Stop voting for fucking Tories

[sturginho]

A liar to the bitter end

[fishfoodie]

A lying piece of shit until the end

Well he probably assumed that once he handed over the Govesters phone contact list, that would be all the rozzers needed

[tabascoboy]

Another day in the HoC wondering where the grown ups went

[tabascoboy]

As expected, TT goooonnneee

[_Os_]

The Tory far right's refusal to get behind one candidate, means it's now likely that Sunak will have enough support to start boosting whichever candidate he would rather face. The far right are even getting behind the candidate opinion polls of the public thought came last/second last in both debates (Badenoch), having already got rid of the candidate the same polls showed came first/second (Tugendhat). The swivel eyed loons from UKIP/Brexit Party/Britain First that have infiltrated them then help vote for the most right wing and least electable candidate whoever that is.

There's a strong chance that whoever becomes PM this all gets repeated next year. Very obvious if Sunak becomes PM, there's a large Tory constituency that will refuse to accept it and immediately start trying to replace him. Also very obvious if it's Mordaunt/Truss/Badenoch, they will be forced to compromise by reality (NI protocol etc), the far right will start ranting about their favourite thing, "betrayal", then demand the removal of the candidate they themselves supported. Johnson could even stand again.

They're a huge fucking mess and still poll at 31%.

[fishfoodie]

The Tory far right's refusal to get behind one candidate, means it's now likely that Sunak will have enough support to start boosting whichever candidate he would rather face. The far right are even getting behind the candidate opinion polls of the public thought came last/second last in both debates (Badenoch), having already got rid of the candidate the same polls showed came first/second (Tugendhat). The swivel eyed loons from UKIP/Brexit Party/Britain First that have infiltrated them then help vote for the most right wing and least electable candidate whoever that is.

There's a strong chance that whoever becomes PM this all gets repeated next year. Very obvious if Sunak becomes PM, there's a large Tory constituency that will refuse to accept it and immediately start trying to replace him. Also very obvious if it's Mordaunt/Truss/Badenoch, they will be forced to compromise by reality (NI protocol etc), the far right will start ranting about their favourite thing, "betrayal", then demand the removal of the candidate they themselves supported. Johnson could even stand again.

They're a huge fucking mess and still poll at 31%.

10% Nazis
10% Careerists
10% Soft c Conservatives

They're three different groups, except when an Election gets called, & then they campaign as one, while Labour tears lumps out of each other....

[Tichtheid]

This is just a guess with nothing to back it up, but I think that a large proportion of the 31% who still back the Tories represent people who will vote Tory without even knowing their candidate's name. They will pay no attention to the dramas being played out in Westminster, they will care only that Brexit "got done" (sic) and that the Cons are the best for the Working Man.

The remainder of the 31% will think that there is no alternative to voting Tory, even though they might know something of what has been going on for the last 12 years

I read the comments in the Mail and the Telegraph (you have to know what you are up against) and that is what makes me think the above.

[Insane_Homer]

[Insane_Homer]

They're a huge fucking mess and still poll at 31%.

10% Nazis
10% Careerists
10% Soft c Conservatives

30% racist uber alles.

[Slick]

They're a huge fucking mess and still poll at 31%.

10% Nazis
10% Careerists
10% Soft c Conservatives

30% racist uber alles.

Nazis , and there goes any semblance of an argument

[Tichtheid]

I don't like the mis-labelling of Nazis because I think it's incredibly disrespectful to the memory of those who were murdered in their millions by that despicable regime.

Similarly I don't like the mislabelling of people like Corbyn as Stalinist for the same reason, that doesn't draw quite the same rolling of eyes though, for some reason

[C T]

This is just a guess with nothing to back it up, but I think that a large proportion of the 31% who still back the Tories represent people who will vote Tory without even knowing their candidate's name. They will pay no attention to the dramas being played out in Westminster, they will care only that Brexit "got done" (sic) and that the Cons are the best for the Working Man.

The remainder of the 31% will think that there is no alternative to voting Tory, even though they might know something of what has been going on for the last 12 years

I read the comments in the Mail and the Telegraph (you have to know what you are up against) and that is what makes me think the above.

