pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,590
|
Post by pjw1961 on Oct 2, 2022 4:19:37 GMT
What you imply is: that if Truss had not diverged from the Manifesto, her succession would be legitimate, contrary to Caroline. Yes, I agree with that - hence no real problem with Wilson/Callaghan, Thatcher/Major, Blair/Brown, Cameron/May or May/Johnson changes. But I will repeat that what Truss is trying to do is 'a affront to democracy' however technically legal it might be. All we can do is hope enough Tory MPs grow a backbone to stop her, whether out of principle or self-interest. After all, if a party can simply rip up its manifesto then how do any of us know what we are voting for in an election? That has dangerous implications for public trust in the whole concept of democracy. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,590
|
Post by pjw1961 on Oct 2, 2022 4:25:00 GMT
It's because of the relentless attacks by the BBC, who assume that Labour will keep them in their cushy jobs. To an ordinary person such as myself macro-economics means next to nothing, though of course my shares have taken a hit, but they'll go back up again at some point. Inflation is increasing, largely because of Putin, but the government is doing what it can to mitigate the pain (more than any other government that I can remember). For those of us who lived through the inflation of the late '70s this is nothing, and wholesale gas and oil prices are already coming down. People will soon see sense. Since you reckon we lefties take things too seriously, I will recognise that entire post as one of your jokes  |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Oct 2, 2022 4:57:36 GMT
When the Yougov 33 poll came out, I thought 'that *has* to be an outlier', but another 31 since and even Opinium now, with their new methodology ('prediction' rather than 'voting intention' saying 19, it seems not. I have never known polling to change so quickly. All self inflicted by the tories, but, surprised at just how quick the change has been... Difficult to recall, but the Major government collapsed into ridicule fairly quickly. Perhaps its a group think thing where the public like to conform so the mood flips from respecting the government to disrespecting it as one?
Obviously Johnson had fallen out of favour so much he had to be replaced, despite his undeniable interpersonal skills. But his replacemt has hardly set a foot right in that regard. Whether fairly or not, she was portrayed as saying different things to every meeting she attended. Just recently ridiculed for being too frightened to speak to national journalists, but then being savaged by local ones. So one aspect might be Johnson was affable, so adding him to Cameron followed by May seemed an improvement. Truss has produced more of a WTF?
And then a budget which has been attacked by the the entire world. Not just labour, but rather labour jumping on the band wagon after even the US expressed concern the new british government needed help. IMF getting ready to intervene. Plus policies which are the reverse of what was promised from Brexit. austerity. Immigration. Curtailing of rights. Pollution of beaches. Massive price rises and return to high inflation. Homes threatened by rising interest rates. Revising the farm subsidy scheme -again- so farmers have no idea what their income will be, and indeed if they will have one. The fishermen of course can't sell dead fish. Now promising a bonfire of regulations again as per brexit, but that looks increasingly like leading to more dead fish. I cant say the proportion, but many will know how awful their school is. The NHS agreed to be in a state of collapse, and whose fault can that be except the government? Falling real income for a growing proportion of the population.
I have argued kwarteng's budget is cleverer than it looks, because the only way to win the next election, or at least minimise damage, is to appeal to core vote and get the worst of the damage over as fast as possible so there is at least the prospect of a visibly improving situation by the next election. But it may be he and Truss are ideologically motivated, and the reason she was chosen for the job by MPs was to expose that ideology to the public, to see how it would be received. If so, its not looking good. The benefit of such a plan would be to confirm the party needs to move away from the right. Revenge of the remainers indeed.
