Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Paddington Bear]

I think those wishing the Tories gone at the next election, and thinking fuckwit Truss or bankers' catamite Sunak will hand it to Labour on a plate are in serious danger of falling into Kinnock's 1992 confidence, or the Trump parallel.

Yes. Either one will inherit a very large majority and incumbents have an inbuilt advantage. Plus as bad as next year could get, 2024 should show economic recovery. Not to mention a lot of us don't really like the Labour party and there's a strong chance either will win the next election.

[Torquemada 1420]

I think those wishing the Tories gone at the next election, and thinking fuckwit Truss or bankers' catamite Sunak will hand it to Labour on a plate are in serious danger of falling into Kinnock's 1992 confidence, or the Trump parallel.

As much a reflection upon the electorate as anything else. I hear the ghost of Joseph de Maistre chuntering in the background.

[I like neeps]

I think those wishing the Tories gone at the next election, and thinking fuckwit Truss or bankers' catamite Sunak will hand it to Labour on a plate are in serious danger of falling into Kinnock's 1992 confidence, or the Trump parallel.

Yes. Either one will inherit a very large majority and incumbents have an inbuilt advantage. Plus as bad as next year could get, 2024 should show economic recovery. Not to mention a lot of us don't really like the Labour party and there's a strong chance either will win the next election.

Most likely result is probably a Lab/Lib Dem coalition. 2024 economic recovery - a lot of ifs - is probably too late as the damage will have been done and people will be sick of incumbents. I also think at some point brexit has to be implemented and when we have to customs check goods. Oh dear.

[fishfoodie]

I think those wishing the Tories gone at the next election, and thinking fuckwit Truss or bankers' catamite Sunak will hand it to Labour on a plate are in serious danger of falling into Kinnock's 1992 confidence, or the Trump parallel.

Yes. Either one will inherit a very large majority and incumbents have an inbuilt advantage. Plus as bad as next year could get, 2024 should show economic recovery. Not to mention a lot of us don't really like the Labour party and there's a strong chance either will win the next election.

Most likely result is probably a Lab/Lib Dem coalition. 2024 economic recovery - a lot of ifs - is probably too late as the damage will have been done and people will be sick of incumbents. I also think at some point brexit has to be implemented and when we have to customs check goods. Oh dear.

Will this be the first UK GE where you have to show your id cards before you get to vote ?

Still, maybe having a year plus of the Covid inquiry, detailing the whole sorry story of ineptitude, & corruption, will put some fire in the voters bellies.

[tabascoboy]

children being disconcertingly honest

[tabascoboy]

Good news for holders of a mortgage...not!

[Ovals]

Good news for holders of a mortgage...not!

Welcome back to the 20th Century !

[sefton]

I think those wishing the Tories gone at the next election, and thinking fuckwit Truss or bankers' catamite Sunak will hand it to Labour on a plate are in serious danger of falling into Kinnock's 1992 confidence, or the Trump parallel.

This is true, there are a large number of the electorate who will vote for a turd as long as it has a red or blue rosette on it but Truss might be a step too far for those with a modicum of independent thinking.

[Insane_Homer]

https://www.conservativesabroad.org/get-involved

But how are they going to produce ID when they vote?

Screenshot_20220722-222730.png (624.07 KiB) Viewed 1469 times

[Insane_Homer]

So... next will be Boris getting his name on the ballot,

Surge in overseas 'member' online registrations (lots of numbers in their twitter name types)

Boris wins.

[Raggs]

https://www.conservativesabroad.org/get-involved

But how are they going to produce ID when they vote?

Screenshot_20220722-222730.png

So literally anyone, in the world, can become a tory party member, and influence who the next prime minister (and obviously leader of tories) will be?

That seems rather open to absolutely insane levels of abuse?

[GogLais]

Something that struck me - members of the Conservative Party are effectively going to elect our next PM with I’m assuming zero oversight from outside the party. Or is there? Seems a bit worrying in an era of outside interference in elections. Same applies to Labour of course.

That's the system we have tbf.

There wasn't even a leadership contest when Brown became Labour leader and PM.

The point I’m trying to make is that the Conservatives are effectively having a private election to elect a public official. It’s only a hypothetical problem. Or maybe they bring in a neutral observer to make sure that everything is legit,

Or to put it another way - if there were malpractice, either internal or external, are we reasonably sure that it would be exposed?

I told you so.

[fishfoodie]

Boaty McBoatface for Leader & PM !

A massive improvement over any of the other options.

[Paddington Bear]

https://www.conservativesabroad.org/get-involved

But how are they going to produce ID when they vote?

