Liz Truss and the Conservative Party.

[WizCastro197]

I've seen estimates of the Tories being reduced to 61 MPs, so low that would threaten the possibility of them even being large enough to be the official opposition.

61 is rather specific. Of course as you've suggested they may not even be the official opposition as many CON seats will be easily taken over by Lib Dems most likely by Voters who don't like the Tories but aren't interested in voting labour.


But I must say most of Southern England will remain Conservative and I do't think it will go down that far low.

 

[nw1]

In this context, "City" usually means the UK's financial services sector.

Ah right, I saw "remainer" and instantly thought of London as a whole. I've heard others on here suggest Brexit was "pushed" by The City (in that context) for its own benefit, so who knows? But to Truss fanboys and fangirls, seems any opposition are communist remainers, or something,

 

[WizCastro197]

That would be my sense. Realistically, mid-term polls do produce much higher fluctuations than you see in general elections, and there's no way Labour are going to be 33% ahead at the next election. But I think we have reached the point where the next election is now Labour's to lose.

You are right. Of course they aren’t going to be 33% ahead!



They’ll be much farther!…

 

[nw1]

61 is rather specific. Of course as you've suggested they may not even be the official opposition as many CON seats will be easily taken over by Lib Dems most likely by Voters who don't like the Tories but aren't interested in voting labour.


But I must say most of Southern England will remain Conservative and I do't think it will go down that far low.

Most of it, yes. But there will I suspect be some changes. I suspect any large town or university town will swing Labour. Thinking of Reading West and perhaps both Milton Keynes seats, for example. And then others with a notable remainer profile will swing Lib Dem, I suspect, such as Esher (Raab needs to look elsewhere now IMO), Guildford, and almost certainly Winchester.

I'd also now expect most Red Wall seats to swing back, except perhaps those which are notably socially-conservative: Hartlepool and Grimsby for example.

All Tory gains in Wales are likely to swing back too.

Not so sure about the West Midlands as it seems to have become disproportionately Tory-favouring in recent years, though I'd expect the more urban locations such as Wolverhampton to swing back.

 

[brad465]

61 is rather specific. Of course as you've suggested they may not even be the official opposition as many CON seats will be easily taken over by Lib Dems most likely by Voters who don't like the Tories but aren't interested in voting labour.


But I must say most of Southern England will remain Conservative and I do't think it will go down that far low.

This was my source, rather amusingly the only Northern Tory Seat left would be Sunak's:

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1575526882853810192

What *That* YouGov poll could look like in a General Election: LAB: 498 (+296) CON: 61 (-304) SNP: 36 (-12) LDM: 29 (+18) PLC: 4 (=) Others: 2 (+2) GRN: 1 (=) NI: 18 Labour Majority of 346

Someone else pointed out from the map in this link that if an election produced this result one could drive from Dover to the Scottish Border without going through a Tory seat.

 

[WizCastro197]

Most of it, yes. But there will I suspect be some changes. I suspect any large town or university town will swing Labour. Thinking of Reading West and perhaps both Milton Keynes seats, for example. And then others with a notable remainer profile will swing Lib Dem, I suspect, such as Esher (Raab needs to look elsewhere now IMO), Guildford, and almost certainly Winchester.

I'd also now expect most Red Wall seats to swing back, except perhaps those which are notably socially-conservative: Hartlepool and Grimsby for example.

All Tory gains in Wales are likely to swing back too.

Not so sure about the West Midlands as it seems to have become disproportionately Tory-favouring in recent years, though I'd expect the more urban locations such as Wolverhampton to swing back.

Guildford and Esher and Walton will swing to Lib Dem

South West Surrey may be able to swing Lib Dem but I think I am pushing it.


Kensington for CONs is done for as is Hastings and Rye.


Yes most Red Wall seats will return to their rightful holders.


Most Cities now are all Labour and their majorities will strengthen. Even those surrounded by hard conservative areas still don't give up on Labour eg. Exeter and Plymouth, Brighton (both) and Canterbury and the small parts of Southampton and Portsmouth.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Sep 2022 ==

This was my source, rather amusingly the only Northern Tory Seat left would be Sunak's:

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1575526882853810192

Someone else pointed out from the map in this link that if an election produced this result one could drive from Dover to the Scottish Border without going through a Tory seat.

Reigate Definitely won't be a Labour area although one can only Hope.

Bournemouth West and East could possibly happen but Poole definitely will not.

 

[nw1]

This was my source, rather amusingly the only Northern Tory Seat left would be Sunak's:

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1575526882853810192

Interestingly Eastleigh, long a Lib Dem stronghold, and Yeovil, former seat of Paddy Ashdown, are still Tory even on that swing while rural seats in the north (except Sunak's) and most of Kent go Labour!

