Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[jfollows]

The Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-by-election-peerage-boris-johnson-tf36hgtrl) is reporting that there will be three by-elections in the near future, in Mid Bedfordshire (Nadine Dorries), Reading West (Alok Sharma) and Selby & Ainsty (Nigel Adams). This is on the back of Boris Johnson's proposed peerages, which he decided he'd hand out on the basis that the nominees could remain as MPs until they didn't feel like it any more, but which has been ruled constitutionally improper (has that been said about Boris Johnson before?). Only Alister Jack (Dumfries & Galloway) is reported to be prepared to refuse the peerage and remain as an MP, the other three will apparently jump for the House of Lords immediately in order to get their peerage, presumably because their chances of getting one from someone else aren't so good.
Reading West had Alok Sharma with 48.4% of the vote, a majority of 4,117 at the last election.
Mid Bedfordshire had Nadine Dorries with 59.8% of the vote, 24,664 majority
Selby & Ainsty had Nigel Adams with 60.3% of the vote, 20,137 majority
Dumfries & Galloway had Alister Jack with 44.1% of the vote, 1,805 majority

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2023 ==

I can't. I have nothing against Sunak himself and I'm sure he's a technically competent leader, however he is a political lightweight who has given no reason to have any confidence that he can keep the loony portion of the party under control.

I won't be voting Conservative for many reasons other than this.

 

[nw1]

He was in the shadow cabinet at the time and Corbyn imposed a three-line whip to vote for it. He would have had to resign his position to vote against.

But if he thought that strongly about it, he would have done just that. So presumably, he doesn't feel that strongly about it. He's pro remain up to a point, but not that willing to make that much of a stand on the matter.

I don't think anyone is likely to politically feel able to introduce any form of FoM for some time, especially if the current rumours are true that net (legal) migration to the UK is likely to be around 1 million for 2022 when the figures are reported soon. Most people will be demanding that to be lower in future, not higher. (Though I suspect if that does happen, it makes it even more likely that Tory voters will sit out the next general election because they're increasingly asking 'what's the point of voting Tory when they never do anything they say they'll do', which should cheer you up

I suspect though that demographics will increasingly favour FoM in future elections, particularly from 2029 onwards when GenXers, millennials and post-millennials will comprise most of the voting population.

While it is a generalisation, and there are always exceptions, I suspect that the baby boomer and pre-boomer generations made up most of the pro-Brexit vote, and anti-FoM opinion. Those of us in the middle (GenX) and younger (millennial and post-millennial) generations have spent the vast majority, or all, of our lives, in the EEC/EU and with FoM in place - so for us (and I am mid-GenX so by no means the youngest in this group) it's become normalised. Now seems the "odd" time.

In particular, if a "FoM with conditions" (e.g. can't claim benefit unless you've been working X years; more paperwork involved) is brought in, I suspect by 2029 onwards a clear majority will be either neutral on the matter, or in favour.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2023 ==

The Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-by-election-peerage-boris-johnson-tf36hgtrl) is reporting that there will be three by-elections in the near future, in Mid Bedfordshire (Nadine Dorries), Reading West (Alok Sharma) and Selby & Ainsty (Nigel Adams). This is on the back of Boris Johnson's proposed peerages, which he decided he'd hand out on the basis that the nominees could remain as MPs until they didn't feel like it any more, but which has been ruled constitutionally improper (has that been said about Boris Johnson before?). Only Alister Jack (Dumfries & Galloway) is reported to be prepared to refuse the peerage and remain as an MP, the other three will apparently jump for the House of Lords immediately in order to get their peerage, presumably because their chances of getting one from someone else aren't so good.
Reading West had Alok Sharma with 48.4% of the vote, a majority of 4,117 at the last election.
Mid Bedfordshire had Nadine Dorries with 59.8% of the vote, 24,664 majority
Selby & Ainsty had Nigel Adams with 60.3% of the vote, 20,137 majority
Dumfries & Galloway had Alister Jack with 44.1% of the vote, 1,805 majority

Reading West is a sure Labour gain, I think - particularly as there will be no incumbent effect to help the Tories. The others I'm not so sure. Dorriesland is a Tory hold I suspect, and from what I gather rural Yorkshire is very small-c conservative. This is David Davis country.