Con will become the rejoin party the moment it becomes electorally advantageous to them, so lab needs to watch out it isnt left behind. Again.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Oct 2, 2022 5:08:26 GMT
When the Yougov 33 poll came out, I thought 'that *has* to be an outlier', but another 31 since and even Opinium now, with their new methodology ('prediction' rather than 'voting intention' saying 19, it seems not. I have never known polling to change so quickly. All self inflicted by the tories, but, surprised at just how quick the change has been... It's because of the relentless attacks by the BBC, who assume that Labour will keep them in their cushy jobs. To an ordinary person such as myself macro-economics means next to nothing, though of course my shares have taken a hit, but they'll go back up again at some point. Inflation is increasing, largely because of Putin, but the government is doing what it can to mitigate the pain (more than any other government that I can remember). For those of us who lived through the inflation of the late '70s this is nothing, and wholesale gas and oil prices are already coming down. People will soon see sense. I had no idea the BBC was so powerful. There are alternative views but perhaps they may seem far fetched to you. www.ft.com/content/1ace8d42-f3ee-4fdd-a103-5cd4234e8c42www.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/29/id-never-seen-anything-like-it-how-market-turmoil-sparked-a-pension-fund-selloffwww.which.co.uk/news/article/what-the-falling-pound-means-for-your-mortgage-pensions-holidays-and-more-a3WOe9s96Px5Surprisingly non of them say it's BBC managers fault. I'm sure the good sense of the "ordinary people" will win through though in the end and the impending announcements of big changes on the Board of Governors at the Beeb will quickly get your shares up again. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Oct 2, 2022 5:14:46 GMT
I hope all that made some sense, but happy to respond to queries. The bottom line is that the Labour leads over the Conservatives are rapidly heading into the territory where on historical precedent the opposition forms the government after the next GE. Some impressive analysis. thank you. Interesting that you have determined: a) it is the average lead of the opposition, for the months that they are ahead, that determines who wins; b) we are currently on the cusp between "Opposition wins" and "Government wins" There was however an exception noted caused by change of leader...we seem to have had lots of them. And taken more generally, the indicator would seem to rely upon more or less steady state background conditions. Whereas again, we have had brexit then covid then Ukraine each being a massive interruptor of business as usual. So there is more risk than usual that one of these has caused a step change in public mood, so the averaged data up to that step change no longer applies.
It also may be Johnson was right in the sense that while his general following had declined, his personal support was still significant where it mattered. Truss really could be worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Oct 2, 2022 5:18:37 GMT
1. Yes, if you constitute a membership organisation which elects its leader under OMOV, then it's democratic to follow the rules. I don't think its democractic for the members under OMOV to impose a leader on millions of lifelong, non-member Labour voters. I don't agree that MPs should not have more wieght in the decision. It wasn't a cabal, which suggests a small inner group of malefactors; it was a much wider rebellion than that, probably the majority of Labour MPs. You repeat my point that Labour would probably have done better in 2017 if the party had been united. 2. I didn't say voters disregard the leader! That would be idiotic. People vote for an MP under a manifesto, a brick in the system, and the leader with the majority forms a government. That's the theory. The manifesto is the democratic mandate. I have said now 3 times that divergence from the manifesto by a PM old or new is a repudiation of the democratic compact. Your original point was a quite different one: that a new PM = GE. Maybe it should. but it doesn't work like that and never has. (Baldwin became leader in '23 when Bonar Law retired on health grounds, having won an election. Baldwin decided to go for protection and as that was not in the manifesto called the '23 election, which he lost.) 3. Good point! I joined the party years ago but certainly voted against Corbyn twice. That was an influence on policy. The real issue is that choosing a leader solely by OMOV, who is then at odds with the majority of his MPs, didn't work. You have to choose a leader within the wider system that parties have to work in, rather than proclaim the sanctity of membership democracy. How you balance the weight of MPs and the members is tricky. But some attempt has to be made or we end up with Corbyn. Corbyn lost 3 elections, '16, 17, & then '19. He fell out with the MPs or they fell out with him. The post-2016-EU Ref coup was undemocratic. So was Corbyn's crap campaign in the Ref. Every Labour voter I knew was as appalled as I was by his half-hearted efforts -- "oh I would give the EU 7 out of 10" he said, what? in an effing Yes/No campaign. We never forgave him. After '17, I vote for him of course, he should have gone. In '19, I voted again, I knew lifelong Labour voters who stayed at home. It was that bad. Starmer would have won the MPs and the membership. I don't understand how you can reconcile thinking that "its [not] democratic for the members under OMOV to impose a leader on millions of lifelong, non-member Labour voters" whilst thinking that MPs ought to have more weight in the decision. MPs represent a much smaller pool of members - how is that more democratically legitimate? The party should have united behind the democratically elected leader. That it failed to do so is on the parliamentary party and a party apparatus that worked ceaselessly against him (costing the party the chance of winning elections), not the party members. 2016 wasn't an election and if Corbyn was as fundamentally useless and unpopular as his detractors claim, his supposedly lukewarm support of Remain should have been a boon to the campaign. Starmer only won over the membership by deceiving them. Neil Kinnock explained it here. He explains how the Labour movement decided on a parliamentary route to power and why the MPs should therefore have a larger role than the members in choosing their leader. They are putting themselves forward as lawmakers, the membership are not. www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/08/secret-recording-neil-kinnock-jeremy-corbyn-step-down-speech-to-mps-in-full |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Oct 2, 2022 5:39:27 GMT
Couple of implications there. First, that just as in 2008, the root cause of this crisis was clever financial instruments which had repackaged debt in a way which suddenly had disastrous consequences. So it was once again the fault of the finance industry selling sows ears as silk purses. Second, that had this unexpected crisis not appeared, then the Bof E would not have resumed buying government debt. And left kwarteng hanging on falling bond prices as he tried to raise more money. We might also note that while spot prices for energy have fallen back, most companies have 'hedged' their prices so might not see falls for a year or more. The hedges will have bought up supply far in advance at artificially high prices. The one thing for sure is that hedge funds aim to make money, so the final price paid by the consumer will be higher than had hedge funds not existed. Again the finance industry costing us money. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Oct 2, 2022 5:45:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Oct 2, 2022 6:02:43 GMT
Is Mercian still paying his licence fee to the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) I wonder? Paying the salaries of dangerous lefties like Tim Davie, Robin Gibb, Laura Kuennsberg, Nick Robinson, Justin Webb, the berks on that ridiculous Newscast that comes on after QT, Alex Forsyth etc etc.
