Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

ps the Best leaders surround themselves with the best people.   Not so good leaders surround themselves with those that are not going to challenge them.  So maybe the reason why it appears that there is a poor selection of candidates is partly due to Boris Johnson.  Another reason may be that the leadership qualities and the general competence levels of elected mps has declined.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

C'mon man, he's got a GCSE in Maths and he started an A-Level in Economics before dropping it for Sociology.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Are the Germans also giving the richest in their society a substantial tax cut?

Don't know. Don't also know what it's got to do with their £200bn borrowed for energy support.

I suspect you'll find that everyone, everyone, thinks this is sensible from the Germans. a) to make a commitment for a greener energy situation going forward and b) to get off any reliance on Russia, which is bound to be a positive for market sentiment I would imagine.

You're waving the red herring around; same as dumb Truss etc. This isn't about energy support (and, incidentally, where the **** were they in the summer on this when it was obvious??? Staring at their navels, perhaps?), this is about a mind numbingly stupid financial statement, w/o any costings (and by actively avoiding it, making it seem like there's a lot to hide) by Kwarteng.

Our energy support measures were talked about before the Germans announced theirs. The tax cuts have been illustrated with the relevant costings.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

Did the German announcement cause their currency to tank?

The following is an interview with someone who worked with Liz Truss.  From it you get some insight on her character and thought processes.  The first 30 seconds is insightful but is spoiled by the beat overlay.  The interview begins after 30 seconds.

It seems likely that benefits for the poor will no longer rise with inflation, as previously intended. These savings will help fund the tax cuts for the rich.
I'm sure if they could get away with culling poor people, they would.

In summary I think Liz Truss is described as a non-reflective radical airhead.

A budget that harms everybody except people who didnt need help, nor ask for it. Next GE can't come soon enough

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

Did the German announcement cause their currency to tank?

The Germans have a shared currency so it's not quite that simple. But the pound is above parity with the dollar, and is only slightly lower than it was this time two weeks ago, while the Euro is below parity and has been in decline for some time.

Duty281 wrote:

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

Did the German announcement cause their currency to tank?

The Germans have a shared currency so it's not quite that simple. But the pound is above parity with the dollar, and is only slightly lower than it was this time two weeks ago, while the Euro is below parity and has been in decline for some time.

You think that might have played a factor in the IMF not commenting?

Duty281 wrote:In that YouGov poll Labour's lead is 21% of those who would vote tomorrow, with 19% don't knows. Those don't knows are presently reluctant Tories.

Similar story in People's Polling which gives Labour a 30% lead - of those who would vote tomorrow, Labour have a 26% lead with 19% don't knows. 29% of Tory 2019 voters are don't knows, and 25% of Leave voters are don't knows. This is similar with YouGov where 26% of Tory 2019 voters are don't knows and 23% of Leave voters.

Techne gives Labour a 20% lead - Labour's lead is 13% on the same criteria with 11% don't knows. Survation a 21% lead - Labour up by 19% with 14% don't knows.

What has happened isn't a sharp increase for Labour's support; instead it's been a loss of Conservative support, whether temporary or permanent will depend on what happens across the 12 months, and if temporary it is recoverable.

Duty281 wrote:

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

Did the German announcement cause their currency to tank?

The Germans have a shared currency so it's not quite that simple. But the pound is above parity with the dollar, and is only slightly lower than it was this time two weeks ago, while the Euro is below parity and has been in decline for some time.

The pound is above parity with the dollar. Gee f*cking whizz. Get that on the side of a bus, Duty. We are all saved.

Sterling was at 1.35 in January, and 1.33 at the time Russia invaded. It was 1.31 a month after the invasion. It is 1.103 currently.

Sure it has moved off it's recent levels but those levels were 37 year lows. It is quite clearly a short covering rally. Potentially building new longs but only because monetary policy has intervened, not because of anything those pair of clowns in charge have done.

It isn't as linear as you seem to understand. Don't get confused by headline numbers. Traders have been shorting sterling throughout this year as the market had little confidence in our economy and currency even before Kwasimodo drew his crayon pictures. Those short positions now cover back at 37 year lows. It is trading 101. Basic stuff. It shouldn't be confused with some kind of economic rebound. There may be fresh long positions being put on down at these because expectations are the next rate rise will be supersized. Probably 125 basis points, but 100 at the minimum.

