Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Sandstorm]

Sunak is obviously a cock, but he's a unlucky that today transphobia is unacceptable when it's been very acceptable if not encouraged in Parliament and the press for years. If she wasn't there and we're a week removed from the sentencing nobody would care about the joke, the Tories would be laughing like seals and labour looking sheepish. She might watch PMQs on TV and hear it, is that not just as bad?

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

[SaintK]

The gift that keeps on giving!!!!

The Conservative peer Michelle Mone assured the government that she was not entitled to “any financial benefit whatsoever” from a PPE company, five months before £29m of its profits were transferred into a trust for her benefit.
Leaked emails between Mone and the Cabinet Office reveal that a civil servant asked her to make a declaration that she had no conflict of interest in relation to the company, PPE Medpro, which she had recommended to ministers in May 2020.
Mone stated that she had “no conflicts whatsoever” and that she was not “entitled to any financial remuneration or financial benefit whatsoever”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2 ... rm-medpro

[inactionman]

The gift that keeps on giving!!!!

The Conservative peer Michelle Mone assured the government that she was not entitled to “any financial benefit whatsoever” from a PPE company, five months before £29m of its profits were transferred into a trust for her benefit.
Leaked emails between Mone and the Cabinet Office reveal that a civil servant asked her to make a declaration that she had no conflict of interest in relation to the company, PPE Medpro, which she had recommended to ministers in May 2020.
Mone stated that she had “no conflicts whatsoever” and that she was not “entitled to any financial remuneration or financial benefit whatsoever”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2 ... rm-medpro

At what point does this cross the criminal threshold, if it hasn't already?

And when is that bloody peerage being redacted?

[I like neeps]

Sunak is obviously a cock, but he's a unlucky that today transphobia is unacceptable when it's been very acceptable if not encouraged in Parliament and the press for years. If she wasn't there and we're a week removed from the sentencing nobody would care about the joke, the Tories would be laughing like seals and labour looking sheepish. She might watch PMQs on TV and hear it, is that not just as bad?

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

[Hal Jordan]

It takes a lot to get a peerage removed. Jeffrey Archer is still a Lord, despite doing bird.

[dpedin]

Sunak is obviously a cock, but he's a unlucky that today transphobia is unacceptable when it's been very acceptable if not encouraged in Parliament and the press for years. If she wasn't there and we're a week removed from the sentencing nobody would care about the joke, the Tories would be laughing like seals and labour looking sheepish. She might watch PMQs on TV and hear it, is that not just as bad?

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

Sunak is making a habit of getting the politics all wrong though - so far this week it is being ambushed by a posh boys gamble on deporting refugees with the loathsome prat Morgan, denying he gambles just as BBC find recording go him saying he likes to do spread betting on the cricket, saying nothing when the right of his party launch a direct challenge to him under the dubious oxymoron "Pop Cons', then finally mocking Starmer about trans folk when the mother of a murdered trans boy was in the gallery before finally refusing to make a direct apology to her for his comments. He is an arrogant self entitled prick who has no political nous and no real moral principles other than to make money for himself, his wife and his mates.

Prove me wrong - what are his principles, what does he stand for, what has he done for the good of others or society?

PS dont even think of mentioning his gift of a bottle of HoC wine for the local school raffle!

[Biffer]

Sunak is obviously a cock, but he's a unlucky that today transphobia is unacceptable when it's been very acceptable if not encouraged in Parliament and the press for years. If she wasn't there and we're a week removed from the sentencing nobody would care about the joke, the Tories would be laughing like seals and labour looking sheepish. She might watch PMQs on TV and hear it, is that not just as bad?

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

And how does any of that stop him from saying to someone who is the mother of a murdered child in a prominent murder trial this week, who is in the public gallery, that it was a tragedy and he's sorry for her loss?

[C T]

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

Sunak is making a habit of getting the politics all wrong though - so far this week it is being ambushed by a posh boys gamble on deporting refugees with the loathsome prat Morgan, denying he gambles just as BBC find recording go him saying he likes to do spread betting on the cricket, saying nothing when the right of his party launch a direct challenge to him under the dubious oxymoron "Pop Cons', then finally mocking Starmer about trans folk when the mother of a murdered trans boy was in the gallery before finally refusing to make a direct apology to her for his comments. He is an arrogant self entitled prick who has no political nous and no real moral principles other than to make money for himself, his wife and his mates.