Unfortunately they're ditching the seat and, in true gerrymandering style, replacing it by Lower Throgmorton and Much Binding (comprising mostly countryside and a little bit of west Reading). So Reading will be presumably down to 1 Labour MP again (the new "Reading" seat is a surefire Labour win) after the election. Also - I suspect that the Reading East incumbent will want to stand in plain Reading, leaving any Labour winner in Reading West with a potentially very short term in office.

 

[jfollows]

Reading West is a sure Labour gain, I think - particularly as there will be no incumbent effect to help the Tories. The others I'm not so sure. Dorriesland is a Tory hold I suspect, and from what I gather rural Yorkshire is very small-c conservative. This is David Davis country.

Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/seatdetails.py?seat=Selby and Ainsty) gives Selby to Labour currently, but it's very close (52%-48% chance). Reform with 8% of the predicted votes is bad for Conservatives there. Reading West Labour for sure, I agree, and Mid Bedfordshire will remain Conservative I also agree.

 

[MikeWM]

But if he thought that strongly about it, he would have done just that. So presumably, he doesn't feel that strongly about it.

I think you have a rather higher opinion of Keir Starmer's integrity than I do. This is the man who has already backtracked on just about all the promises he made in 2020 when standing for party leader, so goodness only knows what he'll do when faced with the realities of government.

I suspect though that demographics will increasingly favour FoM in future elections, particularly from 2029 onwards when GenXers, millennials and post-millennials will comprise most of the voting population.

But people often/usually change politically as they get older, so that's not a guarantee of much. If they didn't, Labour would win massive majorities at every election and the Tories wouldn't have a chance.

 

[nw1]

I think you have a rather higher opinion of Keir Starmer's integrity than I do. This is the man who has already backtracked on just about all the promises he made in 2020 when standing for party leader, so goodness only knows what he'll do when faced with the realities of government.

Maybe, and much as I don't like it, I suppose that's just the game of politics. Are Johnson, Truss and Sunak people of integrity? I think not.

But people often/usually change politically as they get older, so that's not a guarantee of much. If they didn't, Labour would win massive majorities at every election and the Tories wouldn't have a chance.

They might get more Tory, yes (primarily for financial reasons, I suspect) but on other matters, I also suspect that many people, as they get older, "hark back to the norms of their youth". Perhaps that was one contributing factor in the pro-Brexit vote of much of the older generation, as many would have had their youth before the EEC was a thing, let alone the EU.

As I start getting somewhat on the not-so-young side, I'm certainly doing that myself - and harking back to the cultural norms of the 80s (Thatcher being the obvious exception!), 90s and early 00s. So I can see that other people of my age and younger might feel the same, and a combination of GenXers wistfully looking back to their youth, plus millennials and postmillennials who turned 18 in the 00s and 10s, will produce a significant bloc more supportive of FoM.

 

[najaB]

Maybe, and much as I don't like it, I suppose that's just the game of politics. Are Johnson, Truss and Sunak people of integrity? I think not.

Indeed. In absolute terms he isn't a man of either integrity or conviction, but the difference between him and the likes of our last three PMs is as big as the Mariana Trench is deep.

 

[Cloud Strife]

will produce a significant bloc more supportive of FoM.

A friend of mine was on the fence about the EU, until a few months ago. Her boss stopped by her office, and asked if she had any relatives who were born abroad. She was like...why? It turned out that she was being headhunted by the Spanish office, but they needed someone with FoM because the job was going to involve a lot of work throughout the EU, and they would need to apply for work permits for every single country individually.

The job ended up going to a Irish girl who wasn't as suitable for the position, but she didn't need work permits. I wonder how many people will start experiencing the same thing in years to come?

 

[Herefordian]

But people often/usually change politically as they get older, so that's not a guarantee of much. If they didn't, Labour would win massive majorities at every election and the Tories wouldn't have a chance.

Not sure that's the key reason. People changing politically works both ways.

Some mellow as they age. My Dad, for example. Conservative voter for 40 years, now votes Labour.

Others become more resistant to change and start to vote Conservative. But, I think that trend will decline in time.