Monetary policy can only bail them out to a certain extent. Squeeze households and business too much with higher debt refinancing will only create more uncertainty. Then the gap between expansionary fiscal policy and tightening monetary policy widens again leading to more volatility in the the outlook. Those fresh longs in sterling won't hesitate to take profit and smash it again. They are scaling up long positions and their mark to market value will be heavily in their favour. Unless the market has long term confidence in our economic recovery, which it clearly doesn't, then this has all the hallmarks of a rapidly forming bubble.

Sterling moving off 37 year lows should in no way, be celebrated.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Please have a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/29/germany-vows-not-to-follow-uk-risky-expansionary-fiscal-path

Their policy and that of the UK are completely different.

It's not completely different. They're implementing a cap, just like us. They're taking on new debt to finance the cap, just like us. This could cause inflation, just like us. I believe they've also utilised a windfall tax, just like us, and are making one-off payments to certain groups, also like us.

Have you considered the possibility that the IMF understands the differences better than you do?

I'm pointing out that the policy between the Germans and the UK is not 'completely different', for the reasons highlighted.

Did the German announcement cause their currency to tank?

The Germans have a shared currency so it's not quite that simple. But the pound is above parity with the dollar, and is only slightly lower than it was this time two weeks ago, while the Euro is below parity and has been in decline for some time.

The pound is above parity with the dollar. Gee f*cking whizz. Get that on the side of a bus, Duty. We are all saved.

Sterling was at 1.35 in January, and 1.33 at the time Russia invaded. It was 1.31 a month after the invasion. It is 1.103 currently.

Sure it has moved off it's recent levels but those levels were 37 year lows. It is quite clearly a short covering rally. Potentially building new longs but only because monetary policy has intervened, not because of anything those pair of clowns in charge have done.

It isn't as linear as you seem to understand. Don't get confused by headline numbers. Traders have been shorting sterling throughout this year as the market had little confidence in our economy and currency even before Kwasimodo drew his crayon pictures. Those short positions now cover back at 37 year lows. It is trading 101. Basic stuff. It shouldn't be confused with some kind of economic rebound. There may be fresh long positions being put on down at these because expectations are the next rate rise will be supersized. Probably 125 basis points, but 100 at the minimum.

Monetary policy can only bail them out to a certain extent. Squeeze households and business too much with higher debt refinancing will only create more uncertainty. Then the gap between expansionary fiscal policy and tightening monetary policy widens again leading to more volatility in the the outlook. Those fresh longs in sterling won't hesitate to take profit and smash it again. They are scaling up long positions and their mark to market value will be heavily in their favour. Unless the market has long term confidence in our economic recovery, which it clearly doesn't, then this has all the hallmarks of a rapidly forming bubble.

Sterling moving off 37 year lows should in no way, be celebrated.

Calm yourself, Tino, I'm not confusing it with some sort of economic rebound.

Duty281 wrote:

Calm yourself, Tino, I'm not confusing it with some sort of economic rebound.

You should tell the person that writes your posts for you.

Liz Truss' parents put a message over AP. It says,
" Come home Liz. Whatever you are doing we still love you, just get in touch and let us know you're okay.No judgement."

Just watched 5 mins of Truss interview on Kuensberg program and she does what infuriates me about politicians of all ilk, not answering the bleeding question! She was asked about cutting public spending but wouldn't give straight answer just spouted current policy.
This isn't just a Tory thing, all parties do it and it drives me and millions of others mad.
Just give a straight answer!

"how many people voted for your plan"

*Does not compute*

And there goes the 45p tax cut

What a laughing stock this and previous Tory government are.

The pound has climbed sharply today. I can only assume something significant happened in the Ukraine.

Let's not be hasty. The IMF haven't commented yet

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

Yes, often the ideological far right of the Tory party have to be reined in by moderates who a) can spot a policy that will cause an election defeat, b) know when a policy is morally bankrupt.

The fact is the electorate no more want far right policies than they want socialism, because they know that neither work.

