can’t see the ERG/ Britannia Unchained mob getting behind Rishi as they thought he went too far with furlough and putting taxes up
This is what I don't understand, it's not the first time that I have seen sentiments along those lines, ie, he was pursuing his own policies when he was Chancellor.
When Kwasi Kwarteng was Chancellor, we are told, he was pursuing Liz Truss's economic policies, but when Rishi Sunak was Chancellor he wasn't pursuing Boris Johnson's policies.
Plenty of those on the hard-right of the Tory Party publicly threw their weight behind Sunak, off the top of my head Suella Braverman, Steve Baker, and Kemi Badenoch.
The idea that Sunak is on the left of the Tory Party is frankly bizarre. He doesn't want to increase taxation to pump money into public services, like Thatcher he wants increase taxation and slash public services.
"We inherited a bunch of formulas from Labour that shoved all the funding into deprived urban areas and that needed to be undone. I started the work of undoing that.” - Rishi Sunak
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/margaret-thatcher-conservative-taxes-budget_n_3037728
....revolutionized the UK economy through free-market policies that included cuts to the British welfare state.......she was willing to raise taxes to achieve that goal.
Rishi will cut services not taxes, he will raise pensions and benefits but cap/cut with a vengeance to demonstrate fiscal responsibility.
Personal allowances and tax bands will be frozen, next year when inflation drops all public sector salaries will be frozen along with benefits (not pensions)
He will enable stealth tax (VAT maybe excise duty) he will boil the economic Frog.
Yep, I don't see Rishi Rich being much of a saviour for us(well you) and we've a winter to go thru 🙁
BJ would be insane to set into the ring now,None of them have any thing to offer its just the timing of the bad luck.
Another lucky player in game of PM gets to sit on the throne.
Furloughs an odd one, no way would any of them really want do it, but there would have been no economy left if they hadn't bailed it and I reckon it would have got nasty, he was just the man in the frame who had to front it regardless of his opinion.
So he had 102 nominations but has declined to stand?
indeed, “I’ve a winning lottery ticket, but I’ve ripped it up, as now is not the time to win millions” said no one ever, especially Johnson.
Do you doubt his honesty?
I properly laughed at that.
Its a poisoned chalice thou especially after TrussOnomics made it even a bigger mess, he may as well sit it out, its not like he would bring anything new to the table and there is still 2 more years to go on this ride.
It's just too early for BJ to ride in and save us from reality, letting them make it worse and have to deal with the truss mess suits his agenda and giving people longer to forget his sins and accept him back with rose tinted memories.
some interesting and damning analysis on bbc breakfast (some guy from marlborough I didn't catch his name) basically saying that's it it's over for Johnson now, even if Sunak?Mordant lose the next election He's not going to do the hard yards of opposition for 5-10 years.
Will Walden Johnsons former communications director.
It's hilarious to see Johnson bail out in a flood of lies, spin & incompetence- his signature style!
https://twitter.com/sgfmann/status/1584297130457382913?t=Zx6RCzwQsezo3noeVGjARw&s=19
Boris pulling out?
Must be the first time in his life #babies
Out of 357 Tory MPs only 180 have so far publicly declared which candidate they are backing in the leadership contest. I find it astonishing that only half Tory MPs have been open about who they are backing.
Quite why a professional politician who expects members of the public to back their political stances should be so secretive about an important political stance I don't know.
IMO no politician should be protected by the principal of secret ballots. They should always be held accountable for the way they vote.
With only 5 hours left to go I am of course assuming that considerably more than half have decided how they are voting.
Well, there is always time for the big hitters to play for a deal, make a bargain...
those 102 backers in full:
Grant Shapps presumably counts as 4 different backers depending on which of his pseudonymns he uses?
Quite why a professional politician who expects members of the public to back their political stances should be so secretive about an important political stance I don’t know.
There are many Boris fanatics in the grass roots of the party. I know two people who have written to their MP saying "If you don't back Boris, you lose my vote". Perhaps some MPs are waiting so that that doesn't become an issue.
