Enough is enough - It’s time for a General Election

M

Malced

Guest
I’m a former Labour supporter but switched to voting Conservative when Labour left the infamous note saying something along the lines of ‘good luck there’s no money left’.

My main reason for voting conservative was the belief that they’d look after the public finances better than Labour.

However that’s all gone out of the window with the shambles of the mini-budget and what’s ensued thereafter.

I would never have voted for Labour under Corbyn because he was too far left for my liking.

Whilst I don’t have much time for Starmer, and would much prefer someone like Andy Burnham, I do think it’s time to give Labour a chance to govern.

We’ve had too much of this current lot and their in-fighting. It’s a mess. They’re self serving egotists playing their power games. They’ve forgotten who they’re serving and why they’re there.

So I’d welcome a clear out at a General Election. I feel somewhat for the newer MPs who have had little chance to improve the lives of their constituents. Instead their time in post has been marred by No.10 scandals and the ministerial merry-go-round.

If Starmer becomes PM I hope he strikes the right balance between supporting individuals and supporting business. It can’t be one over the other.

By the way, the reason I’d prefer Andy Burnham is because again he’s straight-talking and he connects with the public. I’m not sure Starmer does. But he’s the Labour leader for now, so it is what it is.

It’s clear Truss has no mandate. It’s clear she can’t control her party. The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.

So the only answer for me is to have a General Election. We need a clear out. We need a new Government. Bring it on.
 
The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.

But that is precisely what they are going to attempt to do.
 
Graham Brady, Chairman of 1922 Committee has just said it will be between a choice of 2 candidates. Not sure how they decide that!
 
1966_and_all_that said:
The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.

But that is precisely what they are going to attempt to do.
Click to expand...
They will do. I wonder if the candidates will stand on a GE pledge and being the best to lead them into it.

Not as crazy as it sounds. By holding on to power they could well totally destroy themselves, by calling a GE they could say they're doing the right thing for Britain, still with a lot of damage, but it would have those wavering Tory voters thinking that the worst is over.
 
Surely there now needs to be a rule put in place that, ill health aside, you can’t have more than 2 different PMs between GEs.
 
Does the fact that Liz Truss was completely and utterly inept and outside of her ability levels, plus proven that at least Rishi was correct in his projections on the economy - show that the voting Conservative party members are equally inept?
 
Malced said:
The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.
Click to expand...
Feasible or not, that's the likely outcome


Chunkylad said:
Does the fact that Liz Truss was completely and utterly inept and outside of her ability levels, plus proven that at least Rishi was correct in his projections on the economy - show that the voting Conservative party members are equally inept?
Click to expand...

Rishi lost the vote on the single issue that he was instrumental in ousting Boris Johnson. Otherwise he would already be PM.
 
Malced said:
I’m a former Labour supporter but switched to voting Conservative when Labour left the infamous note saying something along the lines of ‘good luck there’s no money left’.

My main reason for voting conservative was the belief that they’d look after the public finances better than Labour.

However that’s all gone out of the window with the shambles of the mini-budget and what’s ensued thereafter.

I would never have voted for Labour under Corbyn because he was too far left for my liking.

Whilst I don’t have much time for Starmer, and would much prefer someone like Andy Burnham, I do think it’s time to give Labour a chance to govern.

We’ve had too much of this current lot and their in-fighting. It’s a mess. They’re self serving egotists playing their power games. They’ve forgotten who they’re serving and why they’re there.

So I’d welcome a clear out at a General Election. I feel somewhat for the newer MPs who have had little chance to improve the lives of their constituents. Instead their time in post has been marred by No.10 scandals and the ministerial merry-go-round.

If Starmer becomes PM I hope he strikes the right balance between supporting individuals and supporting business. It can’t be one over the other.

By the way, the reason I’d prefer Andy Burnham is because again he’s straight-talking and he connects with the public. I’m not sure Starmer does. But he’s the Labour leader for now, so it is what it is.

It’s clear Truss has no mandate. It’s clear she can’t control her party. The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.

