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

[nicko31]

A majority of Tory voters will vote Tory come what may, but I think a significant chunk will choose not to vote. That way, the Tories will receive a bloody nose without their supporters throwing the punch.

Does seems that way, people being convinced to punch themselves in the face every few years. Then wonder why we have such weak labour laws and the worse pension in the developed world.

Over a decade of economic stagnation, when will the penny drop ?

 

[beorhthelm]

How many seats do the Tories need to lose to see a leadership contest triggered? What do people think?

good question, expect something different for different MPs. i expect where losses are counts for a lot too, losing them in normally Labour areas wont wiegh as much as losing ormally Tory areas.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Uh oh. The government voted to make the Electoral Commission answerable to the government but the Fixed Term Parliament Act was also repealed.

[tweet]1521370755921068032[/tweet]

 

[Peteinblack]

Does seems that way, people being convinced to punch themselves in the face every few years. Then wonder why we have such weak labour laws and the worse pension in the developed world.

Over a decade of economic stagnation, when will the penny drop ?

Tragically, I don't think it ever will for a lot of these people. However bad things continue to get, the Tory sycophants will continue blaming the BBC, senior civil servants, Leftie lawyers, the 'vindictive' EU, the 'obstructive' House of Lords', people in dinghies in the English Channel, liberal do-gooders, the Woke, 'Marxist' universities, etc.

And, of course, bleating "Yeah, but it would be worse under Liebour."

I genuinely think that some of today's Conservatives are as blinkered, dogmatic and unwilling to acknowledge failure as the mad Communists who once ruled the Soviet Union.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I see from this morning's interview with Johnson that we have a PM who now has no idea how many times he has broken the law ?

The prime minister also said he had “no idea” whether he would receive more fines from the Metropolitan Police over rule-breaking government parties in the weeks ahead.

I do wonder what must go on in your head to see something like this and think, Yep, that's definitely the Government for me, now where's my voting card

I wonder if anyone on NSC could give an insight into that line of thinking ?

 

[rippleman]

Can you believe it?

Boris Johnson has conceded current government help to ease the cost of living is not enough, but said further action now could make things worse.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61306589

"Make things worse"?

What a thick bungle**** he truly is.

 

[BBassic]

I see from this morning's interview with Johnson that we have a PM who now has no idea how many times he has broken the law ?

The prime minister also said he had “no idea” whether he would receive more fines from the Metropolitan Police over rule-breaking government parties in the weeks ahead.

I do wonder what must go on in your head to see something like this and think, Yep, that's definitely the Government for me, now where's my voting card

I wonder if anyone on NSC could give an insight into that line of thinking ?

For some it's not about what's good for them or the country. It's about winning, about sticking it to them. And who they are depends on whichever tribe you belong to.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

Can you believe it?

Boris Johnson has conceded current government help to ease the cost of living is not enough, but said further action now could make things worse.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61306589

"Make things worse"?

What a thick bungle**** he truly is.

No, he's right. It will make things worse... for him and for the Tory party. He can't possibly give money away now when he needs it for a pre-election tax break. All so predictable.

 

[zefarelly]

How many seats do the Tories need to lose to see a leadership contest triggered? What do people think?

300 would be a good start

 

[jimhigham]

Labour should have had billboards, double page spreads and a TV campaign listing all the ****-ups, crimes and lies perpetrated by the Tory’s. Really smashed it home. I fear they have done far too little, far too late. Remain campaign all over again. Woefully inadequate.

Finite resources. Sadly the Labour Party doesn’t have pockets nearly as deep as the Conservatives and have had to fight three general elections over a four year period. They simply have to keep their ready cash for the big one.

This might go some way to explaining why their online presence is so woeful. Their YouTube channel barely musters a blip on the national consciousness.

 

[nicko31]

Can you believe it?

Boris Johnson has conceded current government help to ease the cost of living is not enough, but said further action now could make things worse.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61306589

"Make things worse"?

What a thick bungle**** he truly is.

People will be OK in the medium / long term. Just have to go cold and hungry in the near term, where's the wartime spirit?

 

[usernamed]

Does seems that way, people being convinced to punch themselves in the face every few years. Then wonder why we have such weak labour laws and the worse pension in the developed world.

Over a decade of economic stagnation, when will the penny drop ?

In honesty? My suspicion is never. As others have pointed out, a lot of people have picked a tribe.

Democracy only works well when the electorate bother to read manifestos, and (to an extent) take looking back at past iterations of a party, and its current personalities out of the equation.

It’s not X-Factor, it’s the policies you’re really voting for. Some seemingly unlikable people are actually quite good at their jobs, although the current crop seem to combine charmlessness with incompetence, in a “worst of both worlds” manner.

