But in pure numbers, the Labour Party received 10,269,051 votes in 2019, Tony Blair’s Labour won 412 seats in 2001 with 10,724,953 votes for comparison. In his two elections, more people voted for Corbyn’s Labour than voted for Brown, Milliband or Blair’s Labour (in his final election win).

In addition, the popularity of Johnson was profoundly overplayed and exaggerated by those two factors also. Johnson only managed to get around 330,000 more votes than Theresa May in the 2017 election but FPTP gifted him 48 more seats. The comparison here is with Jo Swinson who’s Lib Dem’s increased their vote by 1.3m yet she ended up with one seat less in Parliament (her own).

If there were to be a snap election, the thought of 10,269,051 people voting for Liz Truss and her Tories is truly absurd, even with the inevitable campaign from the Right Wing media the profound influence of the richest 1% pushing her agenda. Labour have seen record leads in the polls. William Hague somehow convinced 8,357,615 people to vote for him in 2001, that is a record low for the Tories against comparable elections with a similar voting population/turn-out. Truss would struggle to get anywhere near that with her polling.

So in terms of popularity, you are way out. However, if your point of reference for ‘perception to the country at large’ is GB News, The Express, The Sun and The Daily Mail, your argument is actually sound. However, I’d reject that particular calculation of popular opinion.

Truss will become the most unpopular PM ever if she survives to 2024 according to current polls. She has the potential to destroy the Conservative Party (with the final bullet in the head being a new voting system such as PV). You simply can’t compare her to Corbyn who convinced 10m+ voters to back his party twice, Truss will struggle to get 7m behind her Party in the next election.

Daily Mail front page today saying " Get behind Truss or fall in to the Ruinous clutches of Starmer " ....I truly dread to think what another four years of " Conservative " rule would do to what's left of the country.. we are entering Soylent Green territory already.

 

[anygivensunday]

It's a good and accurate nickname for Truss. I'll adopt it.

I'm particularly fond of John Crace's moniker for her in The Guardian of 'Trussterf***'

 

[bhafc99]

Daily Mail front page today saying " Get behind Truss or fall in to the Ruinous clutches of Starmer " ....I truly dread to think what another four years of " Conservative " rule would do to what's left of the country.. we are entering Soylent Green territory already.

A few more polls showing 30% leads for Labour, and we'll be getting "Back Liz or Starmer will personally slaughter all UK children under 13 using a rusty bread knife, as Angela Rayner sloshes their blood onto her face laughing demonically"

 

[Hugo Rune]

I'm particularly fond of John Crace's moniker for her in The Guardian of 'Trussterf***'

I hadn’t seen that. It won’t be beaten.

 

[Bakero]

I'm particularly fond of John Crace's moniker for her in The Guardian of 'Trussterf***'

Librium Liz.

Crace's column yesterday was one of his best. Particularly this paragraph:

"The problems started when she tried to speak. She still hasn’t learned the basic rhythms of language. Understood the purpose of punctuation. Sentences collided with one another so that any sense was lost. Her delivery was awkward, trying to escape the monotone by putting the stress on random words. She frequently looked towards the wings as if begging for help and her hands chopped the air as if she was a 1960s TV puppet. If you looked closely, you could see the strings. Mostly she looked nervous. As if she knew she wasn’t cut out for these gigs. She grasped a glass of water in two hands to stop herself spilling it."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/05/liz-truss-conservative-party-conference-speech

 

[Audax]

there is a right curve idea that, knowing we're going into recession, its about how it looks on the other side.

Maybe she could borrow an idea from ancient Australian politics (hey, Australia is such a young country the 90's qualify as ancient!): Paul Keating, in 1990, famously opened a speech with a sentence that included the phrase "this is a recession that Australia had to have".

Interestingly, if you look at the preceding years of the Hawke/Keating government and their policies, one element of how that recession came about originated in the combination of high interest rates on one hand while trying to encourage increased spending through high wage growth and lower taxes (a strategy that failed spectacularly). Sound familiar?

Truss will become the most unpopular PM ever if she survives to 2024 according to current polls.

I believe she's already achieved that - her personal popularity rating is now lower than Boris' ever reached and also lower than Corbyn's ever was.

[tweet]1577581545682046976[/tweet]

---

And finally, for those who peddled the false line that current mortgage rates aren't a problem because they were so much higher in the late 80's / early 90's ... here's a chart that shows why today's rates (and the further increases expected in the coming months) are just as big a problem:

[tweet]1577624054718029824[/tweet]

 

[Is it PotG?]

 

[nicko31]

Librium Liz.

