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

[Davkaus]

Same lines, different voice.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/sep/07/liz-truss-cabinet-news-pm-therese-coffey-uk-politics-live

Quote

Alex Davies-Jones (Lab) says Truss does not have the support of the public. Will she do the decent thing and call an election?

Truss says we are facing serious problems because of Putin’s war in crime. The British people want a government that will sort it out. That is what she will do.

 

[Demitri_C]

I thought it was drab from both truss and starmer

[Genie]

54 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I thought it was drab from both truss and starmer

Truss left several open goals for Starmer which once again he declined to take.

So frustrating. 

[blandy]

45 minutes ago, Genie said:

Truss left several open goals for Starmer which once again he declined to take.

So frustrating. 

Such as?

I thought by highlighting her part in it all over the last decade plus, highlighting the refusal to windfall tax, so that ornery folk end up paying while big oil takes it in, he made a better argument than Truss

[Genie]

6 minutes ago, blandy said:

Such as?

I thought by highlighting her part in it all over the last decade plus, highlighting the refusal to windfall tax, so that ornery folk end up paying while big oil takes it in, he made a better argument than Truss

She made the point that Labour failed to implement more nuclear or other renewable energy sources which might well be true, but the obvious response is that The Conservatives have been in power for over 12 years so could have implemented whatever strategy they wanted and it would have delivered by now.

They can’t keep blaming things on the party in power in 2009.

It seems like it’s going to be a theme of her tenure so it was a good opportunity to nip it in the bud.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Genie

[Genie]

The other thing that was a tad annoying was that the Tories are quite upset about a comedian having a view on politics yet Theresa May used her question to congratulate Liz Truss on being the third female PM and to ask why she thinks they’ve all been Conservative.

Such a lazy jibe at the opposition which really has no place in such a forum. 

[Davkaus]

6 minutes ago, Genie said:

They can’t keep blaming things on the party in power in 2009.

 

But she will. While claiming that the actions of the government she was in the cabinet for mere days ago where absolutely nothing to do with her. More of the same, this time the tories have just put lipstick on the pig instead of shagging it.

[blandy]

14 minutes ago, Genie said:

the obvious response is that The Conservatives have been in power for over 12 years so could have implemented whatever strategy they wanted and it would have delivered by now.

Starmer said this

Quote

The face at the top may change but the story remains the same.

There’s nothing new about the Tory fantasy of trickle-down economics, nothing new about this Tory prime minister who nodded through every decision that got us into this mess and now says how terrible it is. 

Which I think covers that?

[Genie]

Just now, Davkaus said:

But she will. While claiming that the actions of the government she was in the cabinet for mere days ago where absolutely nothing to do with her. More of the same, this time the tories have just put lipstick on the pig instead of shagging it.

Exactly, this is why Starmer needs to make a big point about it. Call it it as ridiculous nice and early. Get their side of the room to have a good laugh and giggle about it so she doesn’t keep doing it.

 

[Genie]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Starmer said this

Which I think covers that?

Not really for me. He needs to be much clearer otherwise it doesn’t land.

He needs to point and laugh at the hilarious notion the party in power for over 12 years are blaming Labour for the problems of today.

[Demitri_C]

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

But she will. While claiming that the actions of the government she was in the cabinet for mere days ago where absolutely nothing to do with her. More of the same, this time the tories have just put lipstick on the pig instead of shagging it.

They all do it though. Blair did it to hague howard cameron did it to miliband/corbyn now truss to starmer. Its a typical leader tactics. 

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

Not really for me. He needs to be much clearer otherwise it doesn’t land.

He needs to point and laugh at the hilarious notion the party in power for over 12 years are blaming Labour for the problems of today.

Hmm. It’s tricky, because mocking a woman on her first day in the job and her first appearance at questions time in parliament would be seen as a poor move by many people. He absolutely made the point that she nodded all that crap through over the last 12 years. I think mocking her is a valid approach later on, but in the early days some seriousness is the better approach at this point.  Obviously respect that you see it differently.

[Genie]

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

Starmer said this

Which I think covers that?

I just rewatched that question and the part you’ve quoted is not after the point I was referring to.

When she blamed labour for not implementing nuclear stations he completely side stepped it and reverted to his previous point about the bill being picked up by ordinary people

Quote

I look forward to tomorrow’s statement, but the money has got to come from somewhere. The Prime Minister knows that every single pound in excess profits that she chooses not to tax is an extra pound on borrowing that working people will be forced to pay back for decades to come. More borrowing than is needed—that is the true cost of her choice to protect oil and gas profits, isn’t it?

She was let off the hook, like SKR used to do weekly with BJ.

It would be perfectly valid (imo) to make the point that blaming the party in power 12 years ago for todays troubles was ridiculous. The Tories could have reversed Labours policies at any time since 2010.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Genie

[bickster]

The pound falls to it's lowest level against the dollar since 1985. That's a good start

[Genie]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

The pound falls to it's lowest level against the dollar since 1985. That's a good start

The only way is up (baby).

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

When she blamed labour for not implementing nuclear stations he completely side stepped it

Perhaps that’s because as you yourself said “it’s true”

 

[Davkaus]

12 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

They all do it though. Blair did it to hague howard cameron did it to miliband/corbyn now truss to starmer. Its a typical leader tactics. 

I'd like it slide with Blair for the first few years, for the same reason I would Cameron against Miliband - most of the shadow cabinet were part of that last government. At this point though, after 12 years, it's more than a bit ridiculous when the majority of the last Labour government haven't been on the front benches for years.

I think Yvette Cooper might be the last member of Brown's cabinet still active on the Labour frontbench

[Genie]

Just now, blandy said:

Perhaps that’s because as you yourself said “it’s true”

 

Yes, but why didn’t they implement it once in power then if it was such a bad call? It wasn’t the right strategy at that time and the fact the conservatives also didn’t implement it supports that. That’s the obvious retort but instead he said exactly the same thing as the question before (ordinary people having to pick up the bill).

She hit him with “this mess is Labours fault” and he did nothing to refute it. 

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

Yes, but why didn’t they implement it once in power then if it was such a bad call? It wasn’t the right strategy at that time and the fact the conservatives also didn’t implement it supports that. That’s the obvious retort but instead he said exactly the same thing as the question before (ordinary people having to pick up the bill).

She hit him with “this mess is Labours fault” and he did nothing to refute it. 

His point that he wants to hammer home is about the difference between Tories and Labour. His reply (from my link to Hansard above) immediately after she said it was

Quote

I look forward to tomorrow’s statement, but the money has got to come from somewhere. The Prime Minister knows that every single pound in excess profits that she chooses not to tax is an extra pound on borrowing that working people will be forced to pay back for decades to come. More borrowing than is needed—that is the true cost of her choice to protect oil and gas profits, isn’t it?

I think he’s right to make that point, rather than talk about more than 12 years ago. People know the tories have been in power for ages.

[Genie]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think he’s right to make that point, rather than talk about more than 12 years ago. People know the tories have been in power for ages.

Me too, and he already did about 90 seconds previously. It should have been meat and drink to remind her of the opportunities not taken over the last 12 years if it was such a bad policy.

Shes done it twice now already, and so did Boris last week. 

It doesn’t take much for it to stick.

It seemed like he already made the decision to say what he was going go say (repeat the point about borrowing needing to be paid back by “ordinary” people) regardless of what she said.