Next permanent manager of the Conservative and Unionist Party 2024

[scottsdad]

Look at the list posted above. Not one of them any good.

[carpetmonster]

14 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Look at the list posted above. Not one of them any good.

To paraphrase the Jamie ‘builders’ scene from ‘In The Loop’ - what did you expect? They’re Tories. 

[scottsdad]

Just now, carpetmonster said:

To paraphrase the Jamie ‘builders’ scene from ‘In The Loop’ - what did you expect? They’re Tories. 

I know. But in the (dim and distant)  past they have produced some folk who could walk and talk like a human, and genuinely wanted to do well for the country. You and I might not have agreed with their outlook but they had some competence.

Now it's all careerists looking for headlines and trying to break into American politics. 

[parsforlife]

22 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Despite the Tories being utterly depraved, I don't think they have anyone quite as evil as Braverman.

Makes Priti Patel seem reasonable.

1. Have you not learned anything? Regularly evil mentalists are written off by the general public and quickly find themselves in high office.  People with half a brain realised how bad Patel was and were glad to see her ousted. The torries thought it was cos she wasn't horrible enough

[JS_FFC]

Rumours that Suella Braverman is defecting to reform

[Boo Khaki]

38 minutes ago, JS_FFC said:

Rumours that Suella Braverman is defecting to reform

Still baffles me why MP's defecting doesn't trigger an automatic by-election.

[JS_FFC]

4 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Still baffles me why MP's defecting doesn't trigger an automatic by-election.

Because if it did, an MP wanting to defect would just start voting in line with their new party without officially defecting.

[Granny Danger]

27 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Still baffles me why MP's defecting doesn't trigger an automatic by-election.

Because we vote for individuals.  It’s not an ideal situation but it’s maybe better than the alternative 

ETA I don’t see Braverman defecting.

Edited July 19 by Granny Danger

[carpetmonster]

4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Because we vote for individuals.  It’s not an ideal situation but it’s maybe better than the alternative 

ETA I don’t see Braverman defecting.

I definitely could. She’ll have comparatively a lot more power within the party machinations of Reform, given Farage doesn’t have the least interest in being an MP. I’d think she’ll be trying to work out how long she wants to steal a living from the public purse for, and whether she thinks Reform and the Tories will eventually merge. 

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

I definitely could. She’ll have comparatively a lot more power within the party machinations of Reform, given Farage doesn’t have the least interest in being an MP. I’d think she’ll be trying to work out how long she wants to steal a living from the public purse for, and whether she thinks Reform and the Tories will eventually merge. 

Don’t see the Tories and Reform merging.

Don’t see FPTP being replaced.

This means Reform remains a fringe party in terms of Westminster representation.

If by the next GE the percentage of people voting reverts to 2019 levels then Reform will lose most/all their MPs.

 

[carpetmonster]

7 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Don’t see the Tories and Reform merging.

Don’t see FPTP being replaced.

This means Reform remains a fringe party in terms of Westminster representation.

If by the next GE the percentage of people voting reverts to 2019 levels then Reform will lose most/all their MPs.

 

Yeah, that’s what I’m figuring too, but I’m wondering if Braverman would have the gall to try and defect back when it happens, should she not have hit the right wing grift circuit full time by that stage. Well, of course she would, but would the Tories have a leader who’d accept her back? Maybe they’ll grow a couple of principles in opposition. 
 
ETA - no sniggering at the back, now

Edited July 19 by carpetmonster

[Boo Khaki]

35 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Because we vote for individuals.  It’s not an ideal situation but it’s maybe better than the alternative 

ETA I don’t see Braverman defecting.

I think she might, but only if she's utterly convinced she has no hope of winning a leadership bid and Bad Enoch is the likely new leader.

Both of them are self-aggrandising, arrogant, entitled arseholes with ambitions that far outstrip their abilities. I don't think Braverman could bring herself to work under KB, and I also think KB is bitter enough to snub SB for any sort of meaningful role in the Opposition. 