Prove me wrong - what are his principles, what does he stand for, what has he done for the good of others or society?

PS dont even think of mentioning his gift of a bottle of HoC wine for the local school raffle!

In my very simple world, you are allowed to believe that trans rights are a joke.

But basically taking an opportunity to rub that in the nose of Brianna Ghey's mother is at best very clumsy, and at worst just damn right cruel.

He was making a point of how many U-turns Starmer has done, he made a huge list of them and then finally made the trans comment. The trans comment didn't add a single thing to his point, his point was already made.

If it was just eating him up inside, he just had to say it, get it out of his system. He didn't have to say it then.

I'm completely out of goodwill when it comes to the Tories, so I'm more inclined to believe he's an evil scumbag, or thick as mince. Or both, why not.

[C69]

What a vile cunt Sunak is. Rubbing the nose of a murdered kids mother into the dirt.
This and his bet FFS man.

[Biffer]

Jeremy Cunt now denying there was any transphobic quip. And not bothering to check how the name is pronounced.

[robmatic]

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

Sunak is making a habit of getting the politics all wrong though - so far this week it is being ambushed by a posh boys gamble on deporting refugees with the loathsome prat Morgan, denying he gambles just as BBC find recording go him saying he likes to do spread betting on the cricket, saying nothing when the right of his party launch a direct challenge to him under the dubious oxymoron "Pop Cons', then finally mocking Starmer about trans folk when the mother of a murdered trans boy was in the gallery before finally refusing to make a direct apology to her for his comments. He is an arrogant self entitled prick who has no political nous and no real moral principles other than to make money for himself, his wife and his mates.

Prove me wrong - what are his principles, what does he stand for, what has he done for the good of others or society?

PS dont even think of mentioning his gift of a bottle of HoC wine for the local school raffle!

You are not wrong about Sunak being extremely bad at politics but that story about the school raffle is a weird thing for people to be latching onto. My niece goes to the school in question and a bottle of wine is appropriate for the range of raffle prizes that they would have on offer. It's also just one of the many primary schools in the constituency and not particularly local to his home there.

[I like neeps]

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

And how does any of that stop him from saying to someone who is the mother of a murdered child in a prominent murder trial this week, who is in the public gallery, that it was a tragedy and he's sorry for her loss?

He did actually say that too though.

What Sunak has done is show everyone cognitive dissonance in action. It's either always wrong to joke about trans people or use them for political gain, or it's never wrong.

[_Os_]

The father is telling him to apologise now. He still hasn't apologised.

Looks really weak hiding behind Badenoch, who immediately invented some bullshit that Starmer was at fault. But that's what they're going with, "Badenoch made me not apologise".

[_Os_]

What Sunak has done is show everyone cognitive dissonance in action. It's either always wrong to joke about trans people or use them for political gain, or it's never wrong.

This doesn't really work, neeps. These people are trying to fight a culture war, seemingly without even understanding how English/British culture functions. They're the government they set the agenda, this is the battleground of their own choosing.

Is politeness in England/UK always honest and never disingenuous? What Sunak did today is well outside any English/British cultural norm, of course it's pissed a lot of people off. When Jenrick demanded Micky Mouse murals be painted over at a children's asylum centre, three quarters of those polled who listed small boats as the top priority facing the UK said it was wrong, less than 15% agreed with it. The polling on this will be more strongly in disagreement because it's grotesque.

[C69]

Knowing Sunak the spineless shit, his team will ask for a meeting with Brianna's family

[Camroc2]

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

Sunak is making a habit of getting the politics all wrong though - so far this week it is being ambushed by a posh boys gamble on deporting refugees with the loathsome prat Morgan, denying he gambles just as BBC find recording go him saying he likes to do spread betting on the cricket, saying nothing when the right of his party launch a direct challenge to him under the dubious oxymoron "Pop Cons', then finally mocking Starmer about trans folk when the mother of a murdered trans boy was in the gallery before finally refusing to make a direct apology to her for his comments. He is an arrogant self entitled prick who has no political nous and no real moral principles other than to make money for himself, his wife and his mates.

