When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[nlogax]

I'd normally say that, but Boris does a very good job of making conspiracy theories come true...

As much as I appreciate the laughs to be found in this particular bout of speculation, it's not going to happen.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not necessarily. What we NEED is economic growth. If we're not careful, we're going to have stagnation, which at a time of high inflation, risks stagflation.

I always thought that stagflation was the result of what happens to an over-fed stag....

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm curious to see examples of this?

I was trying not to be too specific in order not to go off-topic for this thread. But I can't ignore a direct question like that

A couple of examples would be: The way left-wing campaigners (rightly) point out how awful the slave trade and the UK's involvement with it was (and yes, it was horrific), but then edit out that the UK subsequently took the lead in seeking to abolish slavery - outlawing UK involvment in the Slave Trade (in 1807 - at a time when slavery was internationally still widely accepted, so this would have made the UK an outlier). History also seems to be being rewritten to edit out that the UK subsequently spent decades committing a significant portion of our naval resources actively intervening to hinder the Slave Trade - including on occasions actually engaging in battle with slave ships - in other words, spending a lot of money and risking the lives of British servicemen doing something that had no benefit to the UK, purely in order to stamp out slavery at a time when many other countries were still actively involved with that appalling trade

I'd also cite the attempts to cancel William Gladstone because of his alleged links to slavery, ignoring that, in his later life, Gladstone was very much opposed to slavery, and also glossing over that the link in his early life was largely outside his control: His father had been involved in owning slaves since before William Gladstone was born. Thus, a hugely complex issue involving a person born into a slave-owning family who subsequently turned against slavery has been inaccurately reduced down to something like 'bad by association'. And of course the whole saga ignores all Gladstone's other achievements - notably, extending the franchise and so helping move the UK towards full democracy.

As an aside, the irony is: as part of cancelling one of the UK's most significant Prime Ministers, Liverpool University renamed Gladstone Hall after Dorothy Kuya, a woman who may well have achieved much as an anti-racism campaigner in the UK, but was also actively involved in the Communist Party of Great Britain in the 1940s, thereby giving succour to Stalin and his massacres and effective enslavement of much of the Russian population. A reminder of how complex history really is, and of the impossibility of unambiguously labelling people as 'good' or 'bad'.

I would say the problem illustrated by all these examples is the way that (usually) left-wing campaigners and media keep trying to re-interpret history in a way that seeks to categorise everything in a black/white way, ignoring all the complexities and nuances that make up real history.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2022 ==

Britain, although primarily England, has a lot to be ashamed of. However, the total inability and unwillingness to accept that we did anything wrong, unless really forced to,

That's an utter misrepresentation of the view on the right. Pretty much no-one in mainstream politics claims that the UK did nothing wrong. Just about everyone recognises that there is much in the UK's history that is wrong and - with today's hindsight - deeply regrettable. The issue is, accepting the complexities of history, and recognising that the UK also did much that is good and right, and that those things are very mixed up.

 

[najaB]

They’re very few and far between, we still ended the slave trade long before other countries did.

Is that the sound of moving goalposts I hear?

Don't get me wrong - on balance I believe the British Empire did more good than bad. But it's important to recognise, acknowledge and own the bad.

Pretty much no-one in mainstream politics claims that the UK did nothing wrong.

The problem with as woolly a statement based around "pretty much no-one" and "in mainstream politics" is that it allows a lot of room for those who do make those claims to be discounted as exceptions.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Let us remember that the Barbary Coast Corsairs were at their most active in the early to mid 17th century, raiding not only coastal Mediterranean towns, but those of Holland, England, Ireland and Iceland, where they enslaved the residents of those coastal areas as slaves for the Ottoman Empire slave trade.

How on earth did some ignoramus write "Britons, never ever shall be slaves"?

 

[DelayRepay]

Does he realistically think he can win or is that just his ego telling him he will, or is it just disruption? Or does it affect (i.e. increase) any payout that he may get? Remember, his sister has just reminded LBC listeners that he is so poor that he can’t afford a salad bowl. (“When I were young I was so poor I couldn’t afford a salad bowl...Without salad...Or bowl.”)

I heard it suggested that one reason he's trying to hang on for as long as possible is that he doesn't actually have anywhere for him and his family to live, once he gets booted out of Downing Street. Although he owns two houses, they are both occupied by tenants. He might not be able to kick them out in the short term.

When he goes, he's in for a shock as he has to start paying his own bills, transport costs etc. Still, if he moves quickly he'll benefit from the £350 electric bill credit so every cloud has a silver lining!

