Stop voting for fucking Tories

[tabascoboy]

I suspect Reform will beat the Tories in Rochdale.
It would be hilarious

They didn't but an inglorious 3rd place for the Tories. It's such a bizarre circumstance that not too much can be read into this one, other than the main parties were all pretty dismal

George Galloway (Workers Party of Britain) - 12,335
David Anthony Tully (Independent) - 6,638
Paul Ellison (Conservative) - 3,731
Azhar Ali (on the ballot as a Labour candidate) - 2,402
Iain Donaldson (Liberal Democrats) - 2,164
Simon Danczuk (Reform UK) - 1,968

Others
Mark Coleman (Independent) - 455
Michael Howarth (Independent) - 246
William Howarth (Independent) - 523
Guy Otten (on the ballot as a Green candidate) - 436
Ravin Rodent Subortna (Monster Raving Loony Party) - 209

Turnout was 39.7%.

[_Os_]

Galloway is an MP again. He's now won Westminster elections for Labour (4), Respect (2), Workers Party (1), is that a record for the amount of different parties a winning candidate has represented?

Both the Labour and Tory votes collapsed and an independent came second. The Tory candidate took a holiday during the campaign apparently, he only turned up again for the count. Legitimate to wonder if the Tory party are going to bother campaigning in a GE, maybe Sunak's team send out orders to regions distant from the Tory heartlands (anywhere north of Oxford) and morale is so low that no one listens and those who do are few in number and cannot carry out the orders fully. Given the circumstances the Tories would've had a chance of winning if they got their voters out, Galloway got 12k votes and the Tory vote in the seat is 8k-14k.

Maybe Reform were the biggest losers? They came 6th in an election where both Labour and the Tories didn't campaign properly or at all, there is a hardcore right wing vote available there the NF/BNP/UKIP/Brexit Party all contested the seat in recent times (NF/UKIP/Brexit Party all got over 2k votes there in the 2010s), the favourite was a weirdo Commie bogeyman it should've been easy to get right wingers out to vote against, Reform did campaign (Tice on an open top bus etc). Losing to basically everyone other than the Greens doesn't indicate they're much of a force. Going on the three byelections, the media barking for them (GB News/Telegraph, which definitely are barking) is louder than their bite. Their performance over the three byelections taken together meets the minimum threshold, good but nothing more, but given these are byelections and allow small parties to focus resources these par performances start looking below par. They look way off pulling a UKIP 2015 imo. They look more like UKIP in any other election than 2015, 500k-1m votes and not much impact.

[_Os_]

Galloway is an MP again. He's now won Westminster elections for Labour (4), Respect (2), Workers Party (1), is that a record for the amount of different parties a winning candidate has represented?

Answer: Even with floor crossing during a parliament it's super rare to stack up three parties, becomes even rarer once it's a list of those like Galloway who have won elections for three different parties. Looks like around ten MPs have won elections for 3 different parties, and no one has managed 4 parties. List including floor crossers:

It is relatively common for MPs to cross the floor and join another party, sometimes with a period as an independent. MPs representing three distinct parties in the House of Commons are much less common.