Not sure if those seats have moved really dramatically rightwards of late, or whether the prediction just isn't handling Tory/Lib Dem marginals very well.

 

[Acfb]

Interestingly Eastleigh, long a Lib Dem stronghold, and Yeovil, former seat of Paddy Ashdown, are still Tory even on that swing while rural seats in the north (except Sunak's) and most of Kent go Labour!

Not sure if those seats have moved really dramatically rightwards of late, or whether the prediction just isn't handling Tory/Lib Dem marginals very well.

I'm quite cautious about Lib dem prospects as even in 1997 they only got 46 seats although I am relatively confident they will win multiple seats in the blue wall in places like Surrey that they've never won before now like Woking, Raab's seat etc even if they only get about 30 seats.

If they get 50+ seats at the next election we might actually see some surprising LD gains in the home counties in places like Witney or even Michael Gove's seat while recent LD strongolds like Yeovil and Eastleigh could still stay blue.

 

[Busaholic]

George Monbiot did an opinion piece last week suggesting Truss is now controlled by neoliberal think tanks. He just discovered today that Matthew Lesh, who is head of policy at the Institute of Economic Affairs, simply said "Yes" to Monbiot's question:

https://twitter.com/matthewlesh/status/1573219352622637056

The IEA is a "think tank" that is not transparent with its funding sources and was one of the very few public backers of the fiscal event last week that has caused mayhem since. The fact that one of them has admitted to controlling the Prime Minister shows the lack of accountability there is in politics right now.

The shadowy and shady Taxpayers' Alliance is the one whose tune she has adopted and adapted. No-one knows the sources of their financial backing (or, rather, such details are opaque) but they are based next door (?) to Conservative Central Office. I would expect many non-U.K. taxpayers of great wealth and influence to be in the mix somewhere, possibly some with Russian and Saudi background, or even foreground.

 

[BrianW]

So how did Mistrust become Prime Ministar when such illustrious predecessors failed? -

William '14 pints a day' Hague
Ian 'Sunken' Smith, the quiet man who turned up the volume
Michael 'Prison works' Howard

All political careers end in failure, and some start, continue and finish in that way.

 

[GusB]

So how did Mistrust become Prime Ministar when such illustrious predecessors failed? -

William '14 pints a day' Hague
Ian 'Sunken' Smith, the quiet man who turned up the volume
Michael 'Prison works' Howard

All political careers end in failure, and some start, continue and finish in that way.

Wasn't it Ian Duncan Smith who advised Boris's lot to be cautious in the face of making poorer people worse off, despite him being the architect of the current welfare system?

You really couldn't make it up!

I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but Dave and Dod's government was relatively cuddly compared to this lot.

Mistrussed and Kamikwasi.

 

[BrianW]

Paul Sculley (no, me neither) has to face the public on Question Time tonight. He must be on one heck of a promise to take the flak tonight, anthough Fiona Bruce won't be as hard hitting as that Yorkshire Radio Leeds lass.

"Where've yer bin???" That should be the three-word slogan at the Tory conference!

Paul Scully is actually (ie IMHO!) a 'nice guy'. As a business minister under Boris Johnson (remember him?) he accelerated (as best he could) compensation for surviving postmasters that were victim to the 'Horizon' accounting software scandal which was not owned up to while the Revd Paula Vennels was CEO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Vennells).
Perhaps he'll manage a dead bat Sir Geoffrey innings?

 

[Busaholic]

According to the host of the World Tonight programme on Radio 4, the Times commissioned a YouGov poll for tomorrow's paper showing Labour 33% lead over Tories, a first for this century!!

 

[nw1]

The shadowy and shady Taxpayers' Alliance is the one whose tune she has adopted and adapted. No-one knows the sources of their financial backing (or, rather, such details are opaque) but they are based next door (?) to Conservative Central Office. I would expect many non-U.K. taxpayers of great wealth and influence to be in the mix somewhere, possibly some with Russian and Saudi background, or even foreground.

But of course, to paraphrase: "the drop in the pound this week is the fault of Vladimir Pioutin".

The likelihood that the new tax rules might well benefit the Russian oligarchs who have pushed up property prices in London is of no consequence...

 

[Bletchleyite]

But of course, to paraphrase "the drop in the pound this week is the fault of Vladimir Pioutin".

If you're going to misspell his name I'd prefer the "French misspelling" (I suspect posting it here would breach Forum rules), or at least naming him after chips, cheese and gravy in Canada!

The likelihood that the new tax rules might well benefit the Russian oligarchs who have pushed up property prices in London is of no consequence...

I hadn't thought of that but it's most concerning.

 

[nw1]

If you're going to misspell his name I'd prefer the "French misspelling" (I suspect posting it here would breach Forum rules), or at least naming him after chips, cheese and gravy in Canada!