 

[Lost property]

I feel we should thank one Penny Mordaunt at the start of her campain (not a sp ) for her video demonstrating why she is totally unsuited for the role as PM...but there again, so was Boris

 

[AlterEgo]

Is that the sound of moving goalposts I hear?

Don't get me wrong - on balance I believe the British Empire did more good than bad. But it's important to recognise, acknowledge and own the bad.

I think it is very difficult to actually own the bad without going so far down the road of reparations.

Because slavery wasn’t just perpetrated against one group of people - and very long ago at that - it’s very difficult to make a general apology which is meaningful, or to enact anything in law which might even be helpful.

Nonetheless we do have some way to go. Much as I am an old grump who turned his nose up at the Colston statue destroyers, I was appalled to read his history. People like that shouldn’t have statues in English cities in the 21st Century. I’d no idea we did have statues of slave owners still standing and frankly that was an embarrassment. The small groups who used every trick to avoid getting the statue taken down legally were insane.

 

[brad465]

I feel we should thank one Penny Mordaunt at the start of her campain (not a sp ) for her video demonstrating why she is totally unsuited for the role as PM...but there again, so was Boris

You may need to elaborate on this a bit more, but I did hear apparently she had to re-upload the video after editing out some controversial stuff (but I wasn't around to see the original).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The problem with as woolly a statement based around "pretty much no-one" and "in mainstream politics" is that it allows a lot of room for those who do make those claims to be discounted as exceptions.

The only reason I use that phrase is because, if I made my statement absolute, and said, without any qualification, 'no-one claims that the UK did nothing wrong' than I'd be fully expecting someone to be able to prove me wrong at a pedantic level by citing - say - some isolated teenager with a Twitter account but no other influence who says the UK did nothing wrong. If it's not clear, I'm just making that example up, but the point is, in a country of 60+ million people, it would be pretty rash to say 'No-one claims X', no matter what X is. Therefore the pedant in me makes me qualify my statement. You shouldn't attach any more meaning to my phrase 'pretty much no-one in mainstream politics' than that.

I'm would be pretty confident that (for example) no Tory MP/etc. would seriously believe that the UK has never done anything wrong.

 

[jfollows]

The 1922 Committee has proposed arrangements which will presumably need to be ratified by the new committee, but getting a promise from candidates not to pull out of the process seems to be included (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...er-liz-truss-nadhim-zahawi-uk-politics-latest):

11m ago10.46

Candidates with fewer than 36 votes likely to be excluded after first round, senior Tory says​

A new 1922 Committee executive is being elected today, and its first job, late this afternoon, will be to finalise the arrangements for the parliamentary stage of the Tory leadership contest. That is the part where MPs whittle the candidates down to a shortlist of two.

But the current committee has already been considering this (the new committee will have the same chair, Sir Graham Brady) and Bob Blackman,its joint executive secretary, gave an interview to Sky News this morning setting what is likely to be the process.

• Blackman said that Conservative party members will definitely get a vote because candidates will have to promise not to pull out if they make it onto the final shortlist. In 2016 Andrea Leadsom and Theresa May were the two names on the final shortlist, but Leadsom conceded at that point, and so May became leader without members having a say. This speeded up the contest by several weeks. But it meant that May never had the chance to obtain a mandate from the membership, or explain in more detail what her agenda was. Blackman said promising to contest the final ballot would be “a condition of nomination”.
• He said that candidates would need the support of at least 20 MPs to be allowed onto the ballot paper. To show they have a “broad swathe of support, candidates will need a proposer, a seconder and then 18 “or possibly more supporters” to qualify for the ballot, he said. In 2019 candidates needed the support of just eight MPs to be allowed to contest the first round.
• He said that, after the first ballot, candidates were likely to need at least 36 votes - 10% of the party - for them to stay in the contest. The Tories elect their leader using an exhaustive ballot, which means the candidate with fewest votes drops out each round. But a threshold will apply so that if, as expected, several candidates get little support, they will have to drop out. In the 2019 contest the first round threshold was set at 5% of the parliamentary party (17 MPs). This time it is likely to be double that, Blackman said. He said he did not think a threshold would be needed for later rounds. In 2019 a 10% threshold applied after the second ballot.
• He said voting would probably take place on Wednesday and Thursday this week, and on Tuesday and Wednesday next week. The 1922 Committee was committed to getting it down to two candidates by Thursday next week, he said.