You will have seen on this very thread a number of comments along the lines of “I’ll never vote x” which is a ludicrous position to take.

Politics shouldn’t be treated like football, it isn’t pick a side and support your team whatever happens. America is broken precisely because both sides have managed to weaponise their support in exactly this manner, and terrifyingly it works.

https://ed.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/party_over_policy_0.pdf

The research linked to above is wordy and not going to be for everyone, but (paraphrasing) what it showed was:

Students at Yale (who earlier in the term had self-identified as partisan and claimed welfare was something they felt strongly about) were all given (fake) newspaper details of a welfare bill, where the details had been changed in the following ways:

1. Some copies of the article detailed an extremely harsh welfare regime, while others detailed an extremely generous welfare regime.

2. Some copies of each of the above types of article had quotes from prominent Republicans supporting the deal, while other copies (of both types) had quotes from prominent Democrats supporting the deal.

3. Participants were then asked to rate their favourability toward the proposed scheme, and the results showed that it didn’t matter whether the scheme was harsh or generous, all that mattered was whether the scheme was endorsed by their tribe or the “other” tribe. The students paid no attention to the scheme itself, only who endorsed it.

These test subjects were students at one of America’s top universities, who had stated that they had a strong interest in the subject, and yet neither side picked out the scheme which technically fitted their politics.

There can be no improvement in our public life until we find a way to shake off the idea that our politics is integral to our identity, and instead treat our politics as something we select at each election. Sorry for the length of the post.

 

[Pavilionaire]

In honesty? My suspicion is never. As others have pointed out, a lot of people have picked a tribe.

Democracy only works well when the electorate bother to read manifestos, and (to an extent) take looking back at past iterations of a party, and its current personalities out of the equation.

It’s not X-Factor, it’s the policies you’re really voting for. Some seemingly unlikable people are actually quite good at their jobs, although the current crop seem to combine charmlessness with incompetence, in a “worst of both worlds” manner.

You will have seen on this very thread a number of comments along the lines of “I’ll never vote x” which is a ludicrous position to take.

Politics shouldn’t be treated like football, it isn’t pick a side and support your team whatever happens. America is broken precisely because both sides have managed to weaponise their support in exactly this manner, and terrifyingly it works.

https://ed.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/party_over_policy_0.pdf

The research linked to above is wordy and not going to be for everyone, but (paraphrasing) what it showed was:

Students at Yale (who earlier in the term had self-identified as partisan and claimed welfare was something they felt strongly about) were all given (fake) newspaper details of a welfare bill, where the details had been changed in the following ways:

1. Some copies of the article detailed an extremely harsh welfare regime, while others detailed an extremely generous welfare regime.

2. Some copies of each of the above types of article had quotes from prominent Republicans supporting the deal, while other copies (of both types) had quotes from prominent Democrats supporting the deal.

3. Participants were then asked to rate their favourability toward the proposed scheme, and the results showed that it didn’t matter whether the scheme was harsh or generous, all that mattered was whether the scheme was endorsed by their tribe or the “other” tribe. The students paid no attention to the scheme itself, only who endorsed it.

These test subjects were students at one of America’s top universities, who had stated that they had a strong interest in the subject, and yet neither side picked out the scheme which technically fitted their politics.

There can be no improvement in our public life until we find a way to shake off the idea that our politics is integral to our identity, and instead treat our politics as something we select at each election. Sorry for the length of the post.

Tribal politics in the USA and UK - both of which have 2 dominant parties. Who'd have thought it?

As I have said on many occasion, FPTP and the Westminster Houses of Parliament locks in confrontational, tribal politics. The Tories and Labour have put self-interest above the health of our democracy by refusing to support Proportional Representation or Single Transferable Vote.

 

[birthofanorange]

In honesty? My suspicion is never. As others have pointed out, a lot of people have picked a tribe.

Democracy only works well when the electorate bother to read manifestos, and (to an extent) take looking back at past iterations of a party, and its current personalities out of the equation.

It’s not X-Factor, it’s the policies you’re really voting for. Some seemingly unlikable people are actually quite good at their jobs, although the current crop seem to combine charmlessness with incompetence, in a “worst of both worlds” manner.

You will have seen on this very thread a number of comments along the lines of “I’ll never vote x” which is a ludicrous position to take.

Politics shouldn’t be treated like football, it isn’t pick a side and support your team whatever happens. America is broken precisely because both sides have managed to weaponise their support in exactly this manner, and terrifyingly it works.

https://ed.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/party_over_policy_0.pdf

The research linked to above is wordy and not going to be for everyone, but (paraphrasing) what it showed was:

Students at Yale (who earlier in the term had self-identified as partisan and claimed welfare was something they felt strongly about) were all given (fake) newspaper details of a welfare bill, where the details had been changed in the following ways:

1. Some copies of the article detailed an extremely harsh welfare regime, while others detailed an extremely generous welfare regime.