So the only answer for me is to have a General Election. We need a clear out. We need a new Government. Bring it on.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but not with the Charisma Kid Starmer as a potential PM
 
Not a witch hunt but I’d love to hear from one of the party members who did vote for her, for which part of her ideas and manifesto that they found so attractive?

In the debates I saw, I was screaming at the Tv with the same outburst of “where’s the money to do that, and how can that be funded”.
You can have low taxes, high wages and growth…..

Fantasy island stuff.
 
If they refuse to call a GE then it has to be 'Bring Back Boris, to Build Back Better'

Boris is the only one for me amongst the current Tory crop. He's still incredibly popular.
 
Malced said:
I’m a former Labour supporter but switched to voting Conservative when Labour left the infamous note saying something along the lines of ‘good luck there’s no money left’.

My main reason for voting conservative was the belief that they’d look after the public finances better than Labour.
Click to expand...
I shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the crayons on days like this, but there are a couple of things here that really get my goat. Nothing personal Malced -- it's all part of the national credo nowadays, after all. My apologies.

No 1: This outgoing Treasury Secretary thing? Leaving a few words has been a tradition since the 1930s. In 1964 Reg Maudling's version of the memo was to hand over to Jim Callaghan with the message: “Sorry to leave it in such a mess, old cock.” The Labour fella in 2010 simply made the mistake of presuming his successor would have a sense of humour. Sadly, that slapped-arse Cameron got wind of it and so did his chums at the Mail and Express.

No 2: An academic study using quarterly data from 1955 to 2019 found that the UK economy grew at a near-identical pace under Tory and Labour governments (and that's including the 2008 global financial crisis, on Labour's watch), with two key differences being that Labour does better in tackling recessions and is overall more consistent. Take out 2008 and Labour knocks Tory into a cocked hat. I know: lies, damned lies and statistics, and all that, but even so...
 
Malced said:
If they refuse to call a GE then it has to be 'Bring Back Boris, to Build Back Better'

Boris is the only one for me amongst the current Tory crop. He's still incredibly popular.
Click to expand...
68% of the country believed he was doing a bad job as Prime Minister when he resigned in disgrace, Labour had double digit polling leads, and he is currently under investigation for lying to Parliament. Not only that, Tory MPs are telling journalists they would defect to Labour if he came back.
 
foggy said:
68% of the country believed he was doing a bad job as Prime Minister when he resigned in disgrace, Labour had double digit polling leads, and he is currently under investigation for lying to Parliament. Not only that, Tory MPs are telling journalists they would defect to Labour if he came back.
Click to expand...
yes it is very unlikely to be honest, but when I said very popular, I was meaning primarily amongst the tory party members who usually have the final say in their leadership election.

the other thing worth mentioning is that attitudes change over time. yes he resigned under a cloud, but we've since had the shambles the superseded his tenure. so i'm not saying all will be forgiven, but he may now be seen in a better light given what's happened to the country since he left.

the biggest stumbling block could well be the investigation you mention. It wouldn't be good to appoint him as PM only for him to have to resign again.
 
GrimleyFiendish said:
I shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the crayons on days like this, but there are a couple of things here that really get my goat. Nothing personal Malced -- it's all part of the national credo nowadays, after all. My apologies.

No 1: This outgoing Treasury Secretary thing? Leaving a few words has been a tradition since the 1930s. In 1964 Reg Maudling's version of the memo was to hand over to Jim Callaghan with the message: “Sorry to leave it in such a mess, old cock.” The Labour fella in 2010 simply made the mistake of presuming his successor would have a sense of humour. Sadly, that slapped-arse Cameron got wind of it and so did his chums at the Mail and Express.

No 2: An academic study using quarterly data from 1955 to 2019 found that the UK economy grew at a near-identical pace under Tory and Labour governments (and that's including the 2008 global financial crisis, on Labour's watch), with two key differences being that Labour does better in tackling recessions and is overall more consistent. Take out 2008 and Labour knocks Tory into a cocked hat. I know: lies, damned lies and statistics, and all that, but even so...
Click to expand...
I appreciate your well-put comments. I wasn't aware of the tradition you mention, and that does indeed put it in a different light - but - there was no money left, and it's more that, than the letter itself which I found disturbing. It's what led to the era of austerity. Yes austerity was the way the conservatives chose to handle the huge debt mess they inherited - but regardless of how they chose to handle it, and how it was branded, they did inherit a financial mess from Labour and difficult spending decisions and public sector cuts were thus inevitable.
 