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Yes, often the ideological far right of the Tory party have to be reined in by moderates who a) can spot a policy that will cause an election defeat, b) know when a policy is morally bankrupt.

The fact is the electorate no more want far right policies than they want socialism, because they know that neither work.

Cutting the top rate of tax from 45p to 40p is not a 'far-right' policy, unless you're accusing the Major and Blair governments of far-right politics?

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..."

How the members voted for Truss over Sunak is a mystery. Can only assume his association with Boris scuppered his chances. Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

I would have thought it fairly straightforward. You're a Liberal Democrat, but you would have still supported the Tory Party under the leadership of Wallace or Tugendhat. This clearly shows, at the very least, that they are on what is considered to be the 'left' of the Tory Party, as they appeal to Liberal Democrats such as yourself.

And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it, and join the Lib Dems or Labour or Greens, so the Tories could be a proper right-wing, low-tax, small-state political offering, which is obstructed by the likes of Wallace and Tudgendhat - the Blairite mass, if you like, that has taken over the Tory Party and watered it down over the past 12 years.

mountain man wrote:How the members voted for Truss over Sunak is a mystery. Can only assume his association with Boris scuppered his chances. Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

Sunak has immensely benefited from being on the sidelines as people are starting to forget what a disaster he was as Chancellor, and he broke the law. Very few would want Johnson part 2, which is what Sunak as PM would have been.

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

I would have thought it fairly straightforward. You're a Liberal Democrat, but you would have still supported the Tory Party under the leadership of Wallace or Tugendhat. This clearly shows, at the very least, that they are on what is considered to be the 'left' of the Tory Party, as they appeal to Liberal Democrats such as yourself.

And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it, and join the Lib Dems or Labour or Greens, so the Tories could be a proper right-wing, low-tax, small-state political offering, which is obstructed by the likes of Wallace and Tudgendhat - the Blairite mass, if you like, that has taken over the Tory Party and watered it down over the past 12 years.

I'd quite like them to leave as well. That way we'd see exactly what the remaining Tories are like. No hiding behind anything that might be considered as 'caring', 'green' etc.
Think it's more than those two that are 'obstructing' anything. You're still left with the ERG wingnuts, to name but one ridiculous faction.

To be fair, the same can be applied to Labour. About time the Militant people sodded off and stood on their own two feet/policies.

One might almost imagine that a move away from FPTP would facilitate this sort of thing. Perish the thought though in this country...

Duty281 wrote:

mountain man wrote:How the members voted for Truss over Sunak is a mystery. Can only assume his association with Boris scuppered his chances. Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

Sunak has immensely benefited from being on the sidelines as people are starting to forget what a disaster he was as Chancellor, and he broke the law. Very few would want Johnson part 2, which is what Sunak as PM would have been.

Think this is probably correct, for all he knows more about macro economics than Truss and Kwarteng put together. Trouble is, they have no-one left who has any credibility or who hasn't been forced out of the party all together. Roll on the next GE, although never underestimate the ability of people to vote for the current shower.

Duty281 wrote:

mountain man wrote:How the members voted for Truss over Sunak is a mystery. Can only assume his association with Boris scuppered his chances. Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

Sunak has immensely benefited from being on the sidelines as people are starting to forget what a disaster he was as Chancellor, and he broke the law. Very few would want Johnson part 2, which is what Sunak as PM would have been.

Fair point but surely he'd make a better job of it than Truss is doing. Not that I'm a particular fan of him but Truss seems increasingly out of her depth and she wasn't exactly swimming along before.

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

I would have thought it fairly straightforward. You're a Liberal Democrat, but you would have still supported the Tory Party under the leadership of Wallace or Tugendhat. This clearly shows, at the very least, that they are on what is considered to be the 'left' of the Tory Party, as they appeal to Liberal Democrats such as yourself.

And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it, and join the Lib Dems or Labour or Greens, so the Tories could be a proper right-wing, low-tax, small-state political offering, which is obstructed by the likes of Wallace and Tudgendhat - the Blairite mass, if you like, that has taken over the Tory Party and watered it down over the past 12 years.