Feels like there's a proportion of the population that are utterly steadfast in their belief that no matter how bad the Tories are, Labour would be worse. The right wing media are probably delighted with their efforts there. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think a similar thing in reverse but the media power is in the Tories favor.

Then you've got the just good old fashion tribalism, which of course I'm sure Labour have too.

I also get the feeling there are people who vote Tory as a sort of "I've made it" kind of thing. To show I'm succeeding financially I'll be a Tory voter. People do this kind of thing all the time of course, fancy dinner plates that only see the light of day when there are guests over.

What would it take for that number to dip below 25% say for example?

The Tories could release a manifesto with only one thing on there - "We Promise to Give C T Whatever he Wants" and I still couldn't vote for them right now. Surely there's a point when their incompetence and just plain horrible, corrupt, only out for the top 1%, cronyism takes over when voting.

[Tichtheid]

This is just a guess with nothing to back it up, but I think that a large proportion of the 31% who still back the Tories represent people who will vote Tory without even knowing their candidate's name. They will pay no attention to the dramas being played out in Westminster, they will care only that Brexit "got done" (sic) and that the Cons are the best for the Working Man.

The remainder of the 31% will think that there is no alternative to voting Tory, even though they might know something of what has been going on for the last 12 years

I read the comments in the Mail and the Telegraph (you have to know what you are up against) and that is what makes me think the above.

Feels like there's a proportion of the population that are utterly steadfast in their belief that no matter how bad the Tories are, Labour would be worse. The right wing media are probably delighted with their efforts there. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think a similar thing in reverse but the media power is in the Tories favor.

Then you've got the just good old fashion tribalism, which of course I'm sure Labour have too.

I also get the feeling there are people who vote Tory as a sort of "I've made it" kind of thing. To show I'm succeeding financially I'll be a Tory voter. People do this kind of thing all the time of course, fancy dinner plates that only see the light of day when there are guests over.

What would it take for that number to dip below 25% say for example?

The Tories could release a manifesto with only one thing on there - "We Promise to Give C T Whatever he Wants" and I still couldn't vote for them right now. Surely there's a point when their incompetence and just plane horrible, corrupt, only out for the top 1%, cronyism takes over when voting.

There is one scenario where I could see myself voting Tory, and that is if their candidate was best-placed to keep out a BNP/ Britain First type, but otherwise I'd rather smack the back of my own hand with a five pound hammer.

I accept that makes me tribal, but fundamentally I reject the idea of "Me first, fuck all of you" that is the foundation of Tory policy.

[Paddington Bear]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

[C69]

10% Nazis
10% Careerists
10% Soft c Conservatives

30% racist uber alles.

Nazis , and there goes any semblance of an argument

It's clearly reffrernce to the Tory Party being infiltrated by Britain first and giving Kemi their support.
I ma sure the Tories will deny that entryism has taken place.
But thats the point about entryism as Miltant embodied.
In certian cirxumstances small but comitted well organised groups can exhert massive amounts of influence. The Tory Party has vecome such a magnet for UKIPpers Britain first and other assorted far right fringe loonies.

[Tichtheid]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

Well, in the 2019 manifesto the main points were to put the final say on the Brexit deal that the Tories had negotiated to the people and ask if they still wanted to proceed.

They wanted to re-nationalise railways instead of the tax payer underwriting private companies and European state-owned companies, renationalise mail and energy industries - a set of policies that are actually popular across the country.
Get rid of zero hour contracts, reverse austerity, abolish tuition fees, become carbon-neutral by 2030, get rid of universal credit, boost NHS spending, recruit more police officers, build 150 000 new houses.

I'm not sure that stands up against your argument.

[robmatic]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

Well, in the 2019 manifesto the main points were to put the final say on the Brexit deal that the Tories had negotiated to the people and ask if they still wanted to proceed.

They wanted to re-nationalise railways instead of the tax payer underwriting private companies and European state-owned companies, renationalise mail and energy industries - a set of policies that are actually popular across the country.
Get rid of zero hour contracts, reverse austerity, abolish tuition fees, become carbon-neutral by 2030, get rid of universal credit, boost NHS spending, recruit more police officers, build 150 000 new houses.

I'm not sure that stands up against your argument.