Malced said:
I appreciate your well-put comments. I wasn't aware of the tradition you mention, and that does indeed put it in a different light - but - there was no money left, and it's more that, than the letter itself which I found disturbing. It's what led to the era of austerity. Yes austerity was the way the conservatives chose to handle the huge debt mess they inherited - but regardless of how they chose to handle it, and how it was branded, they did inherit a financial mess from Labour and difficult spending decisions and public sector cuts were thus inevitable.
Click to expand...
True enough. I can't begin to explain why the country was skint in 2010 as I'm not an economist, and the bank bailout only cost £33 billion in the end (Wikipedia is your friend), which is a piffling amount compared with what our current shower are throwing around. Maybe it was just time for a change.

A bit like now, in fact. Time to install the party of economic competence and stability in government! By which I mean Labour. With a lawyer at the helm, rather than a crook.
 
Malced said:
yes it is very unlikely to be honest, but when I said very popular, I was meaning primarily amongst the tory party members who usually have the final say in their leadership election.

the other thing worth mentioning is that attitudes change over time. yes he resigned under a cloud, but we've since had the shambles the superseded his tenure. so i'm not saying all will be forgiven, but he may now be seen in a better light given what's happened to the country since he left.

the biggest stumbling block could well be the investigation you mention. It wouldn't be good to appoint him as PM only for him to have to resign again.
Click to expand...
But you know he’d be caught out doing something else he shouldn’t. And then lying about it.

He just can’t help himself.
 
Andy Burnham would win an election hands down, not sure what it is about Keir he’s not very natural and being a Sir, said to be living in a £3million pound house and part of the north London set he doesn’t appeal to the ordinary guy/girl in the street
 
Chunkylad said:
Does the fact that Liz Truss was completely and utterly inept and outside of her ability levels, plus proven that at least Rishi was correct in his projections on the economy - show that the voting Conservative party members are equally inept?
Click to expand...
Dementia is a terrible thing.
 
Chunkylad said:
Not a witch hunt but I’d love to hear from one of the party members who did vote for her, for which part of her ideas and manifesto that they found so attractive?

In the debates I saw, I was screaming at the Tv with the same outburst of “where’s the money to do that, and how can that be funded”.
You can have low taxes, high wages and growth…..

Fantasy island stuff.
Click to expand...
.... maybe you were watching a re run of Corblimy😁
 
Threepeaksphil said:
Andy Burnham would win an election hands down, not sure what it is about Keir he’s not very natural and being a Sir, said to be living in a £3million pound house and part of the north London set he doesn’t appeal to the ordinary guy/girl in the street
Click to expand...
But you'll vote for Etonions
 
Threepeaksphil said:
Andy Burnham would win an election hands down, not sure what it is about Keir he’s not very natural and being a Sir, said to be living in a £3million pound house and part of the north London set he doesn’t appeal to the ordinary guy/girl in the street
Click to expand...
You've obviously not listened to any of his speeches.
 
Malced said:
I appreciate your well-put comments. I wasn't aware of the tradition you mention, and that does indeed put it in a different light - but - there was no money left, and it's more that, than the letter itself which I found disturbing. It's what led to the era of austerity. Yes austerity was the way the conservatives chose to handle the huge debt mess they inherited - but regardless of how they chose to handle it, and how it was branded, they did inherit a financial mess from Labour and difficult spending decisions and public sector cuts were thus inevitable.
Click to expand...
I have to correct you Malced. The banking crisis was born in America and infected the UK big-time. The 'no money left' note was a joke but picked on by the Tories as an electioneering asset. The fact is that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling saved the British economy when it could have imploded. The political benefactors were, ultimately, the Tories but only because the Lib Dems saw a route to power by joining their coalition. They could just as easy have joined with Labour and kept the Tories out of office.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I have to correct you Malced. The banking crisis was born in America and infected the UK big-time. The 'no money left' note was a joke but picked on by the Tories as an electioneering asset. The fact is that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling saved the British economy when it could have imploded. The political benefactors were, ultimately, the Tories but only because the Lib Dems saw a route to power by joining their coalition. They could just as easy have joined with Labour and kept the Tories out of office.
Click to expand...
So it’s a fact that the note was left?

no further questions your Honour
 
Malced said:
I’m a former Labour supporter but switched to voting Conservative when Labour left the infamous note saying something along the lines of ‘good luck there’s no money left’.