I'm no Liberal Democrat, I have rescinded my membership of the Tory party because of Truss and Kwarteng, it doesn't go any further than that, economic ineptitude cannot be tolerated. I may well vote Lib Dem but that  doesn't somehow make me one nor would it make Wallace or Tugendhat one either. It's the weakest possible argument and ignores their voting records over the past decade, which in no way represents any party other than the Conservatives.

Ideologies change, they are not fixed. You talk about progression as if it's a bad thing or as though the Conservatives were somehow properly right win before David Cameron, i've got news for you, that hasn't been the case since 1991. Shall we return to a time when gay marriage was outlawed for instance? Churchill was the right man in 1940 but wasn't in 1951, Macmillan was the right man in 1957 like Thatcher was the right woman in 1979, ideologically the three were nothing alike.

Duty281 wrote:And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it.

I'm surprised that you wish to see a Tory party that would never again get elected into Government.

mountain man wrote:... Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

When a two party system becomes a one party system - that is not much of a democracy.   The Tories have crashed because self-interest, pomposity and narcissistic ambition overtook competent management.  If the Labour Party were the Raving Lunatic Party in disguise, they would still get in at the next election.

ps Boris Johnson was a bigger disaster but he had the gift of the gab and an authoritative bluster.  Liz Truss was a product of Boris Johnson who put her in charge of Foreign Affaires and she was so "successful" in that job that she naturally became a candidate for the top office.

pps: Jacob Rees-Mogg endorsing Liz Truss for PM was an oddity.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-63114183

Search for Oliver Rose on that page. I think it's Duty's real identity.

JuliusHMarx wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-63114183

Search for Oliver Rose on that page. I think it's Duty's real identity.

He looks about 27 so definitely can't be Duty.

He looks like a young Tory Muppet so probably close enough

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

I would have thought it fairly straightforward. You're a Liberal Democrat, but you would have still supported the Tory Party under the leadership of Wallace or Tugendhat. This clearly shows, at the very least, that they are on what is considered to be the 'left' of the Tory Party, as they appeal to Liberal Democrats such as yourself.

And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it, and join the Lib Dems or Labour or Greens, so the Tories could be a proper right-wing, low-tax, small-state political offering, which is obstructed by the likes of Wallace and Tudgendhat - the Blairite mass, if you like, that has taken over the Tory Party and watered it down over the past 12 years.

I'd quite like them to leave as well. That way we'd see exactly what the remaining Tories are like. No hiding behind anything that might be considered as 'caring', 'green' etc.
Think it's more than those two that are 'obstructing' anything. You're still left with the ERG wingnuts, to name but one ridiculous faction.

To be fair, the same can be applied to Labour. About time the Militant people sodded off and stood on their own two feet/policies.

One might almost imagine that a move away from FPTP would facilitate this sort of thing. Perish the thought though in this country...

Agreed.

mountain man wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

mountain man wrote:How the members voted for Truss over Sunak is a mystery. Can only assume his association with Boris scuppered his chances. Truss is a freaking disaster and as been said before seemingly mad.
Labour at next election be getting voted in by default. They won't win because of their policies or leader but the fact millions will refuse to vote for a Truss led Tory party.

Sunak has immensely benefited from being on the sidelines as people are starting to forget what a disaster he was as Chancellor, and he broke the law. Very few would want Johnson part 2, which is what Sunak as PM would have been.

Fair point but surely he'd make a better job of it than Truss is doing. Not that I'm a particular fan of him but Truss seems increasingly out of her depth and she wasn't exactly swimming along before.

Doubt it. See the mess Sunak left as Chancellor?

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:And there goes the 45p tax cut

Tory bottlers, it was usually ever thus. Give one concession to the Liberal Democrats in her party and be prepared to make several more.

I'd have given you Rory Stewart as someone more suited to the Lib Dems in years gone by but if you can name me a few current Tory Mps who are more akin to the yellow party go ahead?

Ben Wallace. Tugendhat. Most of Sunak's supporters.

I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind that, having met both Wallace and Tugendhat i'm looking forward to this.

You like Ben Wallace and Tugendhat, don't you? And you're joining the Lib Dems, aren't you? Isn't that all you need?

There are very few genuine conservatives in the Conservative Party. Most of them would be better off joining some leftist blob, like the Lib Dems, Labour or the Greens.