Screenshot_20220722-222730.png

So literally anyone, in the world, can become a tory party member, and influence who the next prime minister (and obviously leader of tories) will be?

That seems rather open to absolutely insane levels of abuse?

You have to have been a member for at least three months pre-contest to vote I believe

[Rhubarb & Custard]

https://www.conservativesabroad.org/get-involved

But how are they going to produce ID when they vote?

Screenshot_20220722-222730.png

So literally anyone, in the world, can become a tory party member, and influence who the next prime minister (and obviously leader of tories) will be?

That seems rather open to absolutely insane levels of abuse?

Historically the Tories don't have especially high numbers of overseas members. But maybe there are reasons for that, for instance go back 5 years or so and never mind Labour having more overseas voters the Lib Dems would have more voters in France than the Tories have overseas, so one might conclude it's rich Tory types who also have homes on the UK and thus aren't counted as overseas, or one might consider the Tories just don't bother being honest period, and too it's likely a large number of people joining the Lib Dems were simply pissed off by Brexit and those numbers could easily drop again

It's exceedingly unlikely the Lib Dems would be part of this wider problem, overseas party member electing a PM, but Labour could have the exact same issue. Not sure that the situation is with Labour but so far as I know you can be resident in Russia and join the Lib Dems, so something to think on, have for instance the Tories not sent ballot papers to Putin country?

[Raggs]

https://www.conservativesabroad.org/get-involved

But how are they going to produce ID when they vote?

Screenshot_20220722-222730.png

So literally anyone, in the world, can become a tory party member, and influence who the next prime minister (and obviously leader of tories) will be?

That seems rather open to absolutely insane levels of abuse?

You have to have been a member for at least three months pre-contest to vote I believe

Fine, but there's going to be more leadership contests in the future, even if this one is already too late.

[dpedin]

Looks like the tories have actually made us the 'sick man of europe'!

https://www.ft.com/content/c333a6d8-0a5 ... b1c05a34d2

[_Os_]

Good news for holders of a mortgage...not!

A zombie company is one that has so much debt that it can only just meet its debt interest payments. Minford has a poor track record, not unthinkable 7% kills some zombies but also creates more zombies to replace them. Debt is the UK growth model, purposely making debt unaffordable will mean pain.

The average UK house price is £250k+. At 7% an ordinary person on a variable rate mortgage would immediately have an extra £10k of outgoings pa. The accidental landlord types (as already posted not an small amount of people, sorry Torq) would be looking at extra outgoings of £20k+ pa, rents would have to rise with interest. House prices would fall but many potential first time buyers still wouldn't be able to afford a mortgage with an interest rate that high (they may have the deposit but not the salary). Ultimately banks would take the losses when people go bankrupt being unable/unwilling to service the much higher interest rates on their negative equity properties (banking crisis?). Or not and they become zombie homeowners using all their disposable to pay interest. The underlying issue of not enough houses would remain, young people living in a HMO/with their parents wouldn't suddenly be living in a house that doesn't exist.

Something similar would happen to SMEs. Costs are so high in the UK, that any ambitious SME that wants growth takes out a £100k-£1m loan once cashflow/profit is established. A lot of small businesses would suddenly find themselves with £10k-£50k of extra cost, which means firing employee/s.

The average UK person has about £6k of savings, so well done to Minford for protecting that whilst they become homeless.

Minford always ends up wrong, because he massively overestimates economic flexibility, people aren't going to be able to suddenly switch to a 7% interest rate in a very short space of time without damage. He's worth listening to though, because for whatever reason the Tories love him. Quite a lot of the crazy shit he says ends up happening.

[Hal Jordan]

Didn't he say the loss of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors were an acceptable price to pay for Brexit?

[petej]

Looks like the tories have actually made us the 'sick man of europe'!

https://www.ft.com/content/c333a6d8-0a5 ... b1c05a34d2

Sick and dirty man of Europe. They've broken the country.

Minford always ends up wrong, because he massively overestimates economic flexibility, people aren't going to be able to suddenly switch to a 7% interest rate in a very short space of time without damage. He's worth listening to though, because for whatever reason the Tories love him. Quite a lot of the crazy shit he says ends up happening.

Glad to see the economy is ran based on the guidance of a 79 year old crank.

Didn't he say the loss of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors were an acceptable price to pay for Brexit?

Yes.

[fishfoodie]

Lawyers hired by Nadhim Zahawi have sent “threatening” legal letters to a blogger who accused him of lying about his tax affairs.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nadh ... -jbrvfn3c2

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nadhim Zahawi, has been sending threatening letters, drafted by expensive lawyers, to people investigating his tax affairs. The letters are designed to intimidate, and say they are confidential and can’t be published. One was sent to me. I am publishing it.

https://www.taxpolicy.org.uk/2022/07/22/letters/

Charming !