People like Fabricant and Dorries who are fanatical Johnson supporters saying it mustn’t be a ‘coronation’ of Sunak or he would have no mandate. Yet if it does come to that it’s Johnson’s fault as he pulled out having reached the threshold* so it was him who deprived their limited electorate a vote not Sunak.
He could have provided the membership with a contest, but the indicative vote would likely have made him look like a loser with the MP’s even if he won the membership.
*Or not. Which is actually most likely
https://twitter.com/Pandamoanimum/status/1584479418981851136?t=o7RuETcIp3_-NhsQCdvhyQ&s=19
Afternoon amusement.
I did like the joke under the skips thread on Instagram.
What's the difference between Boris Johnson and a skip?
One is full of shit, the other one is a skip.
Boris pulling out?
Must be the first time in his life #babies
🤣🤣🤣
Aye, it was fake headlines all along.
How can you pull out when there was never any (Official Declaration) pushing in ..
That fly tipped sofa of a human had a harder neck than a Churchill statue.
It beggars belief that (some)people still think there is a government position he could do competently.
A failure at almost everything he does ,a skip at Westminster will always be more useful .
It beggars belief that (some)people still think there is a government position he could do competently.
Food taster and/or double for any government minister when assassination attempts are expected.
Okay I suspect he would mess up both but its worth a go.
So according to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee, Graham Brady, Johnson did receive the one hundred required nominations:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63503932
I suspect that Johnson's reason for pulling out was either because he never really wanted to lead the Tories again right now so early, and the certainty of failure at the next general election.
Or he realised that even if he got the backing of the membership there was now too much significant hostility within the Parliamentary Conservative Party to allow his premiership operate smoothly.
Or a combination of both.
The important thing for Johnson though is that the "will he won't he" put him in the limelight, gave him massive media coverage, and had everyone talking about him, so probably a very worthwhile exercise as far as he is concerned.
Grifters gonna grift,job done.
Do you trust Brady?
Do you trust Brady?
About as far as I could throw him
Creating a false narrative for his next runat it, like his American Idol
Well there is always the possibility that anyone is lying, including Graham Brady. And it certainly provides an explanation if you would prefer not to believe what you are being told.
However up to this point most people have not questioned the honesty and integrity of Graham Brady's remarks. Furthermore it would raise the question of motivation - only a few weeks ago Brady met Johnson in an attempt to convince him to resign, why would he now lie to back his latest attempt for a comeback?
And Brady would also be lying to the wider Tory Party, including Johnson's enemies, why would he do that?
Presumably Graham Brady has been chosen by the 1922 Committee of backbench Tory MPs because they feel that they can trust him to honestly represent their views - that is his job. I can't see why their trust would necessarily be misplaced, or why he should be just another one of Johnson's stooges.
Motivation? Brady still thinks he could be leader one day. Of course he’d be happy to lie to the wider party. The members are still wedded to their 2019 “winner”, whispering sweet nothings in their ears could possibly earn you some future support. Johnson’s own “102” was promises, not letters… I don’t believe for a second that 1922 had over 100 letters backing Johnson. Has Brady even said that? Or just given vague assurances that Johnson “had the required support”? No one else will be looking in that box… he can claim what he wants, but doubt he’d bother with such a clear lie when a more vague one is available.
I don’t believe for a second that 1922 had over 100 letters backing Johnson
Not for a second? Your knowledge of Tory MPs and their preferences is so intimate that not for a second would you imagine that as many as a hundred could back Johnson?
I have no idea what nominations letters the Chairman of the 1922 Committee received but I am fairly certain of two things.
Firstly that Johnson enjoys significant support within the Tory Party (I have no idea why anyone would dismiss that as unthinkable)
And secondly that Tory backbench MPs trust the Chairman of the 1922 Committee to honestly handle their letters of no confidence in the party leader and any subsequent leadership contest.
He, and he alone, knows how many letters of no confidence he receives, he is known for keeping it a closely guarded secret, which presumably gives him the possibility of rigging any leadership process.
And so on that basis I am not really in a position to accuse him of lying. Although obviously if it suits your narrative accept everything he says except the bits which you would rather weren't true.
Brady is like the Ayatollah of the Conservative party. Deciding who gets to run for PM and setting the conditions by constantly moving the goalposts of our democracy.