I was making fun of Truss' pronunciation of the name, which seemed almost affected plummy Oxford. Rhyming with Moo is the norm, IMX.

 

[Typhoon]

It appears that Truss has learnt one lesson from Johnson; the repeated avoidance of accuracy if it suits their argument.

Speaking to local radio stations on Thursday, the prime minister said a number of times that people would not face bills of "more than" or a "maximum" of £2,500.

Yet the energy price cap limits the price per unit of energy, and the £2,500 limit is the average bill cost. People are charged for how much they use.

Government figures say a typical detached house will pay £3,330, a semi will pay £2,650 and a purpose-built flat £1,750.

Full Fact, a fact-checking charity, said it wrote to Ms Truss on Wednesday to stress "it is vital the public have accurate information about energy bills in the context of the ongoing cost-of-living crisis".

Will Moy, its chief executive, said: "We wrote to the prime minister about getting this wrong only yesterday. The government's energy plans will affect every household in Britain this winter.

"And yet Liz Truss has repeatedly misled listeners this morning.

"She must now publicly correct her mistake to make sure people are not misled about their energy prices and hit with unexpected and unaffordable energy bills this winter."

Unfortunately, I don't have the will to go through the interviews again (there are only so many times you can take her blaming Putin or the Bank of England, avoiding questions on the top tax rate or where the money is going to come from, saying how it was her duty to cut the tax rate for the richest cur taxes for all (ignoring those who don't pay Income Tax) to find how many times she made that claim, but it wasn't one or two. There will doubtless be those who took what she said (a cap of £2.500) at face value and will end up with a shock next month.

(From https://news.sky.com/story/repeated...e-will-pay-more-than-2-500-on-energy-12707677 )

 

[birchesgreen]

There will doubtless be those who took what she said (a cap of £2.500) at face value and will end up with a shock next month.

Yes they'll have a shock but they will know who is to blame...

Woke workshy immigrants with massive TVs.

 

[DoubleLemon]

A reason the un-capping of the bankers bonuses didn't go down well, as when it was introduced the standard salary went up to compensate. So bankers didn't have to worry the money they earned depended on large potentially risky deal and it would reduce standard salary rises.

Plus it was capped at 200% salary so higher par rise= more money.

 

[nw1]

Yes they'll have a shock but they will know who is to blame...

Woke workshy immigrants with massive TVs.

The new definition of "woke" is, of course:

"Insult, applied to anyone, of any political persuasion, who disagrees with the current UK Government".

 

[jon0844]

Yes they'll have a shock but they will know who is to blame...

Woke workshy immigrants with massive TVs.

A lot of people, including Martin Lewis, are very concerned today with a lot of people being misled into thinking that once they hit £2.5k on their energy bills there will be no further charges (as raised by many on the separate thread on this forum some time ago).

The problem is, I don't actually think the PM understands herself how it works.

 

[nw1]

A lot of people, including Martin Lewis, are very concerned today with a lot of people being misled into thinking that once they hit £2.5k on their energy bills there will be no further charges (as raised by many on the separate thread on this forum some time ago).

The problem is, I don't actually think the PM understands herself how it works.

She certainly comes across very, very robotic, from those interviews yesterday.

Also noticed the long pause at one point, before replying with something completely irrelevant.

I do get the impression that even many Conservatives think she is quite seriously incompetent.

 

[DerekC]

I do see a lot of Labour and LD chickens being counted whilst the eggs are still in the nest. Let's not get complacent! Other parties are far from perfect and the Mail and Express will have their best out on dirt digging duty.

 

[DelayRepay]

I do see a lot of Labour and LD chickens being counted whilst the eggs are still in the nest. Let's not get complacent! Other parties are far from perfect and the Mail and Express will have their best out on dirt digging duty.

I am certainly not counting my chickens but this does have the air of 1997 - Labour win simply because they are not the Tories.

I think Boris Johnson was the biggest asset the Tories had - especially in the 'red wall' seats where for some reason he seemed incredibly popular. Labour must be delighted that Truss won - they've fought and won against her type of Conservatism before. The Johnson type's more difficult.

 

[david1212]

...
But for the first time, it is not unreasonable to talk in terms of a majority Labour government with Sir Keir Starmer as Prime Minister.
...

That would be my sense. Realistically, mid-term polls do produce much higher fluctuations than you see in general elections, and there's no way Labour are going to be 33% ahead at the next election. But I think we have reached the point where the next election is now Labour's to lose.

IMO that has been the case for a while. While Labour were not united under Corbyn the Tories managed to be the majority party although only just when Mrs May had to get the DUP into the bed.