Richard Acland – Liberals (1935 to 1942), Common Wealth Party (1942 to 1945), Labour (1947 to 1955)
Heidi Allen – Conservatives (2015 to February 2019), Change UK (February to June 2019), Liberal Democrats (October to December 2019)Ind
Carlyon Bellairs – Liberals (1906), Liberal Unionists (1906 to 1910), Conservatives (1915 to 1931)
Luciana Berger – Labour (2010 to February 2019), Change UK (February to June 2019), Liberal Democrats (September to December 2019)Ind
John Cartwright – Labour (1974 to 1981), Social Democrats (1981 to 1988), continuing Social Democrats (1988 to 1990)SDP
Jesse Collings – Liberals (1885 to 1886), Liberal Unionists (1886 to 1912), Conservatives (1912 to 1918)
Robert Finlay – Liberals (1885 to 1886), Liberal Unionists (1886 to 1892, 1895 to 1906, 1910 to 1912), Scottish Unionists (1912 to 1916)
John Horam – Labour (1970 to 1981), Social Democrats (1981 to 1983), Conservatives (1992 to 2010)
Frank Markham – Labour (1929 to 1931), National Labour (1931; 1935 to 1945), Conservatives (1951 to 1964)
Francis Mildmay – Liberals (1885 to 1886), Liberal Unionists (1886 to 1912), Conservatives (1912 to 1922)
Oswald Mosley – Conservatives (1918 to 1920), Labour (1924 to 1931), New Party (1931)
Angela Smith – Labour (2005 to February 2019), Change UK (February to June 2019), Liberal Democrats (September to December 2019)Ind
David Owen – Labour (1977 to 1981), Social Democrats (1981 to 1988), continuing Social Democrats (1988 to 1990)SDP
Jim Sillars – Labour (1970 to 1976), Scottish Labour (1976 to 1979), Scottish National Party (1988 to 1992)
Chuka Umunna – Labour (2010 to February 2019), Change UK (February to June 2019), Liberal Democrats (August to December 2019)
Sarah Wollaston – Conservatives (2010 to February 2019), Change UK (February to June 2019), Liberal Democrats (August to December 2019)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_o ... le_parties

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Reform went along with Galloway. There's a reason Nick Griffin endorsed Galloway, and it's not just Galloway is a disgusting waste of skin

[_Os_]

Reform went along with Galloway. There's a reason Nick Griffin endorsed Galloway, and it's not just Galloway is a disgusting waste of skin

Griffin and Galloway both perhaps share similar views on Jews ("perhaps" inserted for lawyers).

But are Reform target voters deciding their vote on the same basis Griffin does? Seems doubtful.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Enshrine anger and resentment, blame foreign types and/or the jews, nonsensical populist 'solutions'

One lot are politer about it, but they're cut from the same cloth

[Calculon]

Dear God

[Hal Jordan]

Galloway is concerned with one thing, and that's himself.

[_Os_]

Enshrine anger and resentment, blame foreign types and/or the jews, nonsensical populist 'solutions'

One lot are politer about it, but they're cut from the same cloth

A red-brown (Commies and Nazis) alliance? I'm not so sure, maybe the right wingers went for the Indy candidate?

If it is a red-brown alliance, then it's actually something even more scary a red-green-brown (Commies, Islamists, Nazis) alliance. I've only ever seen this mentioned in France and more as a theory than something real. The theory goes that there's a lot of crossover between Islamists and Nazis so they could potentially combine forces in a Western European country with a large enough Muslim population, plus throw in some Commie support because they'll be anti-establishment/anti-Israel/pro-state ownership. The BNP were followers of Gaddafi's Green Book (if you Google Nick Griffin and Gaddafi you'll find bizarre stuff), the green-brown alliance has existed on the far right for awhile in the UK.

[dpedin]

As a Dundonian I am ashamed that we have thrust this wanker on the rest of UK politics. He is an utter shithouse, despised in Dundee and should never be near the HoC or on mainstream media. I apologize to the rest of the world for him. Hopefully this will only be for a few months and the Squatter will call a General Election and by then Rochdale will have seen the light and Labour will have got their feckin act together.

[_Os_]

Dear God

Reminds me of dispiriting conversations I've had, trying to explain to people that an MP from an opposition party is not responsible for governance, and that by booting the opposition MP out and electing a Tory from the party that has been governing you are not in fact changing anything.

[inactionman]

One thing that's always bothered me, there's no residency requirement for an MP to live in or near the area they supposedly represent.

The idea that Galloway can know the needs of people living in Rochdale seems - how can I put this - tenuous.

I appreciate this is evident across all of UK government, but it still feels odd to me. Galloway contesting and winning the Rochdale seat is still pretty egregious political opportunism.