Yes, people who vote Labour do so after careful consideration of the manifesto commitments but Tory voters are just ignorant tribalists.

[Raggs]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

It can't really though. Right now we have absolute proof that the Tories are fucking things up. No doubt, no questions, no perhaps etc. It's dire. It might be bad with Labour too, but I'd much rather roll the dice on a "might" than an absolute guarantee.

[I like neeps]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

It can't really though. Right now we have absolute proof that the Tories are fucking things up. No doubt, no questions, no perhaps etc. It's dire. It might be bad with Labour too, but I'd much rather roll the dice on a "might" than an absolute guarantee.

Yeah I think considering Johnson's platform was "get brexit done and look at what a mess austerity made I'll fix that" his platform was a repudiation of Tory policies really. So you could not vote for Tories due to their record in govt which isn't a reason to not vote corbyn.

[JM2K6]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

I must admit I didn't expect this post. Can you expand on this? Full disclosure: I am no fan of Corbyn, I questioned his competence and his judgment, but my preference isn't for a centrist alternative but a better left-wing alternative.

[Tichtheid]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

Well, in the 2019 manifesto the main points were to put the final say on the Brexit deal that the Tories had negotiated to the people and ask if they still wanted to proceed.

They wanted to re-nationalise railways instead of the tax payer underwriting private companies and European state-owned companies, renationalise mail and energy industries - a set of policies that are actually popular across the country.
Get rid of zero hour contracts, reverse austerity, abolish tuition fees, become carbon-neutral by 2030, get rid of universal credit, boost NHS spending, recruit more police officers, build 150 000 new houses.

I'm not sure that stands up against your argument.

Yes, people who vote Labour do so after careful consideration of the manifesto commitments but Tory voters are just ignorant tribalists.

Errr, where are you getting that from what I wrote?

[JM2K6]

I know robmatic is being facetious but I do believe it's true that the right in the UK and the USA are more likely to vote for their main party over anything else, while the left in both countries is more fractious with loyalty to policy + ideology far more than party. Obviously not all Tory voters are ignorant tribalists. Some of them are ignorant _racist_ tribalists.

I jest. I mean that as a country who has largely voted Conservative since the war, we have a large number of voters who are happy with the status quo and who are either actively against changing that or just passively happy to vote how they've always voted. Meanwhile the left and some of the centre is full of people with very different opinions on how things need to change, with 2 major parties and at least 1 minor one (Greens) that vie for their votes.

I would add that the Labour manifesto was a mistake as they basically threw in every single thing they can think of plus several that clearly did not make any sense, completely failing to understand that credibility was Labour and Corbyn's biggest problem. They hadn't properly campaigned on this stuff prior to the election run and when they did unveil it, it was met with understandable skepticism.

I know plenty of Momentum types who are all WELL JEREMY WOULD'VE DONE X but there's a big difference between having something in your manifesto and being able to deliver it, and Labour under Corbyn had the double whammy of having a muddled mess of a manifesto and no public confidence they could deliver on it.

[Tichtheid]

My bad, as they say, I genuinely didn't understand that we were going the full Dacre on Corbyn the person as opposed to Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party at the last general election.

I was against his leadership candidacy as I didn't think he would win Labour the election. When you have the Telegraph urging its readership to join Labour for a pound and vote for Corbyn for leadership, the penny has to drop.

[Torquemada 1420]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

Well, in the 2019 manifesto the main points were to put the final say on the Brexit deal that the Tories had negotiated to the people and ask if they still wanted to proceed.

They wanted to re-nationalise railways instead of the tax payer underwriting private companies and European state-owned companies, renationalise mail and energy industries - a set of policies that are actually popular across the country.
Get rid of zero hour contracts, reverse austerity, abolish tuition fees, become carbon-neutral by 2030, get rid of universal credit, boost NHS spending, recruit more police officers, build 150 000 new houses.

I'm not sure that stands up against your argument.