[I like neeps]

Good news for holders of a mortgage...not!

A zombie company is one that has so much debt that it can only just meet its debt interest payments. Minford has a poor track record, not unthinkable 7% kills some zombies but also creates more zombies to replace them. Debt is the UK growth model, purposely making debt unaffordable will mean pain.

The average UK house price is £250k+. At 7% an ordinary person on a variable rate mortgage would immediately have an extra £10k of outgoings pa. The accidental landlord types (as already posted not an small amount of people, sorry Torq) would be looking at extra outgoings of £20k+ pa, rents would have to rise with interest. House prices would fall but many potential first time buyers still wouldn't be able to afford a mortgage with an interest rate that high (they may have the deposit but not the salary). Ultimately banks would take the losses when people go bankrupt being unable/unwilling to service the much higher interest rates on their negative equity properties (banking crisis?). Or not and they become zombie homeowners using all their disposable to pay interest. The underlying issue of not enough houses would remain, young people living in a HMO/with their parents wouldn't suddenly be living in a house that doesn't exist.

Something similar would happen to SMEs. Costs are so high in the UK, that any ambitious SME that wants growth takes out a £100k-£1m loan once cashflow/profit is established. A lot of small businesses would suddenly find themselves with £10k-£50k of extra cost, which means firing employee/s.

The average UK person has about £6k of savings, so well done to Minford for protecting that whilst they become homeless.

Minford always ends up wrong, because he massively overestimates economic flexibility, people aren't going to be able to suddenly switch to a 7% interest rate in a very short space of time without damage. He's worth listening to though, because for whatever reason the Tories love him. Quite a lot of the crazy shit he says ends up happening.

People will use their savings and remortgage so the 6k is not protected anyway. The UK needs the house price collapse, it's the only way to build a better society. When that bubble bursts there is no escape from honest conversations about UK economic policy and the affects of Brexit and Austerity.

[C69]

So Rishi is going full retard with Common Sense Thatcherism, so what form of Thatcherism is Truss going for?

[_Os_]

People will use their savings and remortgage so the 6k is not protected anyway. The UK needs the house price collapse, it's the only way to build a better society. When that bubble bursts there is no escape from honest conversations about UK economic policy and the affects of Brexit and Austerity.

The bit about people protecting their small amount of savings as the UK economy implodes was a joke. Shows how little Minford knows, the UK has had 2 decades of low inflation and low interest, there was little point in saving and a lot of sense in leveraging as much as possible. UK people have now been conditioned into accumulating debt not savings.

The last half decade has shown the UK is unable to have a sensible and honest conversation about much at all, can't see why one would start. 3% interest rate looks possible in the near future whoever becomes PM all anyone can do is brace in the crash position, those with mortgages should move to fixed if they're on variable the longer they wait the worse the available deals will be, those without mortgages should put maximum effort into being debt free (any disposable into that). Even 3% would put about the same amount of pressure onto the average UK person as the cost of living crisis.

[shaggy]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

[_Os_]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

Is this a reply to me? I agree it would be a disaster. People saying 5%-7% interest rate is the historic average, are missing the point a bit.

[shaggy]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

Is this a reply to me? I agree it would be a disaster. People saying 5%-7% interest rate is the historic average, are missing the point a bit.

No, Neeps.

[Biffer]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

If you’re in negative equity, you can’t get a new mortgage, because you’re asking for over 100% LTV. So no discounted rates, just the headline mortgage rate. People will end up defaulting.

[fishfoodie]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

If you’re in negative equity, you can’t get a new mortgage, because you’re asking for over 100% LTV. So no discounted rates, just the headline mortgage rate. People will end up defaulting.

Also, as the tide goes out, we'll see who's swimming naked.

The banks will always claim they stick to the rules when the issue Mortgages; but I've never heard of a crisis where the claim wasn't debunked very swiftly !

[_Os_]

So Rishi is going full retard with Common Sense Thatcherism, so what form of Thatcherism is Truss going for?

Sunak is the Cameron like target inflation and reduce the deficit Thatcher. Truss is the drive around in a tank dressed up as her and cut taxes to unleash the private sector Thatcher.

What neither of them say is that UK corporation tax is already very low (it's been around 20% for a decade, it was 30%+ the entire time Thatcher was in power) and the private sector is yet to unleash itself, because it's already fully unleashed. Truss mentions Japan a lot, she doesn't mention Japan has a higher corporate tax rate than the UK. Tory members seem to overwhelmingly support Truss, they like the "cut taxes even if it means an increasing debt and interest rate, then the good times will come" Thatcher. It looks cargo cultish. Sunak is more realistic which is why his message is dull and he's losing.