2. Some copies of each of the above types of article had quotes from prominent Republicans supporting the deal, while other copies (of both types) had quotes from prominent Democrats supporting the deal.

3. Participants were then asked to rate their favourability toward the proposed scheme, and the results showed that it didn’t matter whether the scheme was harsh or generous, all that mattered was whether the scheme was endorsed by their tribe or the “other” tribe. The students paid no attention to the scheme itself, only who endorsed it.

These test subjects were students at one of America’s top universities, who had stated that they had a strong interest in the subject, and yet neither side picked out the scheme which technically fitted their politics.

There can be no improvement in our public life until we find a way to shake off the idea that our politics is integral to our identity, and instead treat our politics as something we select at each election. Sorry for the length of the post.

Excellent post and sadly reflective of the true nature of most voters.

 

[beorhthelm]

...3. Participants were then asked to rate their favourability toward the proposed scheme, and the results showed that it didn’t matter whether the scheme was harsh or generous, all that mattered was whether the scheme was endorsed by their tribe or the “other” tribe. The students paid no attention to the scheme itself, only who endorsed it.

These test subjects were students at one of America’s top universities, who had stated that they had a strong interest in the subject, and yet neither side picked out the scheme which technically fitted their politics.

sounds a lot like a recent tax rise. many convinced by argument that tax rises are necessary, when they came along many who'd advocated them decided they are the wrong policy.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

It seems the corruption and 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude from the government has seaped further across the party. The PCC for Nottinghamshire - who claimed she would clamp down on speeding - has to go to court for getting 5 speeding tickets. She is of course from the Tory party !

 

[WATFORD zero]

It seems the corruption and 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude from the government has seaped further across the party. The PCC for Nottinghamshire - who claimed she would clamp down on speeding - has to go to court for getting 5 speeding tickets. She is of course from the Tory party !

To be fair, if she's a PCC she's just a dodgy chancer, trying to take money off of the police force, where it's really needed, whatever her party

 

[Machiavelli]

sounds a lot like a recent tax rise. many convinced by argument that tax rises are necessary, when they came along many who'd advocated them decided they are the wrong policy.

I think you might inadvertently be having a pop at me. I'm of the view that if you want decent public services, you have to pay for them -- which is in stark contrast to what's prevailed for too long, which is that you can have both 'low taxes'* and decent public services. I prefer decent public services to tax cuts. But I also prefer that taxation is progressive (ie the affluent pay a higher amount), that it targets (unproductive) assets over (productive) labour, and that taxation is oriented against harmful activity (particularly environmental destruction) and towards the future (ie tax breaks on renewables).

I also think you might be referencing the recent NI rise which addresses the recent shortfall in NHS funding in light of the pandemic, and the longer-term issue of social care (both of which are necessary). That's bad, because:
-- it's badly timed, right in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis -- how many other G7 countries are increasing taxes?
-- it targets labour rather than assets or, put differently and not entirely accurately, the working-age population rather than those that don't work ...
-- ... and also targets employers as well as employees.

 

[Dave the OAP]

[tweet]1521390442050465792[/tweet]

It’s an Indian IT services company, that is run out of India and has Indian owners

India hate us and are openly trading and supporting Putins Russia who provide 90% of India’s military hardware.

Why do anyone think they will support the uk/eu in sanctions etc etc.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I think you might inadvertently be having a pop at me. I'm of the view that if you want decent public services, you have to pay for them -- which is in stark contrast to what's prevailed for too long, which is that you can have both 'low taxes'* and decent public services. I prefer decent public services to tax cuts. But I also prefer that taxation is progressive (ie the affluent pay a higher amount), that it targets (unproductive) assets over (productive) labour, and that taxation is oriented against harmful activity (particularly environmental destruction) and towards the future (ie tax breaks on renewables).

I also think you might be referencing the recent NI rise which addresses the recent shortfall in NHS funding in light of the pandemic, and the longer-term issue of social care (both of which are necessary). That's bad, because:
-- it's badly timed, right in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis -- how many other G7 countries are increasing taxes?
-- it targets labour rather than assets or, put differently and not entirely accurately, the working-age population rather than those that don't work ...
-- ... and also targets employers as well as employees.

I can't help but wonder, the way this account misses the point consistently and completely so often getting discussions going off at tangents, drops so many 'I understand' and 'I believe' posts that never seems to quote a source but always disappears when asked for a source, has increased their post count enormously whilst other posters have disappeared and appears allergic to the use of capital letters, whether it could be a genuine, one person account.

But I'm sure it's just me being paranoid