Many of these would be good policies but
- Railway subsidies are £5bn+ pa. Even £1 is too much if the f**king things are meant to be privatised. Another example of private profits, public losses.
- Mail is f**ked after the UK sold off all the profitable parts (basically, parcels) and kept the envelope bits.
- Renationalising the rest of the utilities would be much tougher: it would cost a fortune and paid for how?
- Yes to ending slave labour. Kill the likes of Uber.
- Reversing austerity is too big a topic for a one liner but all for redistribution of wealth on merit.
- No to abolishing tuition fees. The issue here is 50% of people should not be going to university to obtain sh*thouse degrees simply so everyone can pretend education is improving. Go back to what universities were meant for i.e.the educationally elite (say < 10%) and then I'm all for paying for the poorer to attend.
- I don't know if carbon neutral by 2030 is possible.
- No to boosting NHS spending. This is a typical Govt response to everything. How about "make the f**king thing vaguely efficient and stop p*ssing the money down the drain"? It's like the solution to a drug abuse it to give the junkie more money to spend on self harm.
- No to more police officers. Get the c**ts out of centralised offices and playing at being The Sweeney in panda cars and put the b*stards back on the beat.
- No to more houses. Because 99% of them are the wrong houses in the wrong locations. Yes to ending the BTL madness, making homes homes rather than investments for the few and normalising house prices to young people can get out or rented and into ownership.

[JM2K6]

My bad, as they say, I genuinely didn't understand that we were going the full Dacre on Corbyn the person as opposed to Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party at the last general election.

I was against his leadership candidacy as I didn't think he would win Labour the election. When you have the Telegraph urging its readership to join Labour for a pound and vote for Corbyn for leadership, the penny has to drop.

I don't think it's going the full Dacre to say Corbyn lacked credibility and made big mistakes with the manifesto and how he campaigned on policies. I've not made any personal attacks (and tbf I could make a couple at the very least!), I just think he was a deeply mediocre choice and that showed up. Yeah, the media was against him, no question. He did little to change voters minds on the boogeyman-version of The Left, though, and the election approach was dreadful.

[Tichtheid]

My bad, as they say, I genuinely didn't understand that we were going the full Dacre on Corbyn the person as opposed to Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party at the last general election.

I was against his leadership candidacy as I didn't think he would win Labour the election. When you have the Telegraph urging its readership to join Labour for a pound and vote for Corbyn for leadership, the penny has to drop.

I don't think it's going the full Dacre to say Corbyn lacked credibility and made big mistakes with the manifesto and how he campaigned on policies. I've not made any personal attacks (and tbf I could make a couple at the very least!), I just think he was a deeply mediocre choice and that showed up. Yeah, the media was against him, no question. He did little to change voters minds on the boogeyman-version of The Left, though, and the election approach was dreadful.

My post came after yours, but it wasn't directed at what you said, and it wasn't meant as any kind of snark, more a light-hearted way to say that I misunderstood the thrust of the post from Paddington.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

I see now that he is saying Corbyn was unelectable, I genuinely thought he meant Corbyn's Labour since the comparison was "The Tories"

However, I'd counter that I never saw Corbyn as corrupt or self-enriching or getting his pals bungs counted in billions, I just think he is a very old fashioned politician who doesn't really live in the 21 century.

[SaintK]

I wonder how long her PR consultants were working on this?

[ASMO]

My bad, as they say, I genuinely didn't understand that we were going the full Dacre on Corbyn the person as opposed to Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party at the last general election.

I was against his leadership candidacy as I didn't think he would win Labour the election. When you have the Telegraph urging its readership to join Labour for a pound and vote for Corbyn for leadership, the penny has to drop.

I don't think it's going the full Dacre to say Corbyn lacked credibility and made big mistakes with the manifesto and how he campaigned on policies. I've not made any personal attacks (and tbf I could make a couple at the very least!), I just think he was a deeply mediocre choice and that showed up. Yeah, the media was against him, no question. He did little to change voters minds on the boogeyman-version of The Left, though, and the election approach was dreadful.

My post came after yours, but it wasn't directed at what you said, and it wasn't meant as any kind of snark, more a light-hearted way to say that I misunderstood the thrust of the post from Paddington.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

I see now that he is saying Corbyn was unelectable, I genuinely thought he meant Corbyn's Labour since the comparison was "The Tories"

However, I'd counter that I never saw Corbyn as corrupt or self-enriching or getting his pals bungs counted in billions, I just think he is a very old fashioned politician who doesn't really live in the 21 century.