[I like neeps]

[*]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

Houses would no longer be viewed as the ideal investment and become a total bubble sucking any sensible political policy or productive investment with it. Some would suffer undoubtedly. Renters currently suffer and that is also an entire generation, the generation needed for work and children.

[shaggy]

[*]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

Houses would no longer be viewed as the ideal investment and become a total bubble sucking any sensible political policy or productive investment with it. Some would suffer undoubtedly. Renters currently suffer and that is also an entire generation, the generation needed for work and children.

So in order to punish a small number of individuals who have leveraged debt for excessive BTL purposes you destroy probably millions of households? Those renters who you now think will be able to afford to buy will likely not have jobs as the repercussions of a massive correction will plunge the country into a recession. Madness.

[Ymx]

Telegraph seem to be heavily promoting Rishi.

“ Only Rishi Sunak can provide the leadership our country needs”

“ This is no time to gamble. That’s why Rishi Sunak has my vote to be next PM”

[I like neeps]

[*]

How does pushing a near generation of home owners into massive levels of negative equity actually free up properties? Surely they will just hold on to their current home with massive mortgage hoping for a correction? The fluidity of home moving will almost completely disappear unless you are considering wholesale bankruptcy of a large percentage of the population and a new banking disaster as positive news. This would decimate pensions and the stock market causing 20 years of absolute misery.

Houses would no longer be viewed as the ideal investment and become a total bubble sucking any sensible political policy or productive investment with it. Some would suffer undoubtedly. Renters currently suffer and that is also an entire generation, the generation needed for work and children.

So in order to punish a small number of individuals who have leveraged debt for excessive BTL purposes you destroy probably millions of households? Those renters who you now think will be able to afford to buy will likely not have jobs as the repercussions of a massive correction will plunge the country into a recession. Madness.

No punishment at all. Realignment. It needs to happen and everyone knows it. There's no smooth landing to a massive bubble bursting and it will burst eventually as the housing market is completely untethered to any economic reality that isn't massive QE. The last twenty years of economic policy has rewarded unearned asset wealth to the cost of productivity and actual growth. This cannot continue. A recession is coming anyway - I expect the bubble to burst regardless of Truss listening to Minford because as said it reflects no reality past a magic money tree.

And it'll happen globally, Canada, US, Australia etc all have these pretty structural problems where QE monies were spaffed into housing and share buybacks or unprofitable tech firms. At least those three have economies which can grow through natural resource and trading relationships though. Britain doesn't.

[I like neeps]

I Ireland you just ended up with loads of reluctant landlords as they had to upsize or they married. In the former the wealthy boomer mammy and daddy helps and in the latter the rent often didn't wipe the face of the mortgage. It was a slog for many years and rent controls made it difficult to catch up with the mortgages in some places. Overall a shit show and only trotsyists and shinners like Fester thought those people deserved it

Again, nothing about deserving anything or not. They didn't deserve the asset wealth inflation and they don't deserve the consequences when the chickens home to roost. if you have the chance to pick the fruits of the magic money tree you obviously take that chance. But any capitalist such as myself knows that having government print untold wealth into unproductive assets which become millstones to productive economies and how capitalism really ought to function is ultimately bad for everyone.

[shaggy]

[*]

Houses would no longer be viewed as the ideal investment and become a total bubble sucking any sensible political policy or productive investment with it. Some would suffer undoubtedly. Renters currently suffer and that is also an entire generation, the generation needed for work and children.

So in order to punish a small number of individuals who have leveraged debt for excessive BTL purposes you destroy probably millions of households? Those renters who you now think will be able to afford to buy will likely not have jobs as the repercussions of a massive correction will plunge the country into a recession. Madness.

No punishment at all. Realignment. It needs to happen and everyone knows it. There's no smooth landing to a massive bubble bursting and it will burst eventually as the housing market is completely untethered to any economic reality that isn't massive QE. The last twenty years of economic policy has rewarded unearned asset wealth to the cost of productivity and actual growth. This cannot continue. A recession is coming anyway - I expect the bubble to burst regardless of Truss listening to Minford because as said it reflects no reality past a magic money tree.

And it'll happen globally, Canada, US, Australia etc all have these pretty structural problems where QE monies were spaffed into housing and share buybacks or unprofitable tech firms. At least those three have economies which can grow through natural resource and trading relationships though. Britain doesn't.

