You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Lost me.
Elections are won and lost by capturing the swinging vote - essentially the voters in the middle who are generally asked to pick the best of the crap options available. When Labour elected Milliband, and to a much greater extent Corbyn, enough of that vote decided that they could see neither as PM so voted Tory as the Least Worst Option.
In the past I would have suggested that the more sophisticated and cerebral tories may have stepped back to allow these lightweights to take the flak with failure on the horizon but I can't think of anyone who fits that description.
So many dense people and IBS in the cabinet who claimed to be a Turin graduate when he only did a language course there and changed his name from Ian Smith.
What -are- you talking about?
Still doesn’t answer the question, either.
You asked a question. I answered it. You ignored my response and decided to talk about something else.
Suit yourself - I'm not playing.
Cold War Steve on good form as usual
Elections are won and lost by capturing the swinging vote
It isn't simply about that, it is also about turnout. Elections are often won and lost because for whatever reasons one party's supporters don't vote in sufficient numbers on the day. Motivating and inspiring your supporters is hugely important.
When Labour elected Milliband, and to a much greater extent Corbyn, enough of that vote decided that they could see neither as PM so voted Tory as the Least Worst Option.
It is the other way round. Labour under Miliband received significantly less votes in the the 2015 general election than they did in the 2017 and 2019 general elections under Corbyn.
Amazing that they actually went and elected Truss, I genuinely thought the membership wouldn't be this bonkers
Wasn't exactly a resounding endorsement: lowest majority of any Tory PM
And it's already being used against her
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1566762513307471874?t=JyJwU4XEWyP7VgNC1BN9Jg&s=19
We denigrate Cameron for being a spineless weasel but he did exactly what was asked of him. The Tory party saw a split in their right wing vote with the rise of UKIP. They saw this threat and acted accordingly. The fact that it may have cost the nation trillions of pounds and split the union is irrelevant to them, it saved the party. They're stronger now than the year before the brexit vote, that is all that matters.
The old rules about fairness and economic growth no longer apply, it's all about the party. The Tories know who votes and they know the 'left' are split across three major parties.
The left is busy being fair and admitting that the challenges we face are nuanced. The Tories know that this doesn't matter. All that matters is soundbites to your core voters and smashing any threat to the 'blue' vote.
For this reason we will have a Tory government for the next 50 yrs.
Wasn’t exactly a resounding endorsement: lowest majority of any Tory PM
Thats the amazing part really. That it was so close rather than a complete walk in the park.
Only problem is that does make her weak and so more vulnerable to the right wing nuts.
We denigrate Cameron for being a spineless weasel but he did exactly what was asked of him. The Tory party saw a split in their right wing vote with the rise of UKIP. They saw this threat and acted accordingly.
Don't blame it all on them. Cameron will undoubtedly have been aware of Liberal Democrat demands for a referendum on EU membership.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-cable-on-european-referendum-1609.html
"Tomorrow the Liberal Democrats will table an amendment to the Government’s parliamentary motion proposing the Queen’s Speech. Our amendment calls for a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union."
Wasn't Vince shouting into an empty bucket in 2007?
The left is busy being fair and admitting that the challenges we face are nuanced. The Tories know that this doesn’t matter. All that matters is soundbites to your core voters and smashing any threat to the ‘blue’ vote.
Indeed. Oh for something more akin to this...
12 years of Tory Govt has depreciated Sterling by 30% against the Dollar - will Truss continue the trend?
No one on STW has attacked a Labour Party leader more than binners has.
That's a little pot and kettle tbf, tbh!
I’m terrified by the loan approach. I really hope they don’t go with that.
Just think of it as an extension of student loans 🙂
Heat now,pay later.
What’s not to love if your a Tory.
It’s going to an interesting thing to see what card they play
Wasn’t Vince shouting into an empty bucket in 2007?
Like ukip? Well yes the LibDems persisted to support and call for a referendum on EU membership right up, and including, the moment the referendum legislation was passed through parliament.
But you are right to point out that the LibDems were calling for a referendum many years before the Tories. They were in fact the first major political party to do so.
"Didn’t they pick the final 2?"
Irrelevant as the whole process from the begining to ends was geared towards who the membership would chose.