Prove me wrong - what are his principles, what does he stand for, what has he done for the good of others or society?

PS dont even think of mentioning his gift of a bottle of HoC wine for the local school raffle!

As an outsider this is how it reads to me, the man is not a politician ie he doesn't know how to do politics; which is to try and reach some sort of accommodation at the end of the day.

From an Irish point of view (sorry!) he seems to be trying to pick a fight with the Irish government, which said Irish government don't understand, or take seriously, bar the poisoning effect it has in NI.

[Biffer]

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

And how does any of that stop him from saying to someone who is the mother of a murdered child in a prominent murder trial this week, who is in the public gallery, that it was a tragedy and he's sorry for her loss?

He did actually say that too though.

What Sunak has done is show everyone cognitive dissonance in action. It's either always wrong to joke about trans people or use them for political gain, or it's never wrong.

When?

[Jockaline]

Sunak is obviously a cock, but he's a unlucky that today transphobia is unacceptable when it's been very acceptable if not encouraged in Parliament and the press for years. If she wasn't there and we're a week removed from the sentencing nobody would care about the joke, the Tories would be laughing like seals and labour looking sheepish. She might watch PMQs on TV and hear it, is that not just as bad?

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

I'm very JKR on this issues, who I don't not consider transphobic, rather pro sex based rights. It's a subject that deserves care in language rather than cheap political barbs and point scoring. It's far from a black and white issue for me, it's nuanced. The PM was crass, lacking in judgement, respect and compassion, whatever his view are to express them in the way that he did/does is not appropriate. Doing it so soon after the conclusion to a murder driven by transphobia (according to the judge) while the mother of the victim was in attendance was particular shameful, and as leader of the country shamed us all, and proved his unworthiness as a statesman. You're defending the indefensible, and those that do so in positions of authority are only compounding his gross error of judgement.

[C69]

So Sunak is now u turning and has asked to meet the Ghey family.
Spineless twat.

[_Os_]

Day 2 of the PM picking a fight with the parents of s child killed in a hate crime.

Trott is lying here. Esther Ghey (the mother) did not say the murder wasn't a hate a crime, she said the opposite and that trans hate was a factor. Trott's big brained idea is that if she puts words into Esther Ghey's mouth she can pretend there was no hate crime, and therefore no apology is needed.

Trott appears to be yet another moron.

[I like neeps]

And how does any of that stop him from saying to someone who is the mother of a murdered child in a prominent murder trial this week, who is in the public gallery, that it was a tragedy and he's sorry for her loss?

He did actually say that too though.

What Sunak has done is show everyone cognitive dissonance in action. It's either always wrong to joke about trans people or use them for political gain, or it's never wrong.

When?

At the end of the session.

[I like neeps]

The Tories are not unlucky, they're just fucking stupid and incompetent! Who wants someone running the country who doesn't know how to read a fucking room??
Or realise they screwed up and apologise immediately?
Wankers.

It's just not credible: I'm sorry for saying my government's policy and using an attack line that's been used for years and will continue to be used. Your son's life will resume being the joke we've treated it when you're watching on TV and reading in the news rather than physically in the room with us.

Policy is more important than optics, imo. You either think trans rights are a joke, or you don't. Irrespective of who is in the room.

I'm very JKR on this issues, who I don't not consider transphobic, rather pro sex based rights. It's a subject that deserves care in language rather than cheap political barbs and point scoring. It's far from a black and white issue for me, it's nuanced. The PM was crass, lacking in judgement, respect and compassion, whatever his view are to express them in the way that he did/does is not appropriate. Doing it so soon after the conclusion to a murder driven by transphobia (according to the judge) while the mother of the victim was in attendance was particular shameful, and as leader of the country shamed us all, and proved his unworthiness as a statesman. You're defending the indefensible, and those that do so in positions of authority are only compounding his gross error of judgement.

I appreciate this thoughtful post and I'm not arguing for self ID either because as you say it's a nuanced and difficult issue.

