The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[tinker]

1 minute ago, desensitized43 said:

Because they see them walk though the lobbies en mass. When you see a bunch of labour people going into the “no” lobby the secret is out.

Agreed they are pathetic but there does seem to be a shift happening. 

The Tory rebels had made their position clear before the vote, even if Labour forced them to back Boris the damage has been done to him , he's a dead duck it just needs the opposition to push him further into the public's attention on his misdemeanors.

 

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

Losing a vote on a non-manifesto issue does not mean a vote of no confidence.

Why would Labour have not backed the proposals anyway? Labour would go further

 

The public ( me included) don't understand the fine points of parliament, we would just see Boris floundering and his MPs turning with labour pointing out why.  Labour going further is irrelevant as they have no say at all and more importantly no voice , they are hopeless in opposition. 

[bickster]

1 minute ago, tinker said:

The Tory rebels had made their position clear before the vote, even if Labour forced them to back Boris the damage has been done to him , he's a dead duck it just needs the opposition to push him further into the public's attention on his misdemeanors.

 

The public ( me included) don't understand the fine points of parliament, we would just see Boris floundering and his MPs turning with labour pointing out why.  Labour going further is irrelevant as they have no say at all and more importantly no voice , they are hopeless in opposition. 

You really aren't understanding how this works, there have been plenty of Government defeats since 2011 when the fixed term parliament act came in, the government didn't resign. There are only two ways to get the government to resign, A Vote of no confidence (simple majority) or a vote to disolve parliament (2/3rds majority)

The only way to get rid of Johnson is internal to the Tory Party and the way Labour votes has no bearing on that

Labour aren't going to tactically vote against their own agenda, like I said, Labour would impose tougher restrictions

[ml1dch]

17 minutes ago, tinker said:

The public ( me included) don't understand the fine points of parliament, we would just see Boris floundering and his MPs turning with labour pointing out why.  Labour going further is irrelevant as they have no say at all and more importantly no voice , they are hopeless in opposition. 

So to sum up, you think that with the pandemic looking like it's about to get nasty again, Labour should prevent the Government from bringing in some pretty inoffensive public health measures (which polling suggests the public are hugely in favour of) , just to score a few cheap political points? 

I'd argue that wouldn't make them as universally popular as you might think. 

[tinker]

7 minutes ago, tinker said:

The public ( me included) don't understand the fine points of parliament, we would just see Boris floundering and his MPs turning with labour pointing out why.  Labour going further is irrelevant as they have no say at all and more importantly no voice , they are hopeless in opposition. 

 

3 minutes ago, bickster said:

You really aren't understanding how this works, there have been plenty of Government defeats since 2011 when the fixed term parliament act came in, the government didn't resign. There are only two ways to get the government to resign, A Vote of no confidence (simple majority) or a vote to disolve parliament (2/3rds majority

Labour aren't going to tactically vote against their own agenda, like I said, Labour would impose tougher restrictions

Please re read my post , I state clearly I don't understand the finer points. It's not about the policies it's about destabilising his leadership and showing the public he has lost his party, nothing to do with the logistics of actually getting rid of him, his party decide that when they are losing the public.

Labour are losing the battle because they aren't fighting at all and even if they are it's hidden from the public eye because Boris plays to crowds very well. They need to offer the country some opposition to these selfish , self serving idiots. Bring on Tactical voting.  

[tinker]

Just now, ml1dch said:

So to sum up, you think that with the pandemic looking like it's about to get nasty again, Labour should prevent the Government from bringing in some pretty inoffensive public health measures (which polling suggests the public are hugely in favour of) , just to score a few cheap political points? 

I'd argue that wouldn't make them as universally popular as you might think. 

No, read my post, they would back the same policy with a leader with some integrity.

[ml1dch]

9 minutes ago, tinker said:

No, read my post, they would back the same policy with a leader with some integrity.

So - Labour's position in now that public health measures should only be brought in following a couple-of-month long Conservative leadership campaign?

Still not seeing how that is going to make people think that they should vote Labour. 

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, tinker said:

Please re read my post , I state clearly I don't understand the finer points.

I know you don't, I was explaining them to you

3 minutes ago, tinker said:

It's not about the policies

It absolutely is about the policies. Voting against a policy that you believe in is stupid, especially when its about the pandemic and peoples lives. You don't play around with that if you want to be taken seriously

5 minutes ago, tinker said:

it's about destabilising his leadership and showing the public he has lost his party, nothing to do with the logistics of actually getting rid of him, his party decide that when they are losing the public.

So you agree that Labour can't effect that change, no matter which way Labour voted, it wouldn't change when the Tories get rid of Johnson. All Labour can do is improve their position in opinion polls which Tory MPs take notice of. They appear to be doing alright in the polls right now (more by default because Johnson is shooting himself in the foot at every opportunity

8 minutes ago, tinker said:

Labour are losing the battle because they aren't fighting at all and even if they are it's hidden from the public eye because Boris plays to crowds very well. They need to offer the country some opposition to these selfish , self serving idiots. Bring on Tactical voting.  