In my view, Corbyn was completely unelectable, surrounding himself with complete loons like Diane Abbott made it even worse. I would say him being elected Labour leader is a if not THE most significant factor for the current mess we are in. Having an unelectable oppposition for 5 years allowed the Tories to pretty much do whatever the hell they liked in the knowledge that nobody in the right mind would elect a party led by Corbyn.

[Paddington Bear]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

I must admit I didn't expect this post. Can you expand on this? Full disclosure: I am no fan of Corbyn, I questioned his competence and his judgment, but my preference isn't for a centrist alternative but a better left-wing alternative.

Nothing wrong with being left wing and no interest in rehashing debates but the man was a disgrace on a number of levels and was clearly unelectable. Those who voted for him were just as tribal as those who are still voting Tory

[Torquemada 1420]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

I must admit I didn't expect this post. Can you expand on this? Full disclosure: I am no fan of Corbyn, I questioned his competence and his judgment, but my preference isn't for a centrist alternative but a better left-wing alternative.

Nothing wrong with being left wing and no interest in rehashing debates but the man was a disgrace on a number of levels and was clearly unelectable. Those who voted for him were just as tribal as those who are still voting Tory

Have to agree. Was as big an own goal as the Democrats running Hilary against Trump.

[JM2K6]

Every point on 'how can people vote for this?' about the Tories can be made about voting for Jeremy Corbyn at the last election as well.

I must admit I didn't expect this post. Can you expand on this? Full disclosure: I am no fan of Corbyn, I questioned his competence and his judgment, but my preference isn't for a centrist alternative but a better left-wing alternative.

Nothing wrong with being left wing and no interest in rehashing debates but the man was a disgrace on a number of levels and was clearly unelectable. Those who voted for him were just as tribal as those who are still voting Tory

By voted for him do you mean in the leadership contest? Because I voted Labour, not for Corbyn. I thought Corbyn was pretty poor, but he wasn't responsible for austerity or corruption, and he was very clearly a better person than Boris fucking Johnson; furthermore, Labour's stated aims were a damn sight more palatable than the Tory approach.

"He was a disgrace on a number of levels" is a cop-out, and comparing people who voted for Labour to those who are still voting Tory after austerity, a disastrous pandemic, huge amounts of corruption and a total destruction of public standards is genuinely ridiculous. I had hoped you had something better than that.

[JM2K6]

My bad, as they say, I genuinely didn't understand that we were going the full Dacre on Corbyn the person as opposed to Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party at the last general election.

I was against his leadership candidacy as I didn't think he would win Labour the election. When you have the Telegraph urging its readership to join Labour for a pound and vote for Corbyn for leadership, the penny has to drop.

I don't think it's going the full Dacre to say Corbyn lacked credibility and made big mistakes with the manifesto and how he campaigned on policies. I've not made any personal attacks (and tbf I could make a couple at the very least!), I just think he was a deeply mediocre choice and that showed up. Yeah, the media was against him, no question. He did little to change voters minds on the boogeyman-version of The Left, though, and the election approach was dreadful.

My post came after yours, but it wasn't directed at what you said, and it wasn't meant as any kind of snark, more a light-hearted way to say that I misunderstood the thrust of the post from Paddington.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

I see now that he is saying Corbyn was unelectable, I genuinely thought he meant Corbyn's Labour since the comparison was "The Tories"

However, I'd counter that I never saw Corbyn as corrupt or self-enriching or getting his pals bungs counted in billions, I just think he is a very old fashioned politician who doesn't really live in the 21 century.

It is fair to say that I am no longer sure what Paddington is saying about Corbyn's Labour.

[Paddington Bear]

I must admit I didn't expect this post. Can you expand on this? Full disclosure: I am no fan of Corbyn, I questioned his competence and his judgment, but my preference isn't for a centrist alternative but a better left-wing alternative.

Nothing wrong with being left wing and no interest in rehashing debates but the man was a disgrace on a number of levels and was clearly unelectable. Those who voted for him were just as tribal as those who are still voting Tory

By voted for him do you mean in the leadership contest? Because I voted Labour, not for Corbyn. I thought Corbyn was pretty poor, but he wasn't responsible for austerity or corruption, and he was very clearly a better person than Boris fucking Johnson; furthermore, Labour's stated aims were a damn sight more palatable than the Tory approach.