As you say, the judge said transphobia was a motive in the murder - so is it not worse that the PM and the Tory party have been playing it up as a political wedge issue and a joke creating an environment of transphobia with their pals in the media? That hasn't been mentioned at all.

And a lot of it comes down to, it's bad because the mother was there. Because it goes against British decorum and it's bad politics whatever. And as you say it is shameful. My point is it's always shameful to make a joke about trans people if it's shameful in this case, it's shameful in every case. Otherwise you get the point where - it's good politics to make fun of trans people x number of weeks after the sentence, or it's not shameful to make a joke when someone not affected by that joke is in attendance. And then I'd argue our British values and decorum aren't virtuous at all.

[_Os_]

Chris Philp also saying there'll be no apology.

This is the coordinated Tory plan: Do not apologise, go all in on the family of a child murdered in a hate crime, keep making all the culture war and anti-trans points, lie.

[_Os_]

And a lot of it comes down to, it's bad because the mother was there. Because it goes against British decorum and it's bad politics whatever. And as you say it is shameful. My point is it's always shameful to make a joke about trans people if it's shameful in this case, it's shameful in every case. Otherwise you get the point where - it's good politics to make fun of trans people x number of weeks after the sentence, or it's not shameful to make a joke when someone not affected by that joke is in attendance. And then I'd argue our British values and decorum aren't virtuous at all.

How do the Tories intend to win a culture war, if they are fighting against that culture? Of course this moment has a lot to do with manners/politeness (a core part of the culture) and therefore there's a lot of hypocrisy (because as you point out it's not as virtuous as it seems). But that is the culture of the place.

There's more to the context though. The broader context is the Tories debasing the office of PM and through that parliament itself, they've turned it into an unserious shit comedy club. Blair was media focused too, but if you liked it or not there was real substance behind that, both Blair and Brown are serious people with a vision. Now there's just the PM trying to land zingers at PMQs and nothing else, Sunak has copied Johnson. Sunak completely lacks weight and substance, he axed a large portion of HS2 turning it into a largely pointless waste of time and money, just so he had something to say at the Tory conference, that's how bereft of substance he is. Rwanda continues on its road to nowhere for similar reasons. All they are is shit one liners at PMQs, if they had any serious matters of substance to be getting on with apologising would be easy.

[I like neeps]

And a lot of it comes down to, it's bad because the mother was there. Because it goes against British decorum and it's bad politics whatever. And as you say it is shameful. My point is it's always shameful to make a joke about trans people if it's shameful in this case, it's shameful in every case. Otherwise you get the point where - it's good politics to make fun of trans people x number of weeks after the sentence, or it's not shameful to make a joke when someone not affected by that joke is in attendance. And then I'd argue our British values and decorum aren't virtuous at all.

How do the Tories intend to win a culture war, if they are fighting against that culture? Of course this moment has a lot to do with manners/politeness (a core part of the culture) and therefore there's a lot of hypocrisy (because as you point out it's not as virtuous as it seems). But that is the culture of the place.

There's more to the context though. The broader context is the Tories debasing the office of PM and through that parliament itself, they've turned it into an unserious shit comedy club. Blair was media focused too, but if you liked it or not there was real substance behind that, both Blair and Brown are serious people with a vision. Now there's just the PM trying to land zingers at PMQs and nothing else, Sunak has copied Johnson. Sunak completely lacks weight and substance, he axed a large portion of HS2 turning it into a largely pointless waste of time and money, just so he had something to say at the Tory conference, that's how bereft of substance he is. Rwanda continues on its road to nowhere for similar reasons. All they are is shit one liners at PMQs, if they had any serious matters of substance to be getting on with apologising would be easy.

I agree the Tories have debased the office of PM and Parliament but turning trans rights into a joke is less bad than their multiple leadership elections, illegal prerogation of parliament, Johnson's manifesto being a total sham etc etc.

And yes you're agreeing with my original point. The problem here is bad optics, but optics are secondary to policy. The British political parties, press and public spend too long talking about optics when as you say we have a torrent of bad policies degrading the country. And having the opinion that making trans jokes in parliament is bad when the mother is there but okay when she isn't, is not a morally legitimate view on the subject.