Deciding who gets to run for PM and setting the conditions by constantly moving the goalposts of our democracy.
No he doesn't. He gets to change how the leader of the Tory Party is chosen, not the goalposts of our democracy. As far as I am aware at least the last 5 Labour Party leadership contests have been carried out under different rules. Usually it is the Labour Party leader who gets to decide the new rules. I don't consider that to be moving the goalposts of our democracy.
Edit: In the case of the Labour Party it is invariably new and creative rules to stop the Left gaining the party leadership. Although in the case of Ed Miliband and his incredibly brilliant idea, fully backed by Tony Blair, of giving a vote to "Labour supporters" it backfired spectacularly.
Lighten up ernie.
Although obviously if it suits your narrative accept everything he says except the bits which you would rather weren’t true.
I’ve never trusted Brady. Or how the 1922 committee operates.
I like this outcome, means Johnson had the number of backers but has actually realised he's no longer wanted or the best solution for the party. Most have been quite a blow for his ego. Also be interesting to know if he was leaned on by people like Brady to withdraw. It's still not a good outcome for Johnson.
Can't really see what gain Brady makes by announcing it if it isn't true.
Lighten up ernie.
I generally find the political threads quite amusing, so really not a problem.
Today I learnt that Boris Johnson is so unpopular among Tories that not for a second could he have found a hundred Tory MPs to back him.
After all Tory MPs are renowned for being so wise and sensible, so why would they do anything that daft?
Do you have 102 MPs in mind, or just happy to take the word of Johnson and Brady? Honest guys. Perhaps the way our PM is chosen by their MPs should involve less secrecy.
And it certainly provides an explanation if you would prefer not to believe what you are being told.
Given Johnson's history of being a relative stranger to truth, it's not exactly surprising that folks doubted that he had the numbers. It's probably a better tactic for folks at the fag-end of a particularly chaotic parliament to assume that anything they're being told by by Tories right now is either 1. an outright straight lie, 2. positioning by various members of the Tories for leadership bids when they get hammered at the next election, or 3. statements to undermine their "colleagues" and once those possibilities are exhausted 4. something approaching truth.
Rats, fighting, sack, in a, like - rearrange to form a well know phrase or saying
Do you have 102 MPs in mind, or just happy to take the word of Johnson and Brady?
Just a combination of my awareness that Johnson is fairly popular among Tories and that the man entrusted by Tory backbenchers to deal with leadership issues is unlikely to lie unnecessarily to them.
I personally didn't feel that Johnson stood any realistic chance of regaining the Tory leadership so incredibly soon after losing it. But I am not really in a position to accuse the Chairman of the 1922 Committee of lying to everyone including members of his own party.
I consider it unlikely.
Yep, I think now that Brady has mentioned it we can forget any illusions that BJ was a no-hoper.
But it’s waay to early for him to come saving us, let Rishi do the dirty work and come back at a later date to save the day.
(Assumimg he escapes his current predicament)
Lighten up ernie.
Oh, sweet summer child, are you new here?
MCTD - arf arf...
arf arf…
Agreed, there is something highly amusing, and it has to be said rather satisfying, when people have to resort to ad hominem attacks because they lack the ability to do otherwise.
The BBC, the Independent, and the Guardian, all report the claim made by Sir Graham Brady that Johnson received sufficient nominations to go forward in a runoff against Rishi Sunak. None appear to suggest that Brady might be lying.
However STW's very own political analysts, using their huge personal knowledge of internal machinations of the Tory Party, and no doubt their connections, have decided that this is quite impossible because Johnson enjoys so little support within the Tory Party! LOL! 🤣 arf arf etc
The BBC, the Independent, and the Guardian, all report the claim made by Sir Graham Brady that Johnson received sufficient nominations to go forward in a runoff against Rishi Sunak. None appear to suggest that Brady might be lying.
How would they know either way?
And quoting politicians without fact checking them is entirely normal. Sadly.
And did he actually say he had 102+ written nominations, or is that an interpretation of what he said?
Can't find the story on BBC or Guardian websites.
This popped up for King Grifter though...
