Rayvin

Superb article. 100% correct about the lot IMO.

Have to say that article really drives home this wider issue at the top of the Tory party - they are all overpromoted and out of their depth, politics aside. So not only are they morally objectionable, they're also dangerously stupid. Johnson really has moulded the party in his own image.

That's a comedian tbf - she does a very convincing job though!

She's not even Jewish... she's of Sri Lankan origin apparently, and is a practising Buddhist (which clearly aligns with the compassionate and anti-materialist values of the Tory party). She's married a Jewish man, as far as I can tell, but isn't Jewish herself. In summary, Hancock is a weapon.

If anything, the fact that everything we've done so far was well within Ashley's ability (top end maybe, but still within it if he was running it properly) actually further underlines how fucking useless the guy was.

I genuinely believe that's the answer to this question presently. I can't really see how it could be anything else unless they're intending to find some large trading bloc to share in the negotiating power of, and use the wider common challenge faced by all the nations within it to tackle the issue from a position of collective strength in terms of negotiating with pharmaceutical giants and so on. That sounds like it would be a pretty useful thing to do, wonder where we could find a trading bloc like that... But yes, clearly the plan is simply that people will die. People that didn't have to die, will die. That's Sunak's gift to the country.

Where exactly is the NHS going to find upwards of 10% to cut from its budget?

Double digit cuts on every department off the back of 12 years of cuts. Are they fucking serious. Tax corporations, you fucks. Raise the money that way and then invest it back into the economy, boosting public sector spending, raising growth, and then tax everyone (in a proportionally fair way) to a higher level to pay off the debt. That way we're leaving our children with an economy that has some chance of delivering a better life to them whilst at the same time paying off national debt over the long term - rather than failing to pay off national debt through austerity since it leaves us completely defenceless against things like Covid and externalities we can't control, and on top of that means our children are inheriting a smoking ruin rather than a nation. In other words, do what Truss was going to do but a) funded through taxes on (corporations) those who can afford it and b) give the proceeds of that to the people of this country so that WE can spend and WE can bolster growth, not your fucking mates who will just offshore the lot of it anyway. Oh and one other thing, small point really but every little helps and I know how keen you are to "give back to the country that gave you so much" - REJOIN THE FUCKING EU.

Sorry, she did show up, she just fled. Cooper is so much better than Starmer btw.

"Brave"rman not even brave enough to show up to confront Cooper.

Led by Donkeys do incredible work but I do sometimes wonder if they're preaching to the choir. Does it go in to the ears of the dispassionate general public? It's well done so I hope it does. Honesty from Sunak is welcome but he'll get no points for it on this issue. Equally though, maybe he means diverting money away from already Labour voting areas? Just a continuation of longstanding Tory policy to reward the areas that vote for them with more money?

And his rule will be one of terror and death, based on his stated aims.

I'm not really anticipating anything, certainly with respect of stability - other than, I suppose, that I don't think the whole thing collapses before a GE. That's the only position I have on it really. All I'm saying with that previous post is that he will have given her that position to try to deal with the instability. Whether it works or not, I've no real view - more concerned about austerity than anything else.

I think it's fully as simple as keeping the ERG on side. He wants stability, Braverman is an ex-chair of the ERG, having her in position gives them the illusion of some manner of control over proceedings, if not some actual and real input. It may not play well with the public but within the Tory party it looks like it makes sense to me from a unifying standpoint.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/26/rishi-sunak-britain-general-election-protest Really good article by Monbiot as usual. "After 12 years of Conservative austerity and chaos, the very rich have taken almost everything. They have even captured virtue. They now appropriate the outward signs of an ethical life while continuing – despite or because of their organic cotton jackets and second homes, their electric cars and pasture-fed meat, their carbon offsets and ayahuasca retreats, philanthropy and holidays in quiet resorts whose palm-thatched cabins mimic the vernacular of the people evicted to make way for them – to grasp the lion’s share of everything... ...In other words, it’s not just a general election we need, it’s a complete rethink of who we are and where we stand. It’s not just proportional representation we need, but radical devolution to the lowest possible levels at which decisions can be made, accompanied by deliberative, participatory democracy. It’s not just new lobbying laws we require, but a comprehensive programme to get the money out of politics, ending all private political donations, breaking up the billionaire press and demanding full financial transparency for everyone in public life. We should seek not only the repeal of repressive legislation, but – as civil disobedience is the bedrock of democracy – positive rights to protest. All this now feels far away. Jeremy Corbyn offered some (though by no means all) of these reforms. Keir Starmer offers none. Though Labour MPs voted against the public order bill, his only public comment so far has been to endorse its headline policy: longer sentences for people who glue themselves to roads. But if the Labour party or its future coalition partners can persuade him to agree to just one aspect of this programme, proportional representation, we can start work on the rest, building the political alliances that could transform the life of this nation. Without PR, we’re stuck with a dysfunctional duopoly, in hock to the billionaire press and the millionaires it appoints to govern us. We cannot carry on like this."

It's absolutely about keeping ERG on side - also worth noting though that Braverman is a favourite amongst the Daily Mail brigade. She'll keep the dyed in the wool Kippers happier.

It's this sort of cutting political analysis that makes your contributions on here so vital to the debate

Case in point

I appreciate this post. Not sure I would claim to be depressed per se but I have a very dim outlook at present. That said, I don't feel like I'm going out of my way to look at things negatively, I'm just trying to make sense of what I can see as best I can. And yes, there's speculation on my side here too in fairness - I speculate that the Tories will derive some success from narratives, given that they have some capability to set and impose such things around their policy directions in a way that Labour seem utterly incapable of emulating. That's my 'negative assumption', I suppose. Agree on Starmer, Labour and everything else. Also, I'm really not in a state of handbags with you atm for all it might appear that way, I'm just tired and resigned to this shit. Sorry for my rudeness earlier (have to throw this in, it's a crowd pleaser).

Suppose it's also fitting that Truss' podium looks like a jenga tower in a state of imminent collapse. Foreshadowing.

My exact words were "So far, the Tories seem to be rallying around". Not "Behold mortals, here is the undeniable proof that all I have feared and foreseen is about to come to pass, I hang it all on the word of Boris Johnson." I will remain open minded throughout this and base my views on the information I have available. At such a point where is becomes clear to me that Labour remain on course for victory with complete certainty, I will acknowledge this. Until that happens (and frankly, it is far too early to tell in my opinion), I'm just going to look at what we can see, not what I want to see. The latter approach has been the primary source of my disappointment in politics for some years. I do not see what benefit assuming victory brings to our side of the argument whatsoever other than perhaps some people find it easier to sleep at night. It's not in my nature to afford myself that luxury though, I will continue looking at what I can see rather than what I'm being told to see. And to clarify that - Labour look very likely to win the next general election. We will have two years of austerity to get through before that happens, as well as full Tory command of all developing narratives around it. Sunak will claim that his record shows he takes tough but compassionate decisions to help the people of his country. These narratives might fail because we're all poorer and people will feel that - I will watch how things go and form an opinion based on evidence rather than speculation. If that isn't looking at things objectively then I'm really not sure what objective means anymore.

I agree that people like him do at least try. Smart guy, lot of respect for him - even if he is a Lexiter.

I'm fine Well I'm not, the country depresses me. But as far as Renton and I go, I'm totally fine. But then I'm not the one kicking off over a very benign statement of fact. I just can't be fucked to argue anymore so I'm afraid bored and weary resignation is all I'm going to be offering on that front for a bit.

Feel free to stick me on ignore if you need to.

So far, it looks like the Tories are rallying around.