And also, Labour ditch their green pledge. Their also talking about optics not policy, the optics of the sensibles in charge with no policy answers to anything.

It's a sad , sad state of affairs.

[Blackmac]

The gift that keeps on giving!!!!

The Conservative peer Michelle Mone assured the government that she was not entitled to “any financial benefit whatsoever” from a PPE company, five months before £29m of its profits were transferred into a trust for her benefit.
Leaked emails between Mone and the Cabinet Office reveal that a civil servant asked her to make a declaration that she had no conflict of interest in relation to the company, PPE Medpro, which she had recommended to ministers in May 2020.
Mone stated that she had “no conflicts whatsoever” and that she was not “entitled to any financial remuneration or financial benefit whatsoever”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2 ... rm-medpro

At what point does this cross the criminal threshold, if it hasn't already?

And when is that bloody peerage being redacted?

Yeah, that's jail time. Fraud every day of the week.

[Tichtheid]

On the radio news this morning the item on Labour rowing back on the investment in green policy was immediately followed by a report stating that average temperatures across the globe had risen by the Paris Agreement fig of 1.5 degrees over a whole year for the first time.

The reason given for Labour’s change of direction was fear of being accused of raising taxes to pay for the policy.

I’m trying to think of an appropriate metaphor for this, but I’m failing to get one that sums up the enormity of it

[C69]

On the radio news this morning the item on Labour rowing back on the investment in green policy was immediately followed by a report stating that average temperatures across the globe had risen by the Paris Agreement fig of 1.5 degrees over a whole year for the first time.

The reason given for Labour’s change of direction was fear of being accused of raising taxes to pay for the policy.

I’m trying to think of an appropriate metaphor for this, but I’m failing to get one that sums up the enormity of it

The UK does not have a massive appetite for Green policies.
Tbh Labour just need to bang the drum stating that the economy is in such a shit state they can't give concrete figures.
They basically need to say fuck all.

[I like neeps]

On the radio news this morning the item on Labour rowing back on the investment in green policy was immediately followed by a report stating that average temperatures across the globe had risen by the Paris Agreement fig of 1.5 degrees over a whole year for the first time.

The reason given for Labour’s change of direction was fear of being accused of raising taxes to pay for the policy.

I’m trying to think of an appropriate metaphor for this, but I’m failing to get one that sums up the enormity of it

The UK does not have a massive appetite for Green policies.
Tbh Labour just need to bang the drum stating that the economy is in such a shit state they can't give concrete figures.
They basically need to say fuck all.

They do actually need to have a plan for Government. They don't have one, that's the issue.

[Tichtheid]

On the radio news this morning the item on Labour rowing back on the investment in green policy was immediately followed by a report stating that average temperatures across the globe had risen by the Paris Agreement fig of 1.5 degrees over a whole year for the first time.

The reason given for Labour’s change of direction was fear of being accused of raising taxes to pay for the policy.

I’m trying to think of an appropriate metaphor for this, but I’m failing to get one that sums up the enormity of it

The UK does not have a massive appetite for Green policies.
Tbh Labour just need to bang the drum stating that the economy is in such a shit state they can't give concrete figures.
They basically need to say fuck all.

The reason I was struggling for a metaphor is because I don’t know where to start with it, in the UK it is predicted that large swathes of land will be under water in certain areas due to climate change, near those areas you won’t be able to get a mortgage or insurance on a house, that is the very tip of the melting iceberg and the reason given for not taking steps to prevent or ameliorate against it is tax.

I saw a thing the other day that said Bezos was “worth” $179Bn. If he started spending a million dollars a year, it would take nearly a hundred and eighty thousand years to get through the money.

Global GDP is $88Tn, or in more manageable terms, $2.8M per second and yet we are all thinking we can’t raise tax by a penny on the richest individuals or a few pennies for the likes of Amazon because the sky will fall in, it’s going to fall in unless we take steps to avoid it.

[_Os_]

And having the opinion that making trans jokes in parliament is bad when the mother is there but okay when she isn't, is not a morally legitimate view on the subject.