Labour have a significant lead in the opinion polls right now

[tinker]

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

I know you don't, I was explaining them to you

It absolutely is about the policies. Voting against a policy that you believe in is stupid, especially when its about the pandemic and peoples lives. You don't play around with that if you want to be taken seriously

So you agree that Labour can't effect that change, no matter which way Labour voted, it wouldn't change when the Tories get rid of Johnson. All Labour can do is improve their position in opinion polls which Tory MPs take notice of. They appear to be doing alright in the polls right now (more by default because Johnson is shooting himself in the foot at every opportunity

Labour have a significant lead in the opinion polls right now

As I have stated 3 times before.........Labour should say

 "Change the leader and we will back it, he has lost the public" 

[HanoiVillan]

4 hours ago, choffer said:

 

 

3 hours ago, Chindie said:

Desmond Swayne is a blowhard clearing in the woods.

To give Desmond Swayne more credit than he deserves - and certainly more than he'd give me - I presume by 'at the moment' he doesn't mean, eg April 2020.

However, this is giving him more credit than I want to, so let's instead consider how much he looks like Uncle Baby Billy instead.

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, tinker said:

As I have stated 3 times before.........Labour should say

 "Change the leader and we will back it, he has lost the public" 

That would be the very definition of “playing politics”

You are saying that Labour should dictate what the Tory Party should do internally or they’ll vote against attempting to save peoples lives.

It's just a very bizarre idea.

Ask yourself this. Why would Labour want the Tory Party to change their leader right now? He's capable of digging a much deeper hole thanhe's already dug

[OutByEaster?]

One of the papers suggested that an alarm was accidentally triggered during the party at No. 10, which meant the police had to come out and check everything was okay.

The police still not interested in investigating claims that there may have been a party.

 

[HanoiVillan]

I'm feeling a need to once again implore people to consider whether a world in which the police spend all their time investigating alleged lockdown breaches from a year ago would be a better one than this, and to consider who exactly is most likely to bear the brunt of that if that world is created (hint: it probably won't be people working in 10 Downing Street).

[Dodgyknees]

How to wake up erect 

 

 

[lapal_fan]

Ah shit man.

Her drinks globe looks nicer than mine

[chrisp65]

14 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm feeling a need to once again implore people to consider whether a world in which the police spend all their time investigating alleged lockdown breaches from a year ago would be a better one than this, and to consider who exactly is most likely to bear the brunt of that if that world is created (hint: it probably won't be people working in 10 Downing Street).

I do feel sympathy for that point of view.

It would be easier to accept it and move on, if people weren’t still being processed through the courts, having been investigated by the Met, for house parties in London and the same time as the Downing Street parties.

It’s not about the level of illegality, it’s about one rule for us (Londoners being taken to court and fined thousands in the last few weeks), and one rule for them.

Nobody gives a shit about the horrid parties. It’s the let them eat cake mentality that’s running through this government. And, it’s about the blatant political decision making by the Met.

It’s more a principles thing, than a contravention of a sub section of the bye laws thing.

[ml1dch]

10 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I do feel sympathy for that point of view.

It would be easier to accept it and move on, if people weren’t still being processed through the courts, having been investigated by the Met, for house parties in London and the same time as the Downing Street parties.

It’s not about the level of illegality, it’s about one rule for us (Londoners being taken to court and fined thousands in the last few weeks), and one rule for them.

Nobody gives a shit about the horrid parties. It’s the let them eat cake mentality that’s running through this government. And, it’s about the blatant political decision making by the Met.

It’s more a principles thing, than a contravention of a sub section of the bye laws thing.

I'd also add that it's the only way that these thieving pricks will start to learn for the first time in their lives that their actions can sometimes have consequences. And it's far better for the country that they start to learn that via the medium of being told off for their shit Christmas parties than over something more serious later.

[HanoiVillan]

It just comes across like people want the police to solve problems that need to be solved by politics. I want to get rid of Johnson as much (or more even) than the next man, but he needs to be defeated politically, he isn't going to be led out of Downing Street in handcuffs and that wouldn't help anything.

[ml1dch]

7 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

It just comes across like people want the police to solve problems that need to be solved by politics. I want to get rid of Johnson as much (or more even) than the next man, but he needs to be defeated politically, he isn't going to be led out of Downing Street in handcuffs and that wouldn't help anything.

Sure - but the only way to defeat him (and the body of the snake as well) politically is to convince enough people who voted for them that they shouldn't do so next time.

If banging on about illegal parties keeps that in people's minds and makes the above more likely, it's an avenue worth continuing with.

[HanoiVillan]

3 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Sure - but the only way to defeat him (and the body of the snake as well) politically is to convince enough people who voted for them that they shouldn't do so next time.

If banging on about illegal parties keeps that in people's minds and makes the above more likely, it's an avenue worth continuing with.

That's fine, I don't disagree with that - but I think there's a difference between 'banging on about illegal parties' and 'demanding the police launch an investigation'.

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

That's fine, I don't disagree with that - but I think there's a difference between 'banging on about illegal parties' and 'demanding the police launch an investigation'.

My gut feeling is that they are heavily entangled and, therefore, demanding the police launch an investigation is doing so on both the Conservative Christmas parties and also the collusion/corruption that crosses police/politic boundaries.  It's an incredibly uncomfortable situation for both organisations - and rightly so.