You'll have to actually explain it to me. This isn't a discussion about me or my political stance, it's about you making erroneous claims and being unable to back them up.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11668/ben_wallace/wyre_and_preston_north/votes

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25374/thomas_tugendhat/tonbridge_and_malling/votes

Looks like the voting history of a leftist to me.

I would have thought it fairly straightforward. You're a Liberal Democrat, but you would have still supported the Tory Party under the leadership of Wallace or Tugendhat. This clearly shows, at the very least, that they are on what is considered to be the 'left' of the Tory Party, as they appeal to Liberal Democrats such as yourself.

And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it, and join the Lib Dems or Labour or Greens, so the Tories could be a proper right-wing, low-tax, small-state political offering, which is obstructed by the likes of Wallace and Tudgendhat - the Blairite mass, if you like, that has taken over the Tory Party and watered it down over the past 12 years.

I'm no Liberal Democrat, I have rescinded my membership of the Tory party because of Truss and Kwarteng, it doesn't go any further than that, economic ineptitude cannot be tolerated. I may well vote Lib Dem but that  doesn't somehow make me one nor would it make Wallace or Tugendhat one either. It's the weakest possible argument and ignores their voting records over the past decade, which in no way represents any party other than the Conservatives.

Ideologies change, they are not fixed. You talk about progression as if it's a bad thing or as though the Conservatives were somehow properly right win before David Cameron, i've got news for you, that hasn't been the case since 1991. Shall we return to a time when gay marriage was outlawed for instance? Churchill was the right man in 1940 but wasn't in 1951, Macmillan was the right man in 1957 like Thatcher was the right woman in 1979, ideologically the three were nothing alike.

If you're no Liberal Democrat, why are you joining them or voting for them? What do you mean by 'economic ineptitude cannot be tolerated'? You appeared to tolerate it under Johnson and Sunak and, possibly, Cameron and Osborne. Leaving Truss/Kwarteng aside, you cannot think that Johnson/Sunak were sane economic operatives?

Ideologies change, but certain values are sacrosanct. And Conservative values have been abandoned over the last thirty years, meaning there is no genuine right-wing party. I disagree that the three were ideologically nothing alike. They had shared values. MacMillan actually started a transition to monetarist policy, the same policy Thatcher would adopt in 1979, before he bottled it entirely and sacked most of his cabinet.

And yes I agree with you on the bit in bold. I've said it before that the Conservatives haven't been conservative since Thatcher left.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it.

I'm surprised that you wish to see a Tory party that would never again get elected into Government.

I've never supported the Tory Party in my life.

JuliusHMarx wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-63114183

Search for Oliver Rose on that page. I think it's Duty's real identity.

I've actually attended the Tory Party conference several times before, but not this year.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it.

I'm surprised that you wish to see a Tory party that would never again get elected into Government.

I've never supported the Tory Party in my life.

You wish the Tory Party would expunge the moderates, leaving a very right-wing party that would never get elected - correct?

So you've attended the party conference but never supported them? How odd.

Kwasi has now performed a second U-turn of the day, bringing forward the publication of the OBR report, having previously said that he couldn't. No shame at all.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And I personally wish that people from that wing of the Tory Party would leave it.

I'm surprised that you wish to see a Tory party that would never again get elected into Government.

I've never supported the Tory Party in my life.

You wish the Tory Party would expunge the moderates, leaving a very right-wing party that would never get elected - correct?

These are your words and your suppositions, not mine, so incorrect.

I wish the Conservative Party would be what is termed right-wing and have right-wing policies. Not necessarily 'very right-wing'. And it is your idea that such a party would never get elected, but they could be elected on such a platform. Of course, I think we differ on the definition of right-wing because you seem to believe that a top rate of tax at 40% is 'far-right', which sounds like lunacy.

'Expunge the moderates'? Expunge the Liberal Democrats, centrists and Blairites within, yes. If those people want a high-tax, high-regulation, big-government political vehicle, fine, but the Conservative Party should not be a place for people with not a single iota of conservatism in their veins - Sunak, Mordaunt, Wallace, Tugendhat, at least a 100 more etc.