Various MSM now reporting the pensions triple lock may not be now guaranteed along with other benefit rises....now who would have seen that coming after the "fiscal event " wrecked the economy !..but hey, all those elderly / poor / impaired voters don't contribute to society, so society is obviously better off without them when they pass away prematurely !....not like those fantastic 1% wealth creators who do so much to ensure the UK is a damned good and jolly fine place to live !

What did Angela Rayner call the Tory party again ?

If Truss, Kwarteng & co try to link benefit increases to the lower of average earnings or CPI inflation that alone will make many vote Labour. The 2.5% element of the triple lock will be irrelevant at least until the latest date for the next general election.
The CPI will be lower than spending on the day-to-day essentials of food, toiletries, energy and other utilities, council tax, transport etc. after which there may be nothing left for even the cheapest clothes never mind other items included that reduce the CPI.

IMO tax should not have been touched last week but if they could not resist doing something it should have been the basic tax & NI threshold from £12570 to say £14000 with the reason given that when frozen it was expected that inflation would stay low but now that over three years has already been exceeded. Those employed earning more than the threshold would have gained ~£500 per year and tax only payers ~£300 per year.

 

[yorksrob]

I do see a lot of Labour and LD chickens being counted whilst the eggs are still in the nest. Let's not get complacent! Other parties are far from perfect and the Mail and Express will have their best out on dirt digging duty.

Absolutely.

Labour need to be on their guard continually.

But I can't recall a time where a Conservative government has deliberately precipitated the sort of crisis they have continually warned that labour would do.

My parents have never forgotten or forgiven Labour for the turmoil of the winter of discontent. I can see the current chaos as becoming a similar, permanent generational stain against the conservative party.

 

[Acfb]

I am certainly not counting my chickens but this does have the air of 1997 - Labour win simply because they are not the Tories.

I think Boris Johnson was the biggest asset the Tories had - especially in the 'red wall' seats where for some reason he seemed incredibly popular. Labour must be delighted that Truss won - they've fought and won against her type of Conservatism before. The Johnson type's more difficult.

I don't think a Labour majority is certain even now (as Cameron also had 20%+ leads in 2008) although its hard to see how Labour doesn't get at least 300 seats now like Cameron in 2010.

When the Tories do lose power I do now think they will find it just as hard to recover as after 1997 as they will also lose seats to the Lib dems which they held in 1997.

The comparisons between Liz Truss and the Progressive Conservative former Canadian PM Kim Campbell also look valid.

 

[Busaholic]

Absolutely.

Labour need to be on their guard continually.

But I can't recall a time where a Conservative government has deliberately precipitated the sort of crisis they have continually warned that labour would do.

My parents have never forgotten or forgiven Labour for the turmoil of the winter of discontent. I can see the current chaos as becoming a similar, permanent generational stain against the conservative party.

I've never forgiven the Labour Party for allowing not only the rise of Robert Maxwell but providing cover for his nefarious and criminal activities. I shan't vote Labour until the last Parliamentarian associated big time with Maxwell goes, presumably with his death. He's a Lord taking the Labour whip still, and has removed all references to his part in the Maxwell empire from his Wikipedia entry! Mind you, Wiki manages to express some scepticism by prefacing 'according to his autobiography' from other 'facts.'

Happily, in my part of the world the LibDems are the main opposition to the Tories, and held the parliamentary seat for about thirteen years.

 

[jon0844]

I do see a lot of Labour and LD chickens being counted whilst the eggs are still in the nest. Let's not get complacent! Other parties are far from perfect and the Mail and Express will have their best out on dirt digging duty.

And they're already on it. They started by attacking Labour and the left wing not saying anything about Rupa Huq and therefore being hypocritical because they attacked the Tories for their (many) incidents.

Of course they did act and she was suspended, but don't let facts get in the way of a good story. Ironically, I doubt those on the right who have been sharing comments about her are actually bothered about the racism element one bit.

If we go back to 1997 however, one wonders if Murdoch might once again switch sides as The Sun did. That would mean certain death for the Tories.

 

[yorksrob]

I've never forgiven the Labour Party for allowing not only the rise of Robert Maxwell but providing cover for his nefarious and criminal activities. I shan't vote Labour until the last Parliamentarian associated big time with Maxwell goes, presumably with his death. He's a Lord taking the Labour whip still, and has removed all references to his part in the Maxwell empire from his Wikipedia entry! Mind you, Wiki manages to express some scepticism by prefacing 'according to his autobiography' from other 'facts.'

Happily, in my part of the world the LibDems are the main opposition to the Tories, and held the parliamentary seat for about thirteen years.

I must admit, I know Maxwell was a crook (I'm old enough to remember the whole affair - including 'falling' off the boat) but personally, that wouldn't prevent me from voting labour.