"He was a disgrace on a number of levels" is a cop-out, and comparing people who voted for Labour to those who are still voting Tory after austerity, a disastrous pandemic, huge amounts of corruption and a total destruction of public standards is genuinely ridiculous. I had hoped you had something better than that.

It's more I can't be bothered to argue about it. If you're willing to have a PM who takes Russia's side on a chemical attack in a British city and indeed the side of terrorists against Britain on a number of occasions the fact that you are not personally corrupt does not make you a moral choice. This is before we get onto the anti-Semitism and I could go on further, but as I say what's the point? He lost and deserved to lose, and 'I voted Labour not Corbyn' is a cop out you would not allow for someone who voted Tory but not Boris. Bar a real turnaround under a new leader, the Tories will suffer the same fate soon enough.

[JM2K6]

Nothing wrong with being left wing and no interest in rehashing debates but the man was a disgrace on a number of levels and was clearly unelectable. Those who voted for him were just as tribal as those who are still voting Tory

By voted for him do you mean in the leadership contest? Because I voted Labour, not for Corbyn. I thought Corbyn was pretty poor, but he wasn't responsible for austerity or corruption, and he was very clearly a better person than Boris fucking Johnson; furthermore, Labour's stated aims were a damn sight more palatable than the Tory approach.

"He was a disgrace on a number of levels" is a cop-out, and comparing people who voted for Labour to those who are still voting Tory after austerity, a disastrous pandemic, huge amounts of corruption and a total destruction of public standards is genuinely ridiculous. I had hoped you had something better than that.

It's more I can't be bothered to argue about it. If you're willing to have a PM who takes Russia's side on a chemical attack in a British city and indeed the side of terrorists against Britain on a number of occasions the fact that you are not personally corrupt does not make you a moral choice. This is before we get onto the anti-Semitism and I could go on further, but as I say what's the point? He lost and deserved to lose, and 'I voted Labour not Corbyn' is a cop out you would not allow for someone who voted Tory but not Boris. Bar a real turnaround under a new leader, the Tories will suffer the same fate soon enough.

Never go full Bimbo.

It is not a cop-out - I would not allow for someone who voted Tory because the Tories have been in power for 12 years and are fully responsible for the mess we are in, which is a very different thing to your tabloid version of Corbyn's failings meaning anyone voting Labour is complicit. I don't think Corbyn was a perfectly moral person. I think history has shown that the guy who said stupid fucking idiot things regarding Russia and terrorist groups is still wildly less compromised than Boris and a big chunk of the current Tory mob. I think a Labour government would have been a massive improvement over the Tories.

Trying to equate voting for Labour - who if nothing else were representing a chance to change the status quo after several years of awful austerity and a Tory shift to the right - with voting for the Tories after all the shit they've said, done, and tried to hide, with all the blood on their hands, their looting of the country, and their conversion of Brexit to a hardcore Libertarian dream, is absolutely fucking mad.

[Hal Jordan]

Bad Enoch showing she's the candidate by telling fibs about flipping burgers for minimum wage at 16 and watching it slip away on taxes. Minimum wage came in when she was 19, and a good deal of her wages would have been tax free.

Another battler against the elite (private education, worked for Coutts and The Spectator, married to a Deutsche Bank type).

[Paddington Bear]

By voted for him do you mean in the leadership contest? Because I voted Labour, not for Corbyn. I thought Corbyn was pretty poor, but he wasn't responsible for austerity or corruption, and he was very clearly a better person than Boris fucking Johnson; furthermore, Labour's stated aims were a damn sight more palatable than the Tory approach.

"He was a disgrace on a number of levels" is a cop-out, and comparing people who voted for Labour to those who are still voting Tory after austerity, a disastrous pandemic, huge amounts of corruption and a total destruction of public standards is genuinely ridiculous. I had hoped you had something better than that.