My opinion is that the joke defence only works every time when the context is explicit, someone is in a comedy club doing their routine or something like that. For me that's morally fine, if it's funny is a different matter. If the context is ambiguous then making a joke about identity means taking a big risk, any normal person in a workplace understands this. The Tories have decided parliament is an unserious place and PMQs is a time for extremely funny PMs to come out with their brilliant quips (Corbyn was mocked for his "Dave in Sheffield is concerned the entire fucking country is collapsing, he says..." style contributions), they refuse to apologise because they believe that's the context and it's all fine, maybe they will make more trans jokes next PMQs to hammer home the point that parliament is a joke to them. I don't think that is the context, I think the context is something closer to billionaire guy mocks bereaved mother's murdered child and refuses to apologise.

And also, Labour ditch their green pledge. Their also talking about optics not policy, the optics of the sensibles in charge with no policy answers to anything.

It's a sad , sad state of affairs.

Labour have decided they cannot win by fighting against the entrenched attitudes of most of the electorate (ie the culture of the UK). There's incredibly deep hostility towards any change or spending any money (ironically given everything the Tories get a free pass on). Something as simple as building an onshore windmill on a random hill, or building a new house on a barren damp field, become heavily contested life or death matters akin to chopping down the Amazon. That barren damp field in southern England is massively more protected than the actual Amazon.

Where Labour have ended up is knowing things are bad and getting worse, not just relative to peer countries but the beginnings of decline in outright terms. But being unable to promise any real change because that risks not being elected. This recipe of knowing everything is fucked but promising no substantial change, is giving them crushing poll leads and maybe even an all time historic victory. "Everything is fucked, we're changing nothing but will try to make everything work better" is what the electorate wants. Which sets up potential catastrophic failure in government, but they'll actually be in government. It's disappointing but this seems to be the best they can do given what they have to work with.

[dpedin]

On the radio news this morning the item on Labour rowing back on the investment in green policy was immediately followed by a report stating that average temperatures across the globe had risen by the Paris Agreement fig of 1.5 degrees over a whole year for the first time.

The reason given for Labour’s change of direction was fear of being accused of raising taxes to pay for the policy.

I’m trying to think of an appropriate metaphor for this, but I’m failing to get one that sums up the enormity of it

The UK does not have a massive appetite for Green policies.
Tbh Labour just need to bang the drum stating that the economy is in such a shit state they can't give concrete figures.
They basically need to say fuck all.

They do actually need to have a plan for Government. They don't have one, that's the issue.

To suggest the Labour Party need a plan for Government even before the General Election has been called is just silly and unrealistic. At the moment all that is happening is skirmishing before the battle actually starts so the last thing you do is provide the enemy with your battle plan in advance. The reason the Tories keep banging on about Labour dont have a plan is because they are desperate to have a real target to attack - they know their culture war attacks are now looking pretty sad but that's all the have to go on at the moment. Until the manifestos for the next GE are launched you won't see Labour doing much in the way of describing the detail of their plan for government, why bother shifting the agenda when your enemy are constantly shooting themselves in the feet with both barrels, when they are haemorrhaging MPs at a catastrophic rate and when more and more fringe loonie parties within a party ie Pop Con, Nat C, etc are launched? If your enemy is busy digging a hole for themselves then dont take away their spade!

Parroting the Tory 'Labour dont have a plan' isn't very helpful nor clever I'm afraid. It is all about timing.

[Biffer]

The obvious labour reply is 'we set out this approach in 2021. Since then, the Conservatives have trashed the economy with reckless uncosted tax cuts in a deliberate attempt to sabotage a future Labour government, as they know they're done for come the election. We'll see more of this over the next six months as they continue to try to put in place spending commitments, cuts and debts that will damage the country and the people, purely for their own political purposes'.

[C69]

The obvious labour reply is 'we set out this approach in 2021. Since then, the Conservatives have trashed the economy with reckless uncosted tax cuts in a deliberate attempt to sabotage a future Labour government, as they know they're done for come the election. We'll see more of this over the next six months as they continue to try to put in place spending commitments, cuts and debts that will damage the country and the people, purely for their own political purposes'.