There have been worse I suppose, Louise Mensch not conducting a single surgery in Corby during her preposterous self-serving political 'career' being one of the most striking examples.

Should we have a residency or association requirement, if the whole point is to represent constituents at parliament?

[sockwithaticket]

One thing that's always bothered me, there's no residency requirement for an MP to live in or near the area they supposedly represent.

The idea that Galloway can know the needs of people living in Rochdale seems - how can I put this - tenuous.

I appreciate this is evident across all of UK government, but it still feels odd to me. Galloway contesting and winning the Rochdale seat is still pretty egregious political opportunism.

There have been worse I suppose, Louise Mensch not conducting a single surgery in Corby during her preposterous self-serving political 'career' being one of the most striking examples.

Should we have a residency or association requirement, if the whole point is to represent constituents at parliament?

Yes, quite simply. It's a mockery that parties can just air drop candidates into seats they have no connection to. Os has highlighted before the number of constituencies Braverman was shopped through until she was stuck in a safe seat.

[Tichtheid]

One thing that's always bothered me, there's no residency requirement for an MP to live in or near the area they supposedly represent.

The idea that Galloway can know the needs of people living in Rochdale seems - how can I put this - tenuous.

I appreciate this is evident across all of UK government, but it still feels odd to me. Galloway contesting and winning the Rochdale seat is still pretty egregious political opportunism.

There have been worse I suppose, Louise Mensch not conducting a single surgery in Corby during her preposterous self-serving political 'career' being one of the most striking examples.

Should we have a residency or association requirement, if the whole point is to represent constituents at parliament?

Yes, quite simply. It's a mockery that parties can just air drop candidates into seats they have no connection to. Os has highlighted before the number of constituencies Braverman was shopped through until she was stuck in a safe seat.

In contrast, Caroline Lucas was air dropped into Brighton Pavilion in 2010, after being an MEP. Having said that she moved here with her family, her kids went to school with mine, though I've never actually met her. She has held a very high profile in the constituency, holding surgeries etc and I often see her in cafes out and about without her being "on duty" so to speak. She has been a very good constituency MP, so it's not impossible for them to do a good job, I suppose a lot depends on their motivation.

I kind of get Billy Connolly's pessimism on this, the desire to become an MP should automatically disqualify you from doing so.

[tabascoboy]

One thing that's always bothered me, there's no residency requirement for an MP to live in or near the area they supposedly represent.

The idea that Galloway can know the needs of people living in Rochdale seems - how can I put this - tenuous.

I appreciate this is evident across all of UK government, but it still feels odd to me. Galloway contesting and winning the Rochdale seat is still pretty egregious political opportunism.

There have been worse I suppose, Louise Mensch not conducting a single surgery in Corby during her preposterous self-serving political 'career' being one of the most striking examples.

Should we have a residency or association requirement, if the whole point is to represent constituents at parliament?

Yes, quite simply. It's a mockery that parties can just air drop candidates into seats they have no connection to. Os has highlighted before the number of constituencies Braverman was shopped through until she was stuck in a safe seat.

Well you'd think that the local party association and voters would be more discriminatory to prefer local over non-local candidates but apparently it means less than the right colour of rosette being on the winner regardless

[Hal Jordan]

One thing that's always bothered me, there's no residency requirement for an MP to live in or near the area they supposedly represent.

The idea that Galloway can know the needs of people living in Rochdale seems - how can I put this - tenuous.

I appreciate this is evident across all of UK government, but it still feels odd to me. Galloway contesting and winning the Rochdale seat is still pretty egregious political opportunism.

There have been worse I suppose, Louise Mensch not conducting a single surgery in Corby during her preposterous self-serving political 'career' being one of the most striking examples.

Should we have a residency or association requirement, if the whole point is to represent constituents at parliament?

Yes, quite simply. It's a mockery that parties can just air drop candidates into seats they have no connection to. Os has highlighted before the number of constituencies Braverman was shopped through until she was stuck in a safe seat.