Crace's column yesterday was one of his best. Particularly this paragraph:

"The problems started when she tried to speak. She still hasn’t learned the basic rhythms of language. Understood the purpose of punctuation. Sentences collided with one another so that any sense was lost. Her delivery was awkward, trying to escape the monotone by putting the stress on random words. She frequently looked towards the wings as if begging for help and her hands chopped the air as if she was a 1960s TV puppet. If you looked closely, you could see the strings. Mostly she looked nervous. As if she knew she wasn’t cut out for these gigs. She grasped a glass of water in two hands to stop herself spilling it."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/05/liz-truss-conservative-party-conference-speech

Her presentation and delivery is poor, but if she had decent policies that could be brushed aside.

The fact is both are dreadful

Her reference to "think tanks" yesterday was laughable when you consider the influence of the IEA etc on her...

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Where has this 'anti-growth coalition' phrase come from?

Aside from it making zero sense and, presumably, having no actual evidence behind it, what are they actually trying to say about it? That Labour and other parties don't want to achieve and/or encourage growth in the country? If people are stupid (sorry, there's no other word for it) enough to believe that (just like all the Brexit and levelling up promises) then they truly deserve what they get if she/they get voted back in.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Where has this 'anti-growth coalition' phrase come from?

Aside from it making zero sense and, presumably, having no actual evidence behind it, what are they actually trying to say about it? That Labour and other parties don't want to achieve and/or encourage growth in the country? If people are stupid (sorry, there's no other word for it) enough to believe that (just like all the Brexit and levelling up promises) then they truly deserve what they get if she/they get voted back in.

It came from simple panicking desperation coupled with unbridled incompetence, but it will still hook a couple (as posts on this thread confirm)

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Where has this 'anti-growth coalition' phrase come from?

Aside from it making zero sense and, presumably, having no actual evidence behind it, what are they actually trying to say about it? That Labour and other parties don't want to achieve and/or encourage growth in the country? If people are stupid (sorry, there's no other word for it) enough to believe that (just like all the Brexit and levelling up promises) then they truly deserve what they get if she/they get voted back in.

Spare me, with your Project Fear.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Where has this 'anti-growth coalition' phrase come from?

Aside from it making zero sense and, presumably, having no actual evidence behind it, what are they actually trying to say about it? That Labour and other parties don't want to achieve and/or encourage growth in the country? If people are stupid (sorry, there's no other word for it) enough to believe that (just like all the Brexit and levelling up promises) then they truly deserve what they get if she/they get voted back in.

Truss politics are based on hate and division relying on the false principle that everyone is selfish, greedy and out for themselves.

A new common enemy is needed.

Sure, anti-Putin rhetoric works with the voters but every party is coming out with the same content. To vote Tory, they have to get their followers (who’ll see no personal benefit from their Government) to ‘hate’. It’s usually a negative vote, whether it be hate against benefit scroungers, EU bureaucrats, trans-rights campaigners, teachers, the BBC, equity campaigners, nurses, unions or even the Police. They’ll throw anyone under the bus to anger the people who vote Tory but are not bright enough to understand that they’ll get no benefit whatsoever from voting for them.

The Anti-Growth-Coalition is the latest attempt to do this. Let’s just say that Comedians across the country are absolutely delighted with this! I don’t think ‘stupid’ people are going to fall for this one and I’d suggest that Starmer will be bleating ‘Anti-Growth-Coaltion’ a hell of a lot more than Truss!

In reality, the Anti-Growth-Coalition are all those people who put things like the environment, family, friends, charity, empathy, concern for others, belief in society ahead of the ambition that life is all about making as much money as possible - which Truss economics is all about.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Librium Liz.

Crace's column yesterday was one of his best. Particularly this paragraph:

"The problems started when she tried to speak. She still hasn’t learned the basic rhythms of language. Understood the purpose of punctuation. Sentences collided with one another so that any sense was lost. Her delivery was awkward, trying to escape the monotone by putting the stress on random words. She frequently looked towards the wings as if begging for help and her hands chopped the air as if she was a 1960s TV puppet. If you looked closely, you could see the strings. Mostly she looked nervous. As if she knew she wasn’t cut out for these gigs. She grasped a glass of water in two hands to stop herself spilling it."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/05/liz-truss-conservative-party-conference-speech

That thing she does at the end of words, adding an extra half syllable, with a half Australian upward, faux questioning intonationnn?

It's pure fake.

Here she is in her student days applying for a bit of pin money doing voice overs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wB0OkcCps8

 

[sparkie]

Where has this 'anti-growth coalition' phrase come from?

Aside from it making zero sense and, presumably, having no actual evidence behind it, what are they actually trying to say about it? That Labour and other parties don't want to achieve and/or encourage growth in the country? If people are stupid (sorry, there's no other word for it) enough to believe that (just like all the Brexit and levelling up promises) then they truly deserve what they get if she/they get voted back in.

The Anti Growth Coalition are the ERG Tories who forced a growth-cutting type of Brexit on us.