Candidates with their current levels of support (numbers include themselves) from https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1546398689798901761?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1546398689798901761|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/jul/11/tory-leadership-contest-arms-races-fantasy-economics-starmer-liz-truss-nadhim-zahawi-uk-politics-latest:

Candidates/backers as of 8.30am (including themselves)
Rishi Sunak - 33
Penny Mordaunt - 20
Liz Truss - 16
Tom Tugendhat - 16
Nadhim Zahawi - 14
Jeremy Hunt - 13
Kemi Badenoch - 13
Suella Braverman - 11
Sajid Javid - 11
Grant Shapps - 8
Rehman Chishti - 1

 

[NorthKent1989]

Is that the sound of moving goalposts I hear?

Don't get me wrong - on balance I believe the British Empire did more good than bad. But it's important to recognise, acknowledge and own the bad.

The problem with as woolly a statement based around "pretty much no-one" and "in mainstream politics" is that it allows a lot of room for those who do make those claims to be discounted as exceptions.

Did I move the goalposts, no I didn’t and I think we own the bad so I don’t get this narrative that we see the Empire as this wonderful thing, very few people have that belief

 

[jfollows]

You may need to elaborate on this a bit more, but I did hear apparently she had to re-upload the video after editing out some controversial stuff (but I wasn't around to see the original).

The controversy was that her video clearly identified "famous" people, sports people, etc. who were not asked if they minded appearing in her video and they made it very clear that they did mind, so the videos had to be changed. See https://www.theguardian.com/politic...at-woke-tag-as-she-joins-tory-leadership-race:

Penny Mordaunt, the latest entrant to the Conservative leadership race, has faced a slightly rocky launch to her campaign as she apparently rolled back her previous view on trans rights and had to re-edit a video after complaints from people featured in it.

In a somewhat embarrassing start for the former defence secretary’s bid to succeed Boris Johnson, a video introducing her candidacy was pulled and replaced with an amended version.


Based around a stirring voiceover and musical backdrop, the video showed images of UK landscapes, events and people, including a series of identifiable public figures, who had seemingly not given their permission to be featured.

Among these was Jonnie Peacock, the British Paralympic sprinter, shown in the original video crossing the finish line of a race in slow motion. The clip also featured a shot of sprinter Oscar Pistorius, the South African Paralympian later convicted of the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.

Peacock, an English sprint runner who won gold at the 2012 and 2016 Summer Paralympics tournaments, replied to the video on Twitter, saying: “I officially request to be removed from this video … Anything but blue please.”

 

[NorthKent1989]

This ‘narrative’ is not saying Britain is “the big evil”. It’s just telling history as it was with the good and the bad. The alternative is to go down the right wing culture war route, and just tell the ‘nicely-nice’ things and wave a little flag, which is rather pathetic really. We should be mature enough to see our history warts and all, as well as great.

But we all know Britain did bad things, and that seems to be that Britain has to keep owning the bad, that’s the left wing culture war way of thinking.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The controversy was that her video clearly identified "famous" people, sports people, etc. who were not asked if they minded appearing in her video and they made it very clear that they did mind, so the videos had to be changed.

Yep. That plus, according to reports, the original video included a clip that included footage showing Oscar Pistorius.

A total disaster in terms of making a campaigning video. Someone on her team definitely didn't do their due diligence properly. I wouldn't go as far as saying it makes her unsuitable for Prime Minister, but if I was a Tory MP thinking of voting for her, I'd certainly want to ask her how that happened and what care she'll be taking to avoid making mistakes like that again.

 

[jfollows]

Given none of the candidates are all that great, and the Tory membership will go for most right wing candidate, I hope we get to July 21 and one of the final two has dropped out. I’d prefer to get this whole saga out of the way, and then Johnson can get on his way too.

Of course, "they" have tried to change the process to prevent this, but ultimately it's not completely enforceable, all candidates have to promise when they start the process that they won't drop out, but if on July 21 one of them says "I give up" then there's not a lot that could be done, is there? I mean they'll look bad and be seen to go against their promises, but that's normal behaviour for some politicians these days.

 

[nlogax]

Mordaunt's launch videos were quite the cringefest for those of us who remember our 1990s comedy. Armando Iannucci wrote this back in 1994.

 

[DelayRepay]

Of course, "they" have tried to change the process to prevent this, but ultimately it's not completely enforceable, all candidates have to promise when they start the process that they won't drop out, but if on July 21 one of them says "I give up" then there's not a lot that could be done, is there? I mean they'll look bad and be seen to go against their promises, but that's normal behaviour for some politicians these days.