In contrast, Caroline Lucas was air dropped into Brighton Pavilion in 2010, after being an MEP. Having said that she moved here with her family, her kids went to school with mine, though I've never actually met her. She has held a very high profile in the constituency, holding surgeries etc and I often see her in cafes out and about without her being "on duty" so to speak. She has been a very good constituency MP, so it's not impossible for them to do a good job, I suppose a lot depends on their motivation.

I kind of get Billy Connolly's pessimism on this, the desire to become an MP should automatically disqualify you from doing so.

We need the man in the shack with his cat, which may or may not exist.

[tabascoboy]

The dangers for democracy in our country supposedly...the biggest danger for them is getting kicked out on their arse in a few months, really

[Hal Jordan]

Enabling Act to protect us against extremism, anyone?

[_Os_]

The glorious Tory Rwanda scheme will now cost £580m.

£370m will be paid regardless of if anyone goes, £220m of that has already been paid and £50m more will be paid each year for the next three years. Then there's £50m of direct running costs and at least £40m more in Home Office extra costs by 2025. Then an additional payment of £120m if more than 300 people are ever sent to Rwanda.

£580m could've been a lot of the way towards making a functional immigration system and actually paying some Windrush victims.

[Simian]

The glorious Tory Rwanda scheme will now cost £580m.

£370m will be paid regardless of if anyone goes, £220m of that has already been paid and £50m more will be paid each year for the next three years. Then there's £50m of direct running costs and at least £40m more in Home Office extra costs by 2025. Then an additional payment of £120m if more than 300 people are ever sent to Rwanda.

£580m could've been a lot of the way towards making a functional immigration system and actually paying some Windrush victims.

Jesus. I knew it was costly, but hadn't realised just how costly

[fishfoodie]

The glorious Tory Rwanda scheme will now cost £580m.

£370m will be paid regardless of if anyone goes, £220m of that has already been paid and £50m more will be paid each year for the next three years. Then there's £50m of direct running costs and at least £40m more in Home Office extra costs by 2025. Then an additional payment of £120m if more than 300 people are ever sent to Rwanda.

£580m could've been a lot of the way towards making a functional immigration system and actually paying some Windrush victims.

Or you could just hand 5,800 people around Calais, looking to cross the channel, a check for 100k, but it's only redeemable in their home country. If these people really are economic migrants, you've just given them a bloody good reason to go home, & if they really are refugees, then you have a really good confirmation of this !

[Hal Jordan]

And now Starmer has come out in support of Sunak's fascist posing. What. A. Pack. Of. Cunts.

[fishfoodie]

And now Starmer has come out in support of Sunak's fascist posing. What. A. Pack. Of. Cunts.

Well now Starmer just needs to go; Oh look, have you noticed that Lettuce Truss stood on a stage with people advocating ending Democracy ??? .... you know, 10000% fucking worse than anything anyone in the UK is saying ?

Don't you think you need to clean your own house (like I did with our candidate), before you start pontificating to anyone else ?

.... and then just let the shit either take on the nutters in his own Party, our slowly roast on the spit of his own stupidity.

[Biffer]

I sat next to George Galloway at a university black tie dinner many years ago (early 90s). He wasn’t enamoured with my opening line of ‘So George, how is the Colonel?’

[C69]

And now Starmer has come out in support of Sunak's fascist posing. What. A. Pack. Of. Cunts.

Whilst I agree with you. He is playing it smart. Do nothing at all that will frighten middle England or red wall voters.
Be boring, be bland, be "not the Tories".

[tabascoboy]

[SaintK]

Made me laugh.
All the headlines in the Tory press applauding Sunak's somewhat muddled and confused speech
I'm sure they will be publishing more divisive right wing claptrap from the likes of Anderson, Braverman and Truss in the coming weeks.

[tabascoboy]

Why this won't be the Budget that Jeremy Hunt wanted

Next week was supposed to be a major moment in the Conservatives' election campaign. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt would have stood up in the Commons and delivered the Budget, bringing an end to three years of rolling geo-political and economic crises and multiple inflation shocks.