But your realignment will have such an impact that it could take decades to recover from whilst still not providing a solution for those that need prices to be affordable.

It does not sound like a solution in any sense as the only people who would escape the carnage would be the wealthy elite.

For someone who has a strong ethical (& transfer of wealth) persona on here, and probably outside too, to commit to such a radical approach knowing the suffering it would bring seems odd.

[_Os_]

I Ireland you just ended up with loads of reluctant landlords as they had to upsize or they married. In the former the wealthy boomer mammy and daddy helps and in the latter the rent often didn't wipe the face of the mortgage. It was a slog for many years and rent controls made it difficult to catch up with the mortgages in some places. Overall a shit show and only trotsyists and shinners like Fester thought those people deserved it

Again, nothing about deserving anything or not. They didn't deserve the asset wealth inflation and they don't deserve the consequences when the chickens home to roost. if you have the chance to pick the fruits of the magic money tree you obviously take that chance. But any capitalist such as myself knows that having government print untold wealth into unproductive assets which become millstones to productive economies and how capitalism really ought to function is ultimately bad for everyone.

Hold up chief, higher interest rates hit anyone with debt. Simple as that, it's nothing to do with if someone has had asset value inflation or not. There's 11 million residential mortgages in the UK, valued at about £1.6 trillion. New BTL mortgages are declining, as are the total amount of properties in the PRS (I've already posted about the reasons for this). What is a big component of the market is FTBs, new mortgages are about a third each FTB/remortgage/mover (with BTL in the single digits). Average mortgage debt is about £140k, but for an FTB it's much higher because property prices were higher when they bought and they've paid less in, their average debt is closer to £200k than £150k and their mortgage length will be about 30 years. Those who are mortgage free are mostly 60+, those who are up to their eyeballs are under 40.

A Minford interest rate would hit the younger mortgage holders the hardest. Structurally it isn't possible for the UK to have interest rates at the historic average for at least another decade, unless you're on team Minford and believe in rapid overnight economic flexibility. If mortgage holders under 40 are wiped out, they end up worse off than their peers who are renting/living with their parents. The UK's total residential mortgage debt is £1.6 trillion, so the contagion would be the entire UK economy. Good luck building a new economy after that, the best move a young person could make after that would be emigration.

[I like neeps]

You are talking about people caught with some thing they don't want. It caused huge harm and along with other matters changed the political landscape. We now have extremes in politics like you have that we never had before. Its terrible really as every spoofing cunt is wearing a path to parliament

Okay but I'd argue assets becoming decoupled from work/salary has caused huge harm and changed the political landscape as well. We already see globally "spoofing cunts" ride the wave of anger created by the central banks and governments of this world inflated the wealth of some whilst decreasing the wealth and opportunity of others. And then what happens in 20 years time across the west when the birth rate has been decimated as working a full time job and having a family are unaffordable? What happens then the pension bills come due? What then? The house price bubble inflated by QE has already caused huge pain and will when it pops. The pain is inevitable, we'll all feel it. The discussions we have now are who feels it in the interim.

[SaintK]

Both of these arse wipes have got their dog whistles out.

Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have pledged to dramatically expand the Rwanda scheme for removing asylum seekers, as they bid with growing ferocity for Conservative members’ votes in the party leadership race.
Both are appealing to the right of the party with pledges on immigration branded “cruel” by charities.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2 ... m-scheme
Neither of them appear to have read the reports from earlier in the week that the maximum number that Rwanda can take is 200.

Rwanda only has the capacity to accommodate 200 Channel migrants, its government officials said as they admitted they were powerless to stop people from leaving in order to return to the UK.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2F ... ing%2F

[Lobby]

Both of these arse wipes have got their dog whistles out.

Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have pledged to dramatically expand the Rwanda scheme for removing asylum seekers, as they bid with growing ferocity for Conservative members’ votes in the party leadership race.
Both are appealing to the right of the party with pledges on immigration branded “cruel” by charities.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2 ... m-scheme
Neither of them appear to have read the reports from earlier in the week that the maximum number that Rwanda can take is 200.

Rwanda only has the capacity to accommodate 200 Channel migrants, its government officials said as they admitted they were powerless to stop people from leaving in order to return to the UK.

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2F ... ing%2F

It doesn't matter whether they've read them or not; Tory members won't have read anything in the Guardian, and even if they had would probably dismiss it as leftie whinging. Any old dog whistle will work with the electorate they are trying to appeal to.

Sunak probably knows that the Rwanda scheme is bullshit, but thinks he has to appeal to the casual racists in the party if he wants to win. Truss is too thick to know otherwise.