Labour's barrier to a majority is the growing number of alternatives on the left.

The Conservatives have never had serious "competition" on the right.

 

[WelshBluebird]

But people often/usually change politically as they get older,

It isn't that simple.

NW1 has already mentioned one reason (people looking back to what they were used to when they were younger).

But there's also the whole "you become more conservative as you get older" myth which is actually more accurately described as "you often will get more conservative as you accumulate more wealth and get more of a stake in society and "protecting" certain things.

We now live in a country where people are much less likely to go through that process as they get older (home ownership, solid careers, families etc) so young people right now are much less likely to become more conservative as they get older.

 

[Herefordian]

It isn't that simple.

NW1 has already mentioned one reason (people looking back to what they were used to when they were younger).

But there's also the whole "you become more conservative as you get older" myth which is actually more accurately described as "you often will get more conservative as you accumulate more wealth and get more of a stake in society and "protecting" certain things.

We now live in a country where people are much less likely to go through that process as they get older (home ownership, solid careers, families etc) so young people right now are much less likely to become more conservative as they get older.

This is a good point.

I'm middle aged. I earn a good salary, own my home and run two cars.

None of those have made me more conservative.

 

[ainsworth74]

But people often/usually change politically as they get older, so that's not a guarantee of much.

There is some evidence, on both sides of the Atlantic, that this traditional link has been fractured by something in the last few decades and the 30, 40 and 50 year olds who would expect to see starting to flip to more conservative (small 'c') parties or right wing policies are remaining fairly staunchly liberal/left wing in outlook. In the 2017 GE the tipping point when someone was more likely to vote Tory than Labour just on age was 47. Boris managed to drag that down to 39 in 2019 but I think we can all agree that that was something an aberration in all sorts of ways. I'm not sure if anyone has done (or I guess more accurately is doing, I don't think they'd have published it yet if they are!) work on the basis of the local elections that have just gone but if they are it would be fascinating to see how things vary by age. I'd bet that the tipping has returned to at least 47 if not older.

There was a piece in the FT about this actually a few months ago:

...

The pattern has held remarkably firm. By my calculations, members of Britain’s “silent generation”, born between 1928 and 1945, were five percentage points less conservative than the national average at age 35, but around five points more conservative by age 70. The “baby boomer” generation traced the same path, and “Gen X”, born between 1965 and 1980, are now following suit.

Millennials — born between 1981 and 1996 — started out on the same trajectory, but then something changed. The shift has striking implications for the UK’s Conservatives and US Republicans, who can no longer simply rely on their base being replenished as the years pass.

...

Let’s start with age effects, and the oldest rule in politics: people become more conservative with age. If millennials’ liberal inclinations are merely a result of this age effect, then at age 35 they too should be around five points less conservative than the national average, and can be relied upon to gradually become more conservative. In fact, they’re more like 15 points less conservative, and in both Britain and the US are by far the least conservative 35-year-olds in recorded history.

...

Millennials are shattering the oldest rule in politics

Western conservatives are at risk from generations of voters who are no longer moving to the right as they age

www.ft.com

If I was a Tory strategist/supporter I would be extremely concerned that in the last thirteen years one of the biggest things we managed to do was ensure that everyone under the age of around 45 currently hates us passionately and of them quite a lot may never vote Tory again...

 

[birchesgreen]

I'm sure young folk can just read whats going on at the National Conservatism conference and they'll come flooding back to the fold.

 

[MikeWM]

I agree with all the replies above that the Tories have a massive problem going forwards because people who have amassed capital are the most likely to vote for the most capitalist party.

Thatcher seemed well aware of that, and as long as she was keeping 55% or 60% happy, even if the rest were seriously damaged, then that was a recipe for electoral success. But now the % of people that have a significant stake in society is dropping, quite rapidly - neatly illustrated by the large rise age at which people tend to buy their first home. Labour need to be filling that gap (though I'm not at all convinced that currently they are).

I suppose this may be part of the reason why politics is now so often descending into 'culture war' issues. We do appear to be moving to US-style politics, where the Republicans get the lions share of the richest *and* the poorest votes, and the Democrats get the middle. If the Tories are losing the middle, they need to pick up from the working class - and Labour appear to have largely deserted the working class, so the votes are there to be grabbed if the Tories can somehow do so, as they did with Brexit.