If all had gone to plan, he would have unveiled a raft of voter-friendly giveaways including tax cuts thanks to a growing economy, falling interest rates and improved public finances.

Instead, the economy is in recession, and Jeremy Hunt and Rishi Sunak do not have the space for a bumper pre-election giveaway. Mr Hunt is not fully in charge of this Budget and his power to make people feel better off and have more money to spend is limited by the decisions of bodies outside of his control.

And while this was supposed to be the last big economic announcement before the next general election, the signs are that voters will have to wait for Downing Street to squeeze in another Budget-like announcement beforehand.


More at ttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68449345

[dpedin]

And now Starmer has come out in support of Sunak's fascist posing. What. A. Pack. Of. Cunts.

Whilst I agree with you. He is playing it smart. Do nothing at all that will frighten middle England or red wall voters.
Be boring, be bland, be "not the Tories".

This is actually very smart from Starmer! It means that as soon as the likes of Braverman, Truss, Anderson, et al come out with anything approaching Islamophobia or similar then Starmer will be asking Sunak to put into action what he said on the steps of No10. He is gambling, probably knowing the hands they both hold, that the Tories and their mates are far more likely to step over the line and indeed is in effect saying to the unhappy Tories to come out and say something that will challenge Sunak to make a decision about them and their membership of the Tory Party. He also knows that Sunak's control over the right wing of his party is now almost non existent and this is an indirect challenge to them to create trouble. I suspect that Sunak has dug a rather big hole for himself with his batshit crazy statement on the steps of No10 late on a Friday afternoon. It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove everyone right!

PS apparently the press guys were furious at Sunak because they are usually in the pub by 5pm on a Friday and had to stay on late to get copy ready for Saturday editions. Never get between the press and their booze!

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

[C69]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

This will bite him on the arse as the far right stirring shit up are members of his own Party ffs

[sockwithaticket]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

[tabascoboy]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

[fishfoodie]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

[Tichtheid]

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

I've just deleted a post, it was about one nation Tories and how at least you could have a discussion with them, as much as one might disagree, but nah, they let this current state of affairs happen.

The Tories are fucking disgusting and can we all, as the thread title suggests, just stop voting for fucking Tories?

[dpedin]

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

I've just deleted a post, it was about one nation Tories and how at least you could have a discussion with them, as much as one might disagree, but nah, they let this current state of affairs happen.

The Tories are fucking disgusting and can we all, as the thread title suggests, just stop voting for fucking Tories?

I honestly believe there is now an element of fear driving the Tories now. It isn't just fear of being driven out of office and into opposition but more the fear of what Labour will find out once in power - the covid PPE scandals, Teeside, Post Office scandal, etc will all be blown open and I am positive there will be civil and criminal prosecutions as a result. Once the Civil Servants are allowed to disclose fully what went on and show their paper trails, civil servants always have paper trails, then a number of senior Tories will be held to account for dodgy if not criminal actions. They know this well and will throw everything into covering their tracks and making escape plans but many will be held to account in courts. They are shitting themselves as their comfy little fiefdom implodes, their tory donors quietly distance themselves and move abroad and Labour keep making serious noises about a COVID corruption commissioner being appointed on Day 1 of when they come into power.

The Tories are now into desperate self preservation mode and do not underestimate how low or how dangerously they will act in the run up to the General Election to avoid defeat and personal financial ruin and/or prison!

[fishfoodie]

Hell you're going into a new GE, & no-one has seen the report on Russian interference in the last one !

The Bumblecunt should be spending as much time in court as the other scrote.

[Biffer]

Galloway - left wing or right wing? You decide

[sockwithaticket]

Conspiracy and grifting now fully encompasses those on both ends of the traditional left - right spectrum.

[C69]

Galloway - left wing or right wing? You decide

He is clearly left wing.
And a complete fucking nut job.