If the ballot papers haven't been printed, they could substitute whoever came third in the previous round.

 

[ainsworth74]

But we all know Britain did bad things, and that seems to be that Britain has to keep owning the bad, that’s the left wing culture war way of thinking.

Whilst the "right wing culture war way of thinking" seem to require that any suggestion of talking about the bad things is somehow ignoring the good things. I must admit I despair at both sides on historical issues as it very much seems like any view that isn't "Britain was awful and everyone in it should be burned to the ground" or "Britain was amazing and if you don't accept that you should be burned to the ground". I prefer the view that Britain has a very complex legacy on the world stage and achieved many good things alongside some truly evil things and we shouldn't ignore one in favour of the other but equally in some contexts we may well spend more time talking about the bad/good rather than the good/bad.

Certainly from what I see in the media and online the conversation seems to be polarised. See also Churchill for another lighting rod type discussion ("Churchill was an evil, racist war monger who should have been imprisoned!" vs "Churchill was the savour of the free world and could do nothing wrong!" seeming to be the general thrust)

 

[brad465]

The 1922 Committee has proposed arrangements which will presumably need to be ratified by the new committee, but getting a promise from candidates not to pull out of the process seems to be included (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...er-liz-truss-nadhim-zahawi-uk-politics-latest):

Candidates with their current levels of support (numbers include themselves) from https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1546398689798901761?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1546398689798901761|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/jul/11/tory-leadership-contest-arms-races-fantasy-economics-starmer-liz-truss-nadhim-zahawi-uk-politics-latest:

Changing the rules of a contest during a contest isn't a good look I think; they did this in 2019 as well after too many candidates stood in that one, I'd have thought that one change would have been enough to learn lessons in time for this one. I can see why the condition of not pulling out of the contest is added, as the way May was "elected" was neither a good look generally and limited essential scrutiny in the selection process.

 

[Phil56]

Of course, "they" have tried to change the process to prevent this, but ultimately it's not completely enforceable, all candidates have to promise when they start the process that they won't drop out, but if on July 21 one of them says "I give up" then there's not a lot that could be done, is there? I mean they'll look bad and be seen to go against their promises, but that's normal behaviour for some politicians these days.

Then either re-start the entire process, or the 3rd place candidate goes up against the one remaining.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I see #10 is rubbishing Sunak. Boris is bound to play games with this contest - presumably to push the least likely candidate to win a General Election so that he is rushed back in under a "Come Back Boris, All is Forgiven" flag. But who could that be? Nadine Dorries comes to mind but hasn't thrown her hat in yet. Suella Braverman?

Truss. Only slightly less vacuous than Dorries.

 

[nlogax]

Truss. Only slightly less vacuous than Dorries.

Dorries is probably heading straight to the Lords. I absolutely cannot imagine her in any sort of leadership campaign.

 

[jfollows]

Dorries is probably heading straight to the Lords.

I'd heard the same, and although there's been concern raised about the implications of Boris Johnson's resignation honours, I'd be happy to see here go there, where she will doubtless be ignored by the majority of her new colleagues even if she bothers to show up.

 

[Gloster]

Dorries is probably heading straight to the Lords.

And she will probably take her cricket racket with her when she goes to St John’s Wood.

 

[jfollows]

Jacob Rees-Mogg is reported to be considering standing, now that would funny if he weren't such a twit.

EDIT All this would achieve would be to increase Rishi Sunak's chances by diluting the anti-Rishi "right" vote.

 

[birchesgreen]

The Haunted Pencil is reported to be considering throwing his hat in the ring. A top hat in his case of course.

 

[AlterEgo]

The Haunted Pencil is reported to be considering throwing his hat in the ring. A top hat in his case of course.

He wouldn’t the throwing his own hat, his valet will do it for him.

 

[nlogax]

He wouldn’t the throwing his own hat, his valet will do it for him.

Not if Nanny beats them to it.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Great quote from Boris today, on why he isn't backing any leadership candidate: ""I wouldn't want to damage anybody's chances by offering my support," he told reporters."

For all his faults (and there were many), that rather obviously shows someone who actually does have a lot of self-awareness, and also hasn't lost his sense of humour even after losing his job in the way he did. I would say that, after getting caught out on so many lies, he had to go, but at the same time that quote does seem to show up a rather different personality from what many of his detractors imagine he is like.