(One other thing : I said people 'change' as they get older, I deliberately didn't say 'move right' While perhaps more move right than left, due to accumulation of capital, that's not a hard rule - see Tony Benn, for example).

 

[nw1]

I suppose this may be part of the reason why politics is now so often descending into 'culture war' issues. We do appear to be moving to US-style politics, where the Republicans get the lions share of the richest *and* the poorest votes, and the Democrats get the middle. If the Tories are losing the middle, they need to pick up from the working class - and Labour appear to have largely deserted the working class, so the votes are there to be grabbed if the Tories can somehow do so, as they did with Brexit.

I remain unconvinced by this argument. While I do not identify as "working-class" myself, I suspect the "working class" are mostly concerned about issues like job security, working conditions, employment prospects, the cost of living and the state of the NHS. Whatever Labour do or do not do to address these issues, they seem to have more natural sympathy with them than the Tories. Plus, the Tories under Johnson, Truss and Sunak don't appear to be dealing with these issues especially well - we have a dysfunctional NHS and widespread industrial action.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2023 ==

I suppose this may be part of the reason why politics is now so often descending into 'culture war' issues. We do appear to be moving to US-style politics, where the Republicans get the lions share of the richest *and* the poorest votes,

Do they, necessarily? Would the poorer parts of inner-city New York or Chicago, or the poorer parts of the LA conurbation, for example, vote Republican?

 

[MikeWM]

I remain unconvinced by this argument. While I do not identify as "working-class" myself, I suspect the "working class" are mostly concerned about issues like job security, working conditions, employment prospects, the cost of living and the state of the NHS. Whatever Labour do or do not do to address these issues, they seem to have more natural sympathy with them than the Tories. Plus, the Tories under Johnson, Truss and Sunak don't appear to be dealing with these issues especially well - we have a dysfunctional NHS and widespread industrial action.

Labour has a coalition of its own to keep together - that between the working class, and the metropolitan often-university-educated 'liberals'. That's rather tough too, but I think in recent times the emphasis has been excessively on the latter at the expense of the former. That's not to say that there isn't stuff there related to job security and working conditions which is fairly good, but it never gets talked about. All they *do* seem to talk about is stuff like net zero and culture war things, occasionally punctuated by calls for even more censorship of the internet.

You're right that the Tories clearly aren't addressing these issues either, but there's definitely a mindset in the working class that being ignored by Labour is worse than being ignored by the Conservatives, because they *expect* to be ignored by the Tories. (That's one reason Trump did well in 2016 - he spoke to the working class and promised them stuff. The Democrats conversely had almost entirely ignored them for decades).

Do they, necessarily? Would the poorer parts of inner-city New York or Chicago, or the poorer parts of the LA conurbation, for example, vote Republican?

No, there are exceptions to every rule, and the inner cities prove that. Rural areas do tend to vote Republican though, despite often being very poor. (I'd say this is the same as how Labour were never at any risk in 2019 in the poorer parts of Liverpool, for example, despite losing most of the 'red wall'.)

 

[najaB]

Do they, necessarily? Would the poorer parts of inner-city New York or Chicago, or the poorer parts of the LA conurbation, for example, vote Republican?

Not in large numbers, but in larger numbers than you might naturally expect.

 

[nw1]

Labour has a coalition of its own to keep together - that between the working class, and the metropolitan often-university-educated 'liberals'. That's rather tough too, but I think in recent times the emphasis has been excessively on the latter at the expense of the former. That's not to say that there isn't stuff there related to job security and working conditions which is fairly good, but it never gets talked about. All they *do* seem to talk about is stuff like net zero and culture war things, occasionally punctuated by calls for even more censorship of the internet.

I would probably argue that they should aim (to a degree) more for the first group. The "metropolitan university educated liberals" (and I would include myself in this group) are going to vote tactically for a Labour-led government in any case, so don't need to be marketed to. Put it this way, no liberal is going to vote for Sunak with all the baggage (Anderson, Braverman, et al) that this would entail!