This is my point. Tbh Cameron came into power with no policies apart from not being Labour.

[I like neeps]

The UK does not have a massive appetite for Green policies.
Tbh Labour just need to bang the drum stating that the economy is in such a shit state they can't give concrete figures.
They basically need to say fuck all.

They do actually need to have a plan for Government. They don't have one, that's the issue.

To suggest the Labour Party need a plan for Government even before the General Election has been called is just silly and unrealistic. At the moment all that is happening is skirmishing before the battle actually starts so the last thing you do is provide the enemy with your battle plan in advance. The reason the Tories keep banging on about Labour dont have a plan is because they are desperate to have a real target to attack - they know their culture war attacks are now looking pretty sad but that's all the have to go on at the moment. Until the manifestos for the next GE are launched you won't see Labour doing much in the way of describing the detail of their plan for government, why bother shifting the agenda when your enemy are constantly shooting themselves in the feet with both barrels, when they are haemorrhaging MPs at a catastrophic rate and when more and more fringe loonie parties within a party ie Pop Con, Nat C, etc are launched? If your enemy is busy digging a hole for themselves then dont take away their spade!

Parroting the Tory 'Labour dont have a plan' isn't very helpful nor clever I'm afraid. It is all about timing.

I'm sorry but an Opposition Party campaigning for Government absolutely have to have a plan for what they will do in government.

[I like neeps]

The obvious labour reply is 'we set out this approach in 2021. Since then, the Conservatives have trashed the economy with reckless uncosted tax cuts in a deliberate attempt to sabotage a future Labour government, as they know they're done for come the election. We'll see more of this over the next six months as they continue to try to put in place spending commitments, cuts and debts that will damage the country and the people, purely for their own political purposes'.

This is my point. Tbh Cameron came into power with no policies apart from not being Labour.

I mean he did, he had his signature policy of austerity laid out and he campaigned on it.

[sockwithaticket]

They do actually need to have a plan for Government. They don't have one, that's the issue.

To suggest the Labour Party need a plan for Government even before the General Election has been called is just silly and unrealistic. At the moment all that is happening is skirmishing before the battle actually starts so the last thing you do is provide the enemy with your battle plan in advance. The reason the Tories keep banging on about Labour dont have a plan is because they are desperate to have a real target to attack - they know their culture war attacks are now looking pretty sad but that's all the have to go on at the moment. Until the manifestos for the next GE are launched you won't see Labour doing much in the way of describing the detail of their plan for government, why bother shifting the agenda when your enemy are constantly shooting themselves in the feet with both barrels, when they are haemorrhaging MPs at a catastrophic rate and when more and more fringe loonie parties within a party ie Pop Con, Nat C, etc are launched? If your enemy is busy digging a hole for themselves then dont take away their spade!

Parroting the Tory 'Labour dont have a plan' isn't very helpful nor clever I'm afraid. It is all about timing.

I'm sorry but an Opposition Party campaigning for Government absolutely have to have a plan for what they will do in government.

Often, yes. At the moment, simply not being the Tories seems to be enough.

Consequently, Starmer and Labour don't have to offer much by way of vision. For a while they've clearly been terrified of generating any sort of negative headlines or providing any policy ideas that could play into the typical Tory narrative (that continues to have an astonishing amount of cut through given their own economic record) around Labour's fiscal irresponsibility. They're right to be wary of the power of the Tory client press, but since that press isn't above simply making shit up and belatedly printing a retraction in the bottom left corner of page 35, I don't think Labour actually derive much benefit from their current strategy, but the polls show they don't need to deviate from it.

What we're beginning to see is also the impact of financial backing that would typically be directed at the Tories; hence the U-turn on bankers' bonuses. It doesn't matter, though, because the majority of people don't follow the news or policy particularly closely and so not being the Tories remains enough (for now) to see Labour continue to consistently poll very well.