I hope he knows that by paying his licence fee he is undermining a Tory Government and fomenting revolution.
Of course the tell tale sign of rampant socialism was when the wonderful Andrew Neil left the Corporation. Not content with fronting just about every BBC political programme they ever transmitted, he felt that the woke agenda was curtailing his sword of truth.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Oct 2, 2022 6:13:54 GMT
Let's be gentle with poor Mercian, it's been a hard year to be a Tory supporter.
I think we should give him a safe space to have his tantrums and throw his dummy out of the pram, bless him 😀
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Oct 2, 2022 6:15:09 GMT
Let's be gentle with poor Mercian, it's been a hard year to be a Tory supporter. I think we should give him a safe space to have his tantrums and throw his dummy out of the pram, bless him 😀 Banter ye not, as the great Frankie Howard might have said. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Oct 2, 2022 6:15:33 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Oct 2, 2022 6:19:07 GMT
Been thinking about that Russian invasion. The claimed reason for the invasion were that locals wanted to be Russian, and behind that, that Russia wanted to better secure access to Crimea. However, as we have learnt more about Ukraine we find it is a hugely important world food producer. It has (or had) some imporant industries including arms and aeroplane manufacture which Russia wanted to acquire. It seems it has the largest reserves in Europe of rare earths necessary for the coming renewable energy revolution, and indeed technological innovation. The real reason for this invasion may be that Russia recognised its rather poor economic position and realised that acquisition of Ukraine would immensely strengthen it economically. Moreover, what with the switch to renewables, its own gas and oil reserves might in future become a dwindling asset. So time to switch to the coming technology - the Russian way? Unfortunately the corollary of this would be that the invasion was not some mad idea of a would be czar wanting additional territory for the sake of it. Instead it was a calculated risk taken because of a long term national need for new resources. There is more at stake here than Putin's pride, but what mght be seen as the whole economic future of Russia. Putin would have advisors who pointed this out and agreed the plan. Which would mean Russia will not give in, because it sees holding this territory as essential to its future.
But more even than that, Europe can hardly allow Russia to sieze the biggest reserve of such vital raw materials on the continent.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Oct 2, 2022 6:49:40 GMT
To put it in the simplest terms, Liz Truss got to be PM through a right-wing coup performed by the Conservative Party members.
The Great British Public don't like it and will kick her out at the earliest possible opportunity, which will be 2024 at the latest. There is short term pain, but ultimately this experience, together with the chaos of Brexit, should only serve to strengthen our democracy. I don't think we should rush to change the rules without a period of reflection first.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Oct 2, 2022 7:22:46 GMT
To put it in the simplest terms, Liz Truss got to be PM through a right-wing coup performed by the Conservative Party members. The Great British Public don't like it and will kick her out at the earliest possible opportunity, Nah, she has just done nothing right since getting the job. Johnson was likeable and said he would get on with brexit, thats why he was well received. He too was the product of a right wing coup. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Oct 2, 2022 7:33:53 GMT
Truss will feature on the BBC this morning, even though every favourable element is in place, it's the BBC after all and she will be being interviewed by a Tory, Laura kuenssberg I really can't see it being anything other than another shambolic effort.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Oct 2, 2022 7:48:25 GMT
For the first time in a very long time I have decided to suffer the Sunday politics shows. So far, my blood pressure has risen and Laura K has failed. Truss is getting away with levels of economic illiteracy of incredible depth. Truss also comes across as stubborn and rude. Please can Laura ask a question on windfall taxes?