[BFTD]

Braverman fancies being Chancellor of His Majesty's Forever Government, so she'll not be joining some tuppenny-ha'penny outfit like REFUK while they already have a far more popular future Chancellor of His Majesty's Forever Government as their figurehead.

She seems like a true believer. I don't think she's in it for the grift. She wants to hurt people.

This is what happens when you name your children after characters from awful TV shows, people.

[Granny Danger]

8 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Braverman fancies being Chancellor of His Majesty's Forever Government, so she'll not be joining some tuppenny-ha'penny outfit like REFUK while they already have a far more popular future Chancellor of His Majesty's Forever Government as their figurehead.

She seems like a true believer. I don't think she's in it for the grift. She wants to hurt people.

This is what happens when you name your children after characters from awful TV shows, people.

I’ve said it before, she was bullied as a child and is out for revenge.  As you say she wants to hurt people.

[HTG]

She might defect because she's a massive c**t - perhaps too massive a c**t even for the Tories ... which is some bar.

[CarrbridgeSaintee]

Braverman denying any chance of a defection.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-europe-zelensky-cabinet-politics-latest-b2582295.html

 

It’s in her interest to say this just now, so I wouldn’t read too much into it.  Saying ‘yeah, I’ll defect if I lose the contest!’ would be a daft move.

[A Diamond For Me]

17 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

Because we vote for individuals.  It’s not an ideal situation but it’s maybe better than the alternative 

ETA I don’t see Braverman defecting.

 

We do, but those individuals stand under party colours, on a party manifesto, campgain with party money and party activists.  It feels very grubby when they jump ship without giving their constituents their say on it - especially if it were to happen five minutes after an election.

Edited July 20 by A Diamond For Me

[Granny Danger]

4 minutes ago, A Diamond For Me said:

 

We do, but those individuals stand under party colours, on a party manifesto, campgain with party money and party activists.  It feels very grubby when they jump ship without giving their constituents their say on it - especially if it were to happen five minutes after an election.

I see it as a slippery slope.

If an MP has to resign if they jump ship then the next logical step is they must resign if they lose the party whip for any reason.  That way you hand the parties huge power over their backbenchers by threatening to withdraw the whip and forcing a by-election.

Given that much of the opposition to the current government over the next five years will probably come from within its own ranks (ie on the two child benefit cap) that would be a retrograde step imo.

 

 

[Salvo Montalbano]

Think there is definitely merit in a "you're not allowed to defect in the first year" type rule. If, after a year you haven't agreed with your party's performance then fair fucks.

[Boo Khaki]

10 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

I see it as a slippery slope.

If an MP has to resign if they jump ship then the next logical step is they must resign if they lose the party whip for any reason.  That way you hand the parties huge power over their backbenchers by threatening to withdraw the whip and forcing a by-election.

Given that much of the opposition to the current government over the next five years will probably come from within its own ranks (ie on the two child benefit cap) that would be a retrograde step imo.

 

 

I don't really see this as comparable, because frequently when the whip is withdrawn it's not because the MP has being acting like a loose cannon and ignoring three-line whip, it's used as an internal disciplinary measure, and it's often the party itself that is completely out of touch with reality.

In instances where an MP is elected by ostensibly toeing party line and parroting policy, and then they go off on a tangent, then aye fair enough, but this isn't always the case. If it's an internal disciplinary matter that doesn't necessarily mean the MP is automatically at odds with the views and opinions of the proportion of their constituents who actually voted them into office.

I suppose a typical example would be Ash Regan. She's my constituency MSP, and against my better judgement I voted for her despite the fact I was aware of her TERF behaviours. If she'd actually stood as an Alba candidate I'd have voted for whoever the SNP nominated in her stead, but I'm fizzing angry about the fact I voted for an SNP MSP, and now she's sitting in Alba because she took a huff at having to use the same corridor as the Greens. Nobody withdrew the whip from her, it's entirely of her own doing, and I will not vote for her in 2026 if she chooses to defend her seat, but in the meantime I'm now represented by a constituency MSP representing a party I utterly detest and would never have voted for. f**k representative democracy, eh?

Edited July 20 by Boo Khaki