Evidenced in your comment because they didn't pick the final 2 to be selected from among themselves, they selected the final 2 who they thought would perform to the membership.
And they didn't pick the final 1 did they?
That’s a little pot and kettle tbf, tbh!
You don't recall the Corbyn thread?
Irrelevant as the whole process from the begining to ends was geared towards who the membership would chose.
It wasnt though. Some of the other, even nuttier, candidates would have probably outperformed Truss if they had got to the party vote.
The MPs had control of who would go to the party vote so if they had chosen two sensible people then the party members would have had to chose a sensible person.
Okay obviously finding the two sensible people amongst the tory MPs post Johnson would be tricky especially given the mess the country is facing meaning most sane people would conclude they arent up to the job and keep their heads down but in theory it was an option.
At best once given that choice the members could simply not turn out and so try to delegitimise it that way.
Irrelevant as the whole process from the begining to ends was geared towards who the membership would chose.
Of course it isn't "irrelevant", the Tory membership had absolutely no say in who the final two candidates were.
The idea that Tory MPs were somehow forced to select candidates that they didn't want to select is nonsense.
Ernie?
Of course I am suggesting that left to their own devices the Tories would have selected someone more sensible like Sunak.
Wether I wish the Tories had picked a more sensible candidate that could have better contested the next election, or select a moron who is going to send the country into oblivion in the short term is another question entirely...
Your scorched earth perspective is no different from the Conservative party membership, you would act exactly how they did given half a chance.
As IHN pointed out, elections are won and lost by the swing voters.
We denigrate Cameron for being a spineless weasel but he did exactly what was asked of him. The Tory party saw a split in their right wing vote with the rise of UKIP. They saw this threat and acted accordingly. The fact that it may have cost the nation trillions of pounds and split the union is irrelevant to them, it saved the party. They’re stronger now than the year before the brexit vote, that is all that matters.
Yep as long as they are on top they really don’t care what smoking ruin is left of the U.K.
It’s a funny one with the flag waving and faux patriotic shite they spout just how little they do like the country.
"Of course it isn’t “irrelevant”, the Tory membership had absolutely no say in who the final two candidates were."
In order for that to be true then the Conservative MP's would have had to whittle down their selection without the knowledge that the final 2 were going to be put before the membership.
You're not even wrong...
Attacking Truss from that perspective is a very poor tactic from Labour imo. Making a big deal about her subsidised energy bills when she hasn't even moved into Downing Street won't impress voters as she clearly isn't responsible for that.
That line of attack could have been kept for after she had got her feet under the table and it had become abundantly clear that she nothing to offer voters.
In the meantime Labour could have declared their hope that a change in Downing Street would lead to a better handling of the gathering crises.
Obviously there is no likelihood of that but negative attacks before anything has even been revealed isn't likely to win voters over imo.
You’re not even wrong…
Coming from the person trying to absolve the tory MPs of blame that is pretty special.
The tory MPs select the final two candidates. As such they could have chosen the two most sensible (relative term) candidates available.
Exactly what could the party members do if they had done so? Refused to vote?
Can you explain your logic here.
I can’t think of anyone who fits that description
Me neither. They've all moved on, or been moved on, haven't they? No doubt they'll be another generation along at some point, but they're not in the most recent intake. Some real doughnuts became MPs at the Johnson election.
Of course I am suggesting that left to their own devices the Tories would have selected someone more sensible like Sunak.
Well I did ask :
If so can you explain why Sunak would have been a more “sensible” choice
I assume by your apparent reluctance to answer the question that you don't have a compelling case to make.
Still no worries as the moment has passed.
Its a fact that labours pact with the tories against the snp gifted may 10 mps. Without that we would have had a minority labour government with snp support the price for which would have been a second ref which remain would almost certainly have won.
Ian Murrays pact with the tories in Scotland cost us a broad based government and was the final nail in our chances of remaining in the eu.
Scottish labour should not be forgiven for this. Their tribal hated of the snp cost the uk so much
she's told the only 80,000 oldiwonks that matter she will cut spending, cut taxes, and cut the state. its ideology, not economic theory.
you're all fubar'd