It's more I can't be bothered to argue about it. If you're willing to have a PM who takes Russia's side on a chemical attack in a British city and indeed the side of terrorists against Britain on a number of occasions the fact that you are not personally corrupt does not make you a moral choice. This is before we get onto the anti-Semitism and I could go on further, but as I say what's the point? He lost and deserved to lose, and 'I voted Labour not Corbyn' is a cop out you would not allow for someone who voted Tory but not Boris. Bar a real turnaround under a new leader, the Tories will suffer the same fate soon enough.

Never go full Bimbo.

It is not a cop-out - I would not allow for someone who voted Tory because the Tories have been in power for 12 years and are fully responsible for the mess we are in, which is a very different thing to your tabloid version of Corbyn's failings meaning anyone voting Labour is complicit. I don't think Corbyn was a perfectly moral person. I think history has shown that the guy who said stupid fucking idiot things regarding Russia and terrorist groups is still wildly less compromised than Boris and a big chunk of the current Tory mob. I think a Labour government would have been a massive improvement over the Tories.

Trying to equate voting for Labour - who if nothing else were representing a chance to change the status quo after several years of awful austerity and a Tory shift to the right - with voting for the Tories after all the shit they've said, done, and tried to hide, with all the blood on their hands, their looting of the country, and their conversion of Brexit to a hardcore Libertarian dream, is absolutely fucking mad.

This is in no way full bimbo. Passing off Corbyn's lifetime foreign policy judgements that continued during a chemical attack on Britain as just saying stupid things is disingenuous given he could have been PM during the Ukraine war. Roughly 30% of people will vote for either main party regardless of who their frontman is or what their record is, and pretending not to understand this is daft.

[_Os_]

I know robmatic is being facetious but I do believe it's true that the right in the UK and the USA are more likely to vote for their main party over anything else, while the left in both countries is more fractious with loyalty to policy + ideology far more than party. Obviously not all Tory voters are ignorant tribalists. Some of them are ignorant _racist_ tribalists.

More or less. Liberalism and socialism are definable universal ideologies, you can tell if someone/something passes the smell test or not, there's little that's context dependent. Conservativism is not like that, a conservative in Saudi Arabia isn't the same as in the UK, it's almost entirely context dependent. In the UK people were told conservativism was about protecting the institutions of the state almost unchanged and about moderation in any changes which were made. When it became about supporting the implementation of the most extreme utopian version of Brexit no matter what, demolishing conventions and ignoring parts of the UK's unwritten constitution with no teeth (which is most of it), even making international treaties with the intention of breaking them almost immediately. People still supported the Tories much as they had before, because "context dependent" is another way of saying "identity". It's the identity of many English people to support the Tories regardless of what they do, the smell test for them is "Tory, yes or no?".

This happens with Labour to, but as the polling shows it afflicts far less people. Corbyn's Labour was polling in the low twenties through much of 2019.

I jest. I mean that as a country who has largely voted Conservative since the war, we have a large number of voters who are happy with the status quo and who are either actively against changing that or just passively happy to vote how they've always voted.

This is the big problem the UK has, the attitude of much of the UK electorate is that any problems are small. A large chunk of the UK electorate (60+, home owners, Tory voters) simply doesn't understand the long term structural damage something like the housing crisis is doing, the only solution is to increase house building substantially which this group of voters opposes. The Tories cater to this group because they're its members, so Mordaunt/Truss/Badenoch have all criticised house building targets and Sunak has waffled some stuff about increasing building in cities like Mordaunt/Truss have. It's the same on every issue. If the Tories remain in power it's a certainty the problems keep getting larger and less solvable. The Tory plan seems to be to turn the UK into Hong Kong, which is a dystopia (massive monopolisation of the private sector, higher cost of living than other East Asian cities, not enough house building therefore insane property prices and people living in literal cages the size of a bed, total death of the manufacturing sector because the government refused to support it, large inward migration from China).

[Mahoney]

Sunak loses to any of the others:

[Mahoney]

This is quite good:

[Paddington Bear]

More or less. Liberalism and socialism are definable universal ideologies, you can tell if someone/something passes the smell test or not, there's little that's context dependent. Conservativism is not like that, a conservative in Saudi Arabia isn't the same as in the UK, it's almost entirely context dependent.

Not convinced this is true. A liberal reformer in Saudi would have almost nothing in common with a liberal in the West.