Jump to content

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


blandy

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Unless you're a tory party member, for the last two prime ministers and now the next one. 

No, they elect the leader of their paty and as much as that is de facto the same thing, it is an important distinction

This is why Johnson is still PM and not party leader. The Queen invited him to be her Prime Minister and as much as you and I don't like that, it currently is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Xann said:

509887519_Screenshot2022-07-08at20_18_05.thumb.png.77f10d4cb0b3027159d9c54985193c94.png

I think it's pretty offensive to trivialise someone who caused so much harm, to so many families, by comparing them to Harold Shipman.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's both a bit funny and a bit scary that The Mail and Express seem to want to turn this into a massive Tory party war.

FXK74fjXoAQOe33?format=jpg&name=large

At least it's only bad people who will be rinsed by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

Peter Bone new deputy head of the House of Commons. 

he’s trolling right?

That representative for Wellingborough?

He's not trolling. He's bribing BJ loyalists. Cummings was right, he doesn't think this is over yet.

I think it's worth noting we haven't had a deputy leader of the HoC since May was PM. He's brought this back to find a role for one of his loyal subjects. The power struggle isn't over yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

A lot of people argue that a presidential system isn't the answer, we wouldn't want President Boris, etc, but it's got to be better than this

Obviously PR would be better than this for democracy but you’d still have the same Prime Ministerial situation. It took the Tories far far too long but eventually they did force Johnson out. That is this type of democracy in action. The alternative is the Presidential model and I just think that is much much worse. There’s an awful lot wrong with our democracy but personally I don’t think the Presidential model is a move I’d be in favour of. As a republican, I also realise we need a head of state and that’s where I become conflicted because ultimately that does lean to a presidential model

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

That representative for Wellingborough?

He's not trolling. He's bribing BJ loyalists. Cummings was right, he doesn't think this is over yet.

I think it's worth noting we haven't had a deputy leader of the HoC since May was PM. He's brought this back to find a role for one of his loyal subjects. The power struggle isn't over yet.

Good. More chaos for the Tories the less likely they will stay in power.

Headlines like the ones in the Daily Mail also show that they are still backing Boris and think it’s actually worth fighting for. It means that they think this isn’t over. It also shows that they are willing to sacrifice the rest of the Tories for him.

A split down the party is exactly what is needed to break their dominance. 

Bring it on :popcorn:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

It's both a bit funny and a bit scary that The Mail and Express seem to want to turn this into a massive Tory party war.

FXK74fjXoAQOe33?format=jpg&name=large

At least it's only bad people who will be rinsed by it.

What's the foundation for this headline/story ?

Seems they have just made it up.

On Wednesday 85% of the UK public wanted him gone ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davkaus said:

A lot of people argue that a presidential system isn't the answer, we wouldn't want President Boris, etc, but it's got to be better than this

As someone who can (to paraphrase the Alaskan Bard Sarah Palin) see America from my house, I'd say be careful what you wish for.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vancvillan said:

As someone who can (to paraphrase the Alaskan Bard Sarah Palin) see America from my house, I'd say be careful what you wish for.

Yeah? How would you like it if the most powerful person who lead the direction of your government frequently failed to complete their term, and was replaced by an internal party process with no input from the electorate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, hippo said:

What's the foundation for this headline/story ?

The guy in charge really, really wants a peerage and will say anything to make sure he gets one from the guy being kicked out.

Nothing more than that really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Yeah? How would you like it if the most powerful person who lead the direction of your government frequently failed to complete their term, and was replaced by an internal party process with no input from the electorate?

Don't know, don't live in the UK, but you certainly sound annoyed.

That said, the Presidential system that relies on primaries (where only party members vote) and then a head to head for the "least worst candidate" hasn't exactly thrown up better in terms of personal, direction or execution of platform.

At least the majority who voted actually did vote for the Conservatives as a party. That there are fail safes to stop an absolute buffoon completing a full term doesn't sound that bad to me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Vancvillan said:

Don't know, don't live in the UK, but you certainly sound annoyed.

I know, that's why  it was a hypothetical question. It's not impossible to imagine this antidemocratic process, is it? :D 

Quote

That said, the Presidential system that relies on primaries (where only party members vote) and then a head to head for the "least worst candidate" hasn't exactly thrown up better in terms of personal, direction or execution of platform.

We essentially have the same, except if that leader pisses off, the party get to repeat the process without the inter-party head-to-head, potentially allowing our leader to be selected by their party and not face the ballot box for several years.

Quote

At least the majority who voted actually did vote for the Conservatives as a party. 

No they didn't, they won a landslide majority, obtaining 56.2% of representatives, despite only winning 43.6% of the vote.

There's no flawless electoral system, but ours is particularly rubbish.

Edited by Davkaus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

Id say sunak has no chance he is more of the same of boris.

He really isn't. In terms of what he'd do for the average voter Sunak is much much worse than Johnson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

No they didn't, they won a landslide majority, obtaining 56.2% of representatives, despite only winning 43.6% of the vote.

There's no flawless electoral system, but ours is particularly rubbish.

This bit I agree with. But imagine we had a PR List electoral system

You still wouldn't be voting for a Prime Minister, you'd be voting for a Party unlike now where you vote for a specific MP of that party in your area

The exact same thing could and would happen (though it would be less likely I think)

Then look at the Presidential system (it doesn't have to be the American one), if you vote in a President for 4 or 5 years, you are stuck with him or her, regardless of how they are doing. Under our system, the party can act (as we've seen) to remove the PM. Even under the Presidential System, there is also usually a Prime Minister and the big question is how much power do you give to each. (that varies a lot)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â