With the "working class" (quotes because I tend to dislike the term anyway) then Labour can, in my view, still offer a lot of what I'd call left-ish policies. Things such as: fixing the NHS, greater job security and working conditions, dealing with the cost of living crisis and so on. I don't think they need to even dabble with the right-wing populist stuff (anti-immigration, pro-Brexit etc); they should just say nothing, or very little, on these matters and let the left-ish social policies do the talking. I doubt that many of the "working class" voters that Labour are targeting even care that much about Brexit these days in any case, and probably don't care whether we are in or out of the EU. People's lives aren't getting better under Sunak so if Labour can promise something better on social issues, I think it'll be a vote winner without having to indulge in pro-Brexit, anti-immigration right-wing populism.

On the other hand, I'd also argue Labour shouldn't promise anything particularly on "liberal" issues (what some might call "woke" issues) either, because us liberals are going to vote for them anyway. (They can always aim to introduce policies in this area at some point but they shouldn't promise them just yet. Just like Brexit and immigration, they should stay quiet and sit on the fence for now, in order to achieve power).

Key thing is to get a Labour-led government in and move on from the current state of UK politics. Do this via social issues (NHS, cost of living, employment, public services) and the other issues, while important for many of us, can wait until Labour get into power.

 

[MikeWM]

I would probably argue that they should aim (to a degree) more for the first group.

I'd agree - one could argue that Corbyn attempted that, certainly over Miliband, and while it was partly successful in 2017 it certainly wasn't in 2019, though admittedly that election was 99% about Brexit so hard to draw any conculsions there.

With the "working class" (quotes because I tend to dislike the term anyway) then Labour can, in my view, still offer a lot of what I'd call left-ish policies. Things such as: fixing the NHS, greater job security and working conditions, dealing with the cost of living crisis and so on.

I think they will do the employment stuff, though I have no confidence in them actually fixing the NHS or dealing with the cost of living (not least because in both cases, a big part of the problem is due to policies that Labour supported and indeed asked for more of those policies - and so far I haven't heard anything that I think would particularly help).

I doubt that many of the "working class" voters that Labour are targeting even care that much about Brexit these days in any case, and probably don't care whether we are in or out of the EU.

A single data point, but my mother (a lifelong Labour voter) cares very much. She doesn't like or trust Starmer one bit, particularly on this issue.

On the other hand, I'd also argue Labour shouldn't promise anything particularly on "liberal" issues (what some might call "woke" issues) either, because us liberals are going to vote for them anyway. (They can always aim to introduce policies in this area at some point but they shouldn't promise them just yet. Just like Brexit and immigration, they should stay quiet and sit on the fence for now, in order to achieve power).

That's sounds really rather cynical. If they aim to do things, shouldn't they tell the electorate *before* the election?

Key thing is to get a Labour-led government in and move on from the current state of UK politics.

I don't think getting a Labour-led government will actually do that though. The shadow cabinet are hardly any more inspiring than the current one, in my opinion.

 

[nw1]

I'd agree - one could argue that Corbyn attempted that, certainly over Miliband, and while it was partly successful in 2017 it certainly wasn't in 2019, though admittedly that election was 99% about Brexit so hard to draw any conculsions there.

I don't think it was 99% about Brexit. I think it was mostly about Johnson versus Corbyn, and people saw Johnson, rightly or wrongly, as the least-worst of the two.

I think they will do the employment stuff, though I have no confidence in them actually fixing the NHS or dealing with the cost of living (not least because in both cases, a big part of the problem is due to policies that Labour supported and indeed asked for more of those policies - and so far I haven't heard anything that I think would particularly help).

I'm not so sure. The NHS and cost of living are things that a left-leaning government will be inherently more attracted to.

A single data point, but my mother (a lifelong Labour voter) cares very much. She doesn't like or trust Starmer one bit, particularly on this issue.

I suspect it's not typical though. At the end of the day, if we were to become closer to the EU (and I don't necessarily mean rejoin: I'm thinking of things like the customs union and single market) again, would many people's lives be negatively impacted? I suspect very few - and certainly less than would be positively impacted. I suspect a majority of people now either a) don't care either way because there are more pressing problems, or b) want to get closer to the EU because Brexit causes problems.

