The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[Genie]

 

[theboyangel]

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

 

Is anyone surprised by the snakelike moves by Boris & Co.

Any excuses to cling on to power. 

what an utter bunch of cretins… 

[ml1dch]

11 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think it's quite important to note that her criticism is very much not because 'you are being too much of a dick to foreigners', which is neither legality, practicality nor efficacy. 

Before people get too happy about Theresa May, for no good reason. 

Don't worry, I will never get happy about anything that Theresa May has ever done or, or will ever do. 

[Davkaus]

14 minutes ago, Genie said:

 

The Sue Gray report that they're sitting on and can publish whenever they like, but yesterday stated (for what their word is worth) that they'd publish when all met investigations into the matter were resolved. So they'd just need to find one investigation they can stall to kick this into the long grass

[Phil Silvers]

21 minutes ago, Genie said:

 

This must mean the whips are struggling to get enough ***** to toe the party line.

[Chindie]

13 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Don't worry, I will never get happy about anything that Theresa May has ever done or, or will ever do. 

I dunno, she's got 1 good action left in her. Dying.

[Genie]

5 minutes ago, Phil Silvers said:

This must mean the whips are struggling to get enough ***** to toe the party line.

Yep. I’d have thought if they were going to “win” they’d want it done and out of the way. An attempt to stall must mean they are worried.

[ml1dch]

15 minutes ago, Genie said:

Yep. I’d have thought if they were going to “win” they’d want it done and out of the way. An attempt to stall must mean they are worried.

They'd win it easily. The issue is how it looks. 

The tipping point for all of this was the Paterson misjudgement. When they thought they could just get a minor bit of corruption done and out of the way.

They want to make this all go away, but to do so in such a way that it doesn't look to the casual observer that they are just making it go away.

They can get anything they like through Parliament. They can't make people whose votes they rely on who couldn't visit their dying family believe that they aren't despicable scum.

Edited April 20, 2022 by ml1dch

[Genie]

12 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

They'd win it easily. The issue is how it looks. 

The tipping point for all of this was the Paterson misjudgement. When they thought they could just get a minor bit of corruption done and out of the way.

They want to make this all go away, but to do so in such a way that it doesn't look to the casual observer that they are just making it go away.

They can get anything they like through Parliament. They can't make people whose votes they rely on who couldn't visit their dying family believe that they aren't despicable scum.

That’s kind of contradictory, it suggests they can get what they want through because of the majority, but also that MP’s don’t want to back him.

I know what you mean, but MP’s are now front and centre in Boris’s mess and they don’t like it. Everyone that backs him will have an inbox full of angry constituents.

I guess the attempt to defer the vote is because of the likelihood of more fines incoming. If the back him now, they look bad now, and even worse later. The gift that keeps giving.

There will be resentment because they are now embroiled in a turd of their boss’s making.

[Davkaus]

He is a habitual, unrepentant liar, who actively harms our democracy each day he remains in power. If he's that important to the Ukraine conflict, hand the word removed a rifle and send him back to Kyiv.

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/boris-johnson-repeats-false-employment-claim-in-parliament-again-having-already-admitted-its-wrong/

Quote

Boris Johnson has repeated a false claim about employment for the ninth time – despite admitting he knows it’s incorrect.

During Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Johnson claimed there are “record numbers of people now back in work, productivity back above what it was. More than half a million people back on the payroll than there were before the pandemic began.” 

But weeks earlier, while appearing before the Liaison Committee, he acknowledged it was wrong of him to make the claim about overall employment figures. There are more people on payrolls, but the large drop in the number of people who are self-employed means total employment is down.

 

He doesn't care about truth, he cares about spewing enough bullshit that the uninformed think "well, that sounds like a fact".

[ml1dch]

17 minutes ago, Genie said:

That’s kind of contradictory, it suggests they can get what they want through because of the majority, but also that MP’s don’t want to back him.

It's not in the least bit contradictory.  They have two groups that they need to keep onside to have any sort of medium term future. The Tory parliamentary party and their potential voters.