[I like neeps]

To suggest the Labour Party need a plan for Government even before the General Election has been called is just silly and unrealistic. At the moment all that is happening is skirmishing before the battle actually starts so the last thing you do is provide the enemy with your battle plan in advance. The reason the Tories keep banging on about Labour dont have a plan is because they are desperate to have a real target to attack - they know their culture war attacks are now looking pretty sad but that's all the have to go on at the moment. Until the manifestos for the next GE are launched you won't see Labour doing much in the way of describing the detail of their plan for government, why bother shifting the agenda when your enemy are constantly shooting themselves in the feet with both barrels, when they are haemorrhaging MPs at a catastrophic rate and when more and more fringe loonie parties within a party ie Pop Con, Nat C, etc are launched? If your enemy is busy digging a hole for themselves then dont take away their spade!

Parroting the Tory 'Labour dont have a plan' isn't very helpful nor clever I'm afraid. It is all about timing.

I'm sorry but an Opposition Party campaigning for Government absolutely have to have a plan for what they will do in government.

Often, yes. At the moment, simply not being the Tories seems to be enough.

Consequently, Starmer and Labour don't have to offer much by way of vision. For a while they've clearly been terrified of generating any sort of negative headlines or providing any policy ideas that could play into the typical Tory narrative (that continues to have an astonishing amount of cut through given their own economic record) around Labour's fiscal irresponsibility. They're right to be wary of the power of the Tory client press, but since that press isn't above simply making shit up and belatedly printing a retraction in the bottom left corner of page 35, I don't think Labour actually derive much benefit from their current strategy, but the polls show they don't need to deviate from it.

What we're beginning to see is also the impact of financial backing that would typically be directed at the Tories; hence the U-turn on bankers' bonuses. It doesn't matter, though, because the majority of people don't follow the news or policy particularly closely and so not being the Tories remains enough (for now) to see Labour continue to consistently poll very well.

I agree you on most of this. That Labours poll lead is entirely on the Tories complete implosion, I also agree they're terrified of negative headlines and the Tory press. And I agree that you're seeing them cowtow to the monies now behind them.

But Day 1 of government it's not enough to sit in number10 and be not the Tories, if they don't have the confidence now to take on the right wing press - how will they have the confidence in government? If nobody likes or knows labour policy now - how can they lead the country in what will continue to be sh*te times for everyone?

Turnout for the election I predict to be a historic low, and a labour government without principle or bravery will be destroyed by a far right "popular national conservative" or whatever they call themselves with extreme policies.

[Sandstorm]

Labour's policy to get us out of the shit is this: "Raise taxes". Everyone knows this.

However announcing it before Day 2 in Downing Street is stupid.

[_Os_]

This is my point. Tbh Cameron came into power with no policies apart from not being Labour.

There's a Twitter account (I cannot remember the name of) posting newspaper clippings on Labour pre-1997. It's similar to now, Blair isn't inspirational, Labour have no plans, and Major will close the gap.

A lot will depend on the manifesto. How it should work is all parties list what they're going to do in detail. But in UK politics that just provides too much of a target for opponents. The Tories have been making very vague manifestos over recent elections, which could be interpreted in many different ways, from this position they then attack detailed Labour spending pledges. The media also give the Tories a free ride, the Tories haven't built 40 new hospitals or whatever it was, Rwanda wasn't even in the manifesto, no one cares. It could be that Labour haven't really dropped their green energy plans they've just dropped the specific spending commitment to reduce the size of the target for the Tories. It would be bad for democracy, but Labour could even do something completely different to what they said they would do, and it would be no different to what the Tories are doing now.

I expect the media are going to ignore the manifestos and go on the vibes like they usually do. But Labour's will be worth reading, they'll get started implementing whatever is in there immediately. The Labour front bench is more competent in any number of ways compared to the Tory cabinet, they're going to get a lot more done than the Tories have. The media will then be completely shocked a party is relentlessly doing what their manifesto says line by line, that's the Labour 1997 script.

The other thing that'll matter is the size of the victory. If the Tories are wiped out, that'll create it's own narrative and momentum, even the Tory supporting rags will be forced to change their tune. A massive Labour win will create its own reality. It's a bit silly given the the electoral system, but try convincing anyone the Lib Dems did well in 2019 because they had the biggest vote rise, or that the difference between the Tories in 2017 and 2019 was very little (300k votes).

They'll manage a broken system better, I have doubts if that'll be enough.