My main reason for voting conservative was the belief that they’d look after the public finances better than Labour.

However that’s all gone out of the window with the shambles of the mini-budget and what’s ensued thereafter.

I would never have voted for Labour under Corbyn because he was too far left for my liking.

Whilst I don’t have much time for Starmer, and would much prefer someone like Andy Burnham, I do think it’s time to give Labour a chance to govern.

We’ve had too much of this current lot and their in-fighting. It’s a mess. They’re self serving egotists playing their power games. They’ve forgotten who they’re serving and why they’re there.

So I’d welcome a clear out at a General Election. I feel somewhat for the newer MPs who have had little chance to improve the lives of their constituents. Instead their time in post has been marred by No.10 scandals and the ministerial merry-go-round.

If Starmer becomes PM I hope he strikes the right balance between supporting individuals and supporting business. It can’t be one over the other.

By the way, the reason I’d prefer Andy Burnham is because again he’s straight-talking and he connects with the public. I’m not sure Starmer does. But he’s the Labour leader for now, so it is what it is.

It’s clear Truss has no mandate. It’s clear she can’t control her party. The Tory’s can’t feasibly replace her with another leader. That would be farcical - and in any case there’s no one that could unite their party.

So the only answer for me is to have a General Election. We need a clear out. We need a new Government. Bring it on.
Click to expand...
I've got the same doubts about Starmer, so you're not the only one. I could never have voted for Corbyn and I'm still not sure I could bring myself to vote for Starmer. I agree with most of your post though and I too think it's time for a change.
Truss got it so wrong. You couldn't make up some of the stuff! Surely a PM has economic advisors who would have told her not to go down that route? Or was she that arrogant she thought she was right, and she could just bulldoze everything through? The mind boggles.
I read a few views about Liz Truss when she became PM, and most views were scathing.
I thought surely she can't be that bad? She actually wasn't that bad, she was worse.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I have to correct you Malced. The banking crisis was born in America and infected the UK big-time. The 'no money left' note was a joke but picked on by the Tories as an electioneering asset. The fact is that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling saved the British economy when it could have imploded. The political benefactors were, ultimately, the Tories but only because the Lib Dems saw a route to power by joining their coalition. They could just as easy have joined with Labour and kept the Tories out of office.
Click to expand...
NO, you don’t HAVE TO correct anybody…for three reasons ..