That's sounds really rather cynical. If they aim to do things, shouldn't they tell the electorate *before* the election?

I guess what I was trying to say was: look long-term about introducing more radical liberal things, as in, a hypothetical second Labour government in 2029. But do a prospective government always tell the electorate everything they end up doing?

I don't think getting a Labour-led government will actually do that though. The shadow cabinet are hardly any more inspiring than the current one, in my opinion.

I think I'd have to beg to disagree there. There is no-one as extreme as Braverman in the Labour shadow cabinet, for example. And no spokesperson for Labour who is as radical-right as Anderson.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm not so sure. The NHS and cost of living are things that a left-leaning government will be inherently more attracted to.

Fixing healthcare and the cost of living are things that pretty much everyone in all parties wants to do. The more relevant question is, does Labour have any policies that are more likely to succeed than what the Tories are doing.

I suspect it's not typical though. At the end of the day, if we were to become closer to the EU (and I don't necessarily mean rejoin: I'm thinking of things like the customs union and single market) again, would many people's lives be negatively impacted? I suspect very few - and certainly less than would be positively impacted.

If re-joining the single market means bringing back Freedom of Movement and therefore increasing immigration to even higher levels than it is at today, then pretty much everyone who needs to find somewhere to live is going to be negatively impacted. I think that's rather more than 'very few' people (Set against that, anyone who wants to sell a house or has one to let out would be positively impacted).

I suspect a majority of people now either a) don't care either way because there are more pressing problems, or b) want to get closer to the EU because Brexit causes problems.

I think you are correct to the extent that, with the cost of living crisis, most people have more pressing things to worry about than Brexit.

I think I'd have to beg to disagree there. There is no-one as extreme as Braverman in the Labour shadow cabinet, for example. And no spokesperson for Labour who is as radical-right as Anderson.

That might have something to do with Labour being a left-wing, and not a right-wing party, so is more likely to harbour people on the radical (whatever you want to call it) left

 

[Thirteen]

Paul Scully has announced his bid to become Mayor of London. Seems like a lost cause given the Tories are very unpopular in London.

 

[Cross City]

For people to vote Conservative they have to have been able to amass things which they wish to conserve.

I'm 32 now, I should be well on my way to voting Tory, but there's no chance of that happening when the prospect of me ever owning a house is vanishingly small, my pension pot is going to be comparatively tiny, I have almost zero savings due to disgusting wage stagnation over the past 20 years.

I'm far from alone in my current situation, and unless the Tories change they're resigning themselves to the history books in a few decades.

 

[nw1]

Paul Scully has announced his bid to become Mayor of London. Seems like a lost cause given the Tories are very unpopular in London.

Who?



== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 May 2023 ==

If re-joining the single market means bringing back Freedom of Movement and therefore increasing immigration to even higher levels than it is at today, then pretty much everyone who needs to find somewhere to live is going to be negatively impacted. I think that's rather more than 'very few' people (Set against that, anyone who wants to sell a house or has one to let out would be positively impacted).

Perhaps, but you could in theory have one (single market and customs union) without the other. Wasn't that one of the options on the table during early 2019? Or, introduce a more "bureaucratic" form of FoM where more paperwork is involved (criminal, security checks etc; can't claim benefits unless you've been working here for X years) which would probably limit the numbers wanting to come here anyway.

 

[ainsworth74]

For people to vote Conservative they have to have been able to amass things which they wish to conserve.

I'm 32 now, I should be well on my way to voting Tory, but there's no chance of that happening when the prospect of me ever owning a house is vanishingly small, my pension pot is going to be comparatively tiny, I have almost zero savings due to disgusting wage stagnation over the past 20 years.

I'm far from alone in my current situation, and unless the Tories change they're resigning themselves to the history books in a few decades.

You clearly need to cut back on the number of cheese sandwiches that you're eating! Expecting such luxuries to be handed to you is just another sign of the wokification of society these days. Back in the good old days when Brits were Brits if you couldn't afford a cheese sandwich that was just too bad, you got on with it. None of this moaning. And don't even get me started on the bleating about sewerage in the water! We used to swim in turd infested waters and we liked it! It was character building! None of this lefty liberal snowflake whinging then let me tell you!