They have enough control to make enough of the first group do broadly what they want. But as seen with the Paterson affair, if they turn on that control it can backfire to make the second group turn on them. MPs definitely don't want to back him, but nor do they want to set a fire under the institution that their career relies on. So they will. 

This is a risky attempt to control the narrative just enough that they control the first without alienating the second. It probably won't work, but they don't really have any good options to go with instead. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by ml1dch

[Genie]

3 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

It's not in the least bit contradictory.  They have two groups that they need to keep onside to have any sort of medium term future. The Tory parliamentary party and their potential voters.

They have enough control to make enough of the first group do broadly what they want. But as seen with the Paterson affair, if they turn on that power it can backfire to make the second group turn on them. MPs definitely don't want to back him, but nor do they want to set a fire under the institution that their career relies on. So they will. 

This is a risky attempt to control the narrative just enough that they control the first without alienating the second. It probably won't work, but they don't really have any good options to go with instead. 

Tbh, I think we’re in agreement

They have a majority so in theory it’s not an issue if they do what they are told.

The issue is they don’t want to do what they are told as it doesn’t look good with many of their voters so they have a decision to make.

Why are they looking to defer the vote if it’s an opportunity to move on? I think it’s because MP’s don’t think the topic will move on if they back Boris, because there will be more shit to deal with in the next few weeks.

[Lichfield Dean]

Always liked the fine upstanding hero of Sutton Coldfield that is Andrew Mitchell (ahem)

[ml1dch]

30 minutes ago, Genie said:

Why are they looking to defer the vote if it’s an opportunity to move on? I think it’s because MP’s don’t think the topic will move on if they back Boris, because there will be more shit to deal with in the next few weeks.

Because their biggest problem is that while they have come up with a plan, that doesn't mean they aren't a bunch of simple-minded, hopeless, incompetent t***s.

It's about stumbling into the next crisis intact and hoping enough dullards stumble along with them, as it had been since 2016.

So vote for the amendment that says they should look at it in a few months, and hope something pops up in the meantime to make things look a bit better. 

[Davkaus]

 

 

Staggering

[Sam-AVFC]

6 hours ago, bickster said:

All the people using foodbanks would scoff at your suggestion

It achieves the ability to have a new election with brand new candidates if none of the above is the top choice

Huh. Is that actually a thing that, where it's used, a majority of 'none of the above' triggers a new election? Interesting if it is.

[bickster]

5 hours ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Huh. Is that actually a thing that, where it's used, a majority of 'none of the above' triggers a new election? Interesting if it is.

Yes it is, depends on the country what a NOTA vote actually triggers.

[desensitized43]

2 hours ago, bickster said:

Yes it is, depends on the country what a NOTA vote actually triggers.

Having done a bit of reading on this, I can't find a single country where a NOTA majority vote triggers a new contest (or even that it's ever been the top choice on a ballot). Happy to be wrong though. This seems to be more of a thing used by statisticians to keep tabs on voter satisfaction or in an attempt to give turnouts a bit of a boost. So as far as I can tell it really doesn't 'accomplish' anything other than make a few people less likely to either not vote or spoil ballots. Is it worth it?

[Stevo985]

9 hours ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Always liked the fine upstanding hero of Sutton Coldfield that is Andrew Mitchell (ahem)

 

He's my MP and I've been pleasantly surprised how openly against Boris he has become. He was one of the only Tory MPs who stood up in the house and told Boris he'd lost his support when the Partygate stuff broke.

Considering he's a monumental dickhead, he's gone up a notch in my book.

 

 

That puts him on notch 1

[Stevo985]

10 hours ago, Davkaus said:

He is a habitual, unrepentant liar, who actively harms our democracy each day he remains in power. If he's that important to the Ukraine conflict, hand the word removed a rifle and send him back to Kyiv.

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/boris-johnson-repeats-false-employment-claim-in-parliament-again-having-already-admitted-its-wrong/

 

He doesn't care about truth, he cares about spewing enough bullshit that the uninformed think "well, that sounds like a fact".

What annoys me about this is Starmer doesn't humiliate him for it every time he spouts it. He must know it's a lie so nail him on it.

Same with the "fastest growing economy in the G7" bollocks. We're forecast to be the slowest growing economy next year. Nail him for it!