1) You Can’t because your contention is merely subjective opinion not factual

2) It makes you sound an arrogant Bore

3) You don’t have to do anything
1966_and_all_that said:
Of course, I just posted that it was. Do keep up old chap.
Click to expand...
I do keep up
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
I've got the same doubts about Starmer, so you're not the only one. I could never have voted for Corbyn and I'm still not sure I could bring myself to vote for Starmer. I agree with most of your post though and I too think it's time for a change.
Truss got it so wrong. You couldn't make up some of the stuff! Surely a PM has economic advisors who would have told her not to go down that route? Or was she that arrogant she thought she was right, and she could just bulldoze everything through? The mind boggles.
I read a few views about Liz Truss when she became PM, and most views were scathing.
I thought surely she can't be that bad? She actually wasn't that bad, she was worse.
Click to expand...
Give Labour a chance Rusty. You won't be held to account for doing so.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Give Labour a chance Rusty. You won't be held to account for doing so.
Click to expand...
I’ve voted Labour a few times 1966
More times than I’ve voted for any other party. I come from a Labour voting family of union shop stewards and party members.Maybe I’m still a bit traumatised by the Corbyn years 😬 I’m definitely a floating voter though. I don’t vote for a party just because of my family history
My gut feeling is I probably won’t vote
I’ll see how the land lies at the next GE but there isn’t a politician or a party that fills me with any confidence at all
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
I’ve voted Labour a few times 1966
More times than I’ve voted for any other party. I come from a Labour voting family of union shop stewards and party members.Maybe I’m still a bit traumatised by the Corbyn years 😬 I’m definitely a floating voter though. I don’t vote for a party just because of my family history
My gut feeling is I probably won’t vote
I’ll see how the land lies at the next GE but there isn’t a politician or a party that fills me with any confidence at all
Click to expand...
Trouble is, whoever is elected they will be a politician. You can not vote - it's allowed. You can spoil your ballot paper- better, at least you've then turned up. Or, you can vote for someone then hold them to account.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
I've got the same doubts about Starmer, so you're not the only one. I could never have voted for Corbyn and I'm still not sure I could bring myself to vote for Starmer. I agree with most of your post though and I too think it's time for a change.
Truss got it so wrong. You couldn't make up some of the stuff! Surely a PM has economic advisors who would have told her not to go down that route? Or was she that arrogant she thought she was right, and she could just bulldoze everything through? The mind boggles.
I read a few views about Liz Truss when she became PM, and most views were scathing.
I thought surely she can't be that bad? She actually wasn't that bad, she was worse.
Click to expand...


It seems that she was told by her own advisors;

www.theguardian.com

Liz Truss ignored economists’ stark warnings over mini-budget

Pair sympathetic to her growth agenda told Truss before she became PM that plans needed to be handled with care
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Arrogance paired with stupidity - how on earth did she become PM?
 
rockontommy said:
Tory MPs provided their membership two shite options.
Click to expand...

The years of Tory civil war has left lots of casualties. I'm not convinced there are very many 'good options' because everyone is linked to a faction in one way or another. It's really hard to hold on to power once that splits start because eventually, everyone is part of one camp or another who tried to stab someone else in the back and everyone hates everyone. They've also gone through a whole set of expulsions and now have stuck their current credibility (such as it is) on a chancellor who is possibly the biggest critic of the their potential saviour.

That's not to say there aren't people who are more able than the options presented, but I think part of the appeal of Truss was the idea that she was a bit of a chameleon who had been in multiple cabinets and worked successfully (i.e. hadn't stropped off) with multiple different regimes and thus there was a degree of continuity perhaps possible. It clearly didn't work.

They've also got loads of new MPs that are too callow.

If I was advising them, I'd say - pick Gove as a caretaker - he's too old to be a serious candidate in 6 or 7 years - let him absorb the damage - he's intelligent enough to lead and you know what you're getting and then, keep the talent for later, don't burn it now.

Then again, I'm some oddball on the internet, so I don't really know a) why they'd listen and b) why I'm even writing this cos I'm not even a tory in the slightest...
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Trouble is, whoever is elected they will be a politician. You can not vote - it's allowed. You can spoil your ballot paper- better, at least you've then turned up. Or, you can vote for someone then hold them to account.
Click to expand...
I have always voted for whoever has the best chance of beating the Tory. Never forgiven them for Thatcher. However, at the last General Election, I despaired so much about all of them that I spoiled my ballot paper.
 
I am genuinely bemused by the way some people think - or not, as the case may be.

They had some back bench dollop on today saying she favoured Boris and her response to the question about whether he might get kicked out of the House by the Privileges Committee was "well he might not, we should give him a chance". Why would you take a risk that big when you didn't have to?

Elsewhere the ERG are demanding a slate of Ministerial posts in return for their endorsement. The lack of self-awareness is breathtaking, really.
 
Macseasider said:
I feel comfortable that Sir Kier will be a safe pair of hands for our nation.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/busines...cheering-tory-meltdown-end-cheap-money-sinks/

But the end of Trussonomics does not only mark the end of Truss’s time as prime minister. It marks the end of any economic plan that would borrow vast sums of money for day-to-day spending. This is going to create just as big of a headache for the Labour party in the future as it has done for the Conservatives now – and indeed for any Tory who has not yet learned this lesson.


Personally I don't see how Starmer keeps his trade union masters happy without causing exactly the same problems that Truss's plans did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top