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Oct 2, 2022 7:55:36 GMT
ptarmigan "Starmer only won over the membership by deceiving them." Corbyn could have only won an election by deceiving the whole UK electorate.They weren't that stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Oct 2, 2022 7:57:24 GMT
It has now been officialy confirmed. Liz Truss is a woman with hidden shallows. If I hear her say "the fact is Laura" one more time I am likely to break the TV.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Oct 2, 2022 8:43:16 GMT
Right in my assessment a shambles by interviewee and interviewer.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Oct 2, 2022 8:51:36 GMT
[quote author=" robbiealive" It's interesting that at your point 3 you don't say you voted for a candidate but AGAINST Corbyn it points to one of the Labour Party's major problems that of factionalism where an almost religious belief states a member of the same party is more your enemy than other parties. This applies to all wings. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2022 9:08:35 GMT
has there ever been a more spectacular political suicide? and three weeks into the job?!? (and how on earth did someone so .. wrong .. on so many levels.. get to be where she is?) Johnson had already lost his lead and I guess as soon as he was replaced what was left of his fan club deserted the party too. It didn't matter who that was. Johnson seemed to win support from a broad section of the electorate, especially people who rarely vote and certainly never Conservative but saw him as someone who got things done (the irony), bigged up Britain and was 'one of them' (again, the irony). I imagine the builders working across the road from me - I bet a few of them voted Tory in 2019 because of the Boris 'cult' and because they didn't like Corbyn. Now they'll revert back to not voting, or maybe might vote Labour. Stereotypical I know. Perhaps I should ask them! |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on Oct 2, 2022 9:18:57 GMT
For the first time in a very long time I have decided to suffer the Sunday politics shows. So far, my blood pressure has risen and Laura K has failed. Truss is getting away with levels of economic illiteracy of incredible depth. Truss also comes across as stubborn and rude. Please can Laura ask a question on windfall taxes? I do not understand the Laura K phenomenon on any level other than to intentionally make Tory politicians look less rubbish than they are. What gets me particularly is how comically seriously she takes herself. It will interesting to see what kind of pivot takes place when we have a Lab govt |
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Oct 2, 2022 9:19:49 GMT
I see that on Sky News today the Conservative Party chairman Jake Berry has confirmed that Tory MPs who vote against the Government's 'Mini Budget' will lose the whip. Fun times ahead for all.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Oct 2, 2022 9:20:08 GMT
To put it in the simplest terms, Liz Truss got to be PM through a right-wing coup performed by the Conservative Party members. The Great British Public don't like it and will kick her out at the earliest possible opportunity, which will be 2024 at the latest. There is short term pain, but ultimately this experience, together with the chaos of Brexit, should only serve to strengthen our democracy. I don't think we should rush to change the rules without a period of reflection first. What about the issue that there is a massive difference between the new Govmt's agenda and what was put before the country in Dec 2019? I mean how is removing the 45k tax band levelling up? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Oct 2, 2022 9:26:44 GMT
lefthanging So if 40+ decide to not be Turkey's voting for Christmas then it's game on for a number of alternatives. Of course finding 40 with the guts amongst a party of snivelling little shits is a big ask.
|
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Oct 2, 2022 9:30:40 GMT
mandolinist domjg Tbh I thought Laura was a lot better than usual today. That's not really meant as praise - she still failed to ask the toughest questions - more a reflection of how shockingly bad she's been previously I suppose. Anyway, I did actually wonder if this was the start of a personal 'pivot' for Laura - perhaps she's recognising that all that time spent at Spectator cocktail parties schmoozing with Government ministers will mean diddly squat once this lot are finally booted out.
|
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Oct 2, 2022 9:34:56 GMT
lefthanging So if 40+ decide to not be Turkey's voting for Christmas then it's game on for a number of alternatives. Of course finding 40 with the guts amongst a party of snivelling little shits is a big ask. Well from his comments to Kuenssberg this morning it looks like Michael Gove may be minded to rebel - and he's done his fair share of snivelling in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Oct 2, 2022 9:42:34 GMT
mandolinist domjg Tbh I thought Laura was a lot better than usual today. That's not really meant as praise - she still failed to ask the toughest questions - more a reflection of how shockingly bad she's been previously I suppose. Anyway, I did actually wonder if this was the start of a personal 'pivot' for Laura - perhaps she's recognising that all that time spent at Spectator cocktail parties schmoozing with Government ministers will mean diddly squat once this lot are finally booted out. Her interview with Rachel Reeves was interesting, she pushed her harder and more often on Labour's spending plans than she did Truss. I spent most of it screaming at the TV...
"but Labour is not in power".
It was risible, pathetic and very annoying.
I am not going to repeat my experiment again in a hurry. Hmph.
|
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Oct 2, 2022 9:44:05 GMT
It's significant to see right wing commentators such as Montgomerie being so critical of Truss:
It may also be notable that Truss said the Cabinet had not discussed the abolition of the 45p rate and the Chancellor had made the decision.
|
|