(I think I'm getting the tone right for current Tory and ex-Tory politicians?)

 

[DustyBin]

You clearly need to cut back on the number of cheese sandwiches that you're eating! Expecting such luxuries to be handed to you is just another sign of the wokification of society these days. Back in the good old days when Brits were Brits if you couldn't afford a cheese sandwich that was just too bad, you got on with it. None of this moaning. And don't even get me started on the bleating about sewerage in the water! We used to swim in turd infested waters and we liked it! It was character building! None of this lefty liberal snowflake whinging then let me tell you!

(I think I'm getting the tone right for current Tory and ex-Tory politicians?)

Should they be?

 

[Purple Train]

You clearly need to cut back on the number of cheese sandwiches that you're eating! Expecting such luxuries to be handed to you is just another sign of the wokification of society these days. Back in the good old days when Brits were Brits if you couldn't afford a cheese sandwich that was just too bad, you got on with it. None of this moaning. And don't even get me started on the bleating about sewerage in the water! We used to swim in turd infested waters and we liked it! It was character building! None of this lefty liberal snowflake whinging then let me tell you!

(I think I'm getting the tone right for current Tory and ex-Tory politicians?)

It's filled in my Tory Dunce Bingo Sheet. I know a couple of people who still support the Conservatives even after all this mess, and they remain the only people who have called me "woke" and "liberal" respectively. Do they actually mean anything beyond "generic Labour supporter"?
The Tories are dreadfully amusing to watch tear themselves apart; it would just help if they weren't supposed to be running the country at the same time!

 

[birchesgreen]

You clearly need to cut back on the number of cheese sandwiches that you're eating! Expecting such luxuries to be handed to you is just another sign of the wokification of society these days. Back in the good old days when Brits were Brits if you couldn't afford a cheese sandwich that was just too bad, you got on with it. None of this moaning. And don't even get me started on the bleating about sewerage in the water! We used to swim in turd infested waters and we liked it! It was character building! None of this lefty liberal snowflake whinging then let me tell you!

(I think I'm getting the tone right for current Tory and ex-Tory politicians?)

Not wanting to starve to death is so woke.

 

[ainsworth74]

Should they be?

What? Being able to fulfil the ambition to own your own home or be secure in your retirement? Those used to be things that the Tory party believed in surely? And yet by all accounts if you're under the age of about 45 or so they are increasingly unlikely to be obtainable. Or at this point even being able to afford a cheese sandwich it seems is considered to be something that you shouldn't necessarily expect.

 

[GusB]

You clearly need to cut back on the number of cheese sandwiches that you're eating! Expecting such luxuries to be handed to you is just another sign of the wokification of society these days. Back in the good old days when Brits were Brits if you couldn't afford a cheese sandwich that was just too bad, you got on with it. None of this moaning. And don't even get me started on the bleating about sewerage in the water! We used to swim in turd infested waters and we liked it! It was character building! None of this lefty liberal snowflake whinging then let me tell you!

(I think I'm getting the tone right for current Tory and ex-Tory politicians?)

Release your inner-Widdecombe!

 

[nw1]

It's filled in my Tory Dunce Bingo Sheet. I know a couple of people who still support the Conservatives even after all this mess, and they remain the only people who have called me "woke" and "liberal" respectively. Do they actually mean anything beyond "generic Labour supporter"?
The Tories are dreadfully amusing to watch tear themselves apart; it would just help if they weren't supposed to be running the country at the same time!

Never mind, "Rishi is confident he will be PM for years" and "won't need a coalition with the Lib Dems or DUP", according to the Daily Express (just glanced at a physical copy earlier).

I really can't see a Tory majority happening. Hung parliament, perhaps, but the Tories are unlikely to be the largest party.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 May 2023 ==

What? Being able to fulfil the ambition to own your own home or be secure in your retirement? Those used to be things that the Tory party believed in surely? And yet by all accounts if you're under the age of about 45 or so they are increasingly unlikely to be obtainable. Or at this point even being able to afford a cheese sandwich it seems is considered to be something that you shouldn't necessarily expect.

Ah, but that means you're not in the Tory target voter group so you don't count.