Scraping the bottom of the barrel, Liz Truss

As luck would have it Truss has a plan (that lasted 5 minutes). Her plan was to cut public sector pay (nurses, teachers etc) in Blackpool to subsidise wages in London and the South East. I have no idea why any of you guys would have a problem with that.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you think that Truss would be a good PM?
Click to expand...
Wizaard said:
You genuinely think she has the capability to manage the country?

She can't manage to throw out a soundbite without withdrawing it two hours later while denying it.

Strategy is completely beyond her capabilities.
Click to expand...

I don't know how she will do the leader's job. The thing is that you don't either despite your eagerness to tell us what a disastrous PM she will be.
 
Last edited:
tommytwojags said:
I don't know how she will do the leader's job. The thing is that you don't either despite your eagerness to tell us what a disastrous PM she will be.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of hard evidence in her political career to say she'll be rubbish, with nothing to say she'll be able to provide solutions to the massive problems she's been a party to as part of a comedy cabinet.
 
Trammo said:
Wiz was misguided enough to want Corblimey as PM in 2019. Latest news on suspended from the Labour Party Corblimey is that he has just made a speech saying that the Western nations are prolonging the war in Ukraine. 😂
Click to expand...
So nothing to do with the Labour Party then?
 
Trammo said:
Wiz was misguided enough to want Corblimey as PM in 2019. Latest news on suspended from the Labour Party Corblimey is that he has just made a speech saying that the Western nations are prolonging the war in Ukraine. 😂
Click to expand...
Well there must have been plenty of hard evidence that Corbyn would be a legendary PM 😅
 
poolseasider said:
The left frothing at the mouth about the next Tory leader.
Nothing to see here move along.👍
Click to expand...

If it was just that then that would be OK as you suggest.
Fact is with one or two exceptions this is the centre / centre left on here complaining about two candidates who are not addressing the huge problems we face in this country and are making massive promises to a very small electorate that is far to the right even of their own MP’s and are barely Tory as we knew them these days.
 
tommytwojags said:
Well there must have been plenty of hard evidence that Corbyn would be a legendary PM 😅
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with the concept of totally irrelevant.

Corbyn was never PM, is not in the Labour Party. Truss, on the other hand, is more than likely to be running the country in a month.

If you think that's good for this country, then you get all you deserve.
 
Wizaard said:
Are you familiar with the concept of totally irrelevant.

Corbyn was never PM, is not in the Labour Party. Truss, on the other hand, is more than likely to be running the country in a month.

If you think that's good for this country, then you get all you deserve.
Click to expand...

Corbyn was one single national vote away from being PM. What is relevant is how close this country came to the biggest disaster in its political history. Having narrowly escaped that, we can now look forward to a new leadership. If Truss succeeds then she'll earn herself another term in office. If not, she and her party will be voted out. Democracy is a beautiful thing. Look at Russia and cherish what we have in this country.
 
tommytwojags said:
Corbyn was one single national vote away from being PM. What is relevant is how close this country came to the biggest disaster in its political history. Having narrowly escaped that, we can now look forward to a new leadership. If Truss succeeds then she'll earn herself another term in office. If not, she and her party will be voted out. Democracy is a beautiful thing. Look at Russia and cherish what we have in this country.
Click to expand...
I really dont know how you can make that claim of the potential biggest disaster bearing in mind we have just gone through Brexit, which has been proven to be nothing but the biggest disaster political and otherwise to have fallen the country in the last two hundred years. To think there has been anything positive from that signifies that you have to be living in some kind of parallel universe, changing Dartford tunnel signs to yards, and abolish the limit on vacuum cleaner power. Would Corbyn have made Brexit worse - quite probably, but then so did May, by triggering article 50 before understanding what Brexit actually was, so did Johnson by not accepting basic facts of a UK withdrawal from the EU - the Irish Border, EU customs checks etc etc etc etc.

Truss, Like May, like Johnson and every other leading candidate (put up) has been shown wanting in every single government / public service job she has had, and if rumours are true he pre-political life was no great shakes. She has also been complicit in a significant amount of recent government policy, which like Johnson did, she tries to distance herself from.

To footballify it, the UK is in a perpetual state of Oystonesque operation and culture, and the candidates are all Hendry, Ince or Mugdonald level candidates looking to elasticate or not knowing when to shoot. Sunak might be the Jose Riga of the government, he might be quite smart and stylsh but none of his ideas are anywhere near what the country needs to do in order to keep it from being relegated to a third tier non entity. There are no King Billy's looking to actually build something better, despite the Oystonesque underpinnings, there isnt even a Holloway in the wings, who would at least take the country to a short term high, before succombing. The very best the UK can hope for at the moment is a Neil Critchley (using the country as a stepping stone to something else) but working under the Oystons. The country needs a NAPM campaign and a Belekon style moment.

Also if you would have asked Russians ten years ago, they mostly thought their country was the best in the world, despite it being very visibly on course to what is going on today, and Democracy as it stands in the UK today where minorities get to make decsions and implement policies that benefit a very small part of the population whilst driving the rest, including those who are supporting that minority towards what could be abject poverty, whilst having little or no oppostion isnt that far removed from Russia 10 to 15 years ago.
 
tommytwojags said:
Corbyn was one single national vote away from being PM. What is relevant is how close this country came to the biggest disaster in its political history. Having narrowly escaped that, we can now look forward to a new leadership. If Truss succeeds then she'll earn herself another term in office. If not, she and her party will be voted out. Democracy is a beautiful thing. Look at Russia and cherish what we have in this country.
Click to expand...
A country with 68m people that gets its leader via a vote of 160,000 people, a county with a 1st past the post where a few marginal seats will gain you power and millions of votes are effectively chucked in the bin due to safe seats, referendum based on poor information and the proroguing of parliament isn't very democratic is it?
 
Shandypants said:
A country with 68m people that gets its leader via a vote of 160,000 people, a county with a 1st past the post where a few marginal seats will gain you power and millions of votes are effectively chucked in the bin due to safe seats, referendum based on poor information and the proroguing of parliament isn't very democratic is it?
Click to expand...
Get it into your head. People are not voting for a PM. They did that already and will do so again in a couple of years. They're voting for a leader of their party.
 
Shandypants said:
A country with 68m people that gets its leader via a vote of 160,000 people, a county with a 1st past the post where a few marginal seats will gain you power and millions of votes are effectively chucked in the bin due to safe seats, referendum based on poor information and the proroguing of parliament isn't very democratic is it?
Click to expand...
So how would you change it? Whichever electoral system you look at there are problems. None of them are perfect.
 
tommytwojags said:
Get it into your head. People are not voting for a PM. They did that already and will do so again in a couple of years. They're voting for a leader of their party.
Click to expand...
Who will be the leader of the country.

That is one of the problems, leading the conservative party or labour or the greens or lib dems, assuming that leading a party is an executive position where the future of the party is determined, and being the leader of the country is also an executive position, the two roles are often (in todays climate of partisanship) in diametric opposition to one another. Work for the party or work for the country, i dont think the two can exist together and it goes for all the parties currently. To some extent party politics needs to be separated from governence. Much easier said than done.
 
Wizaard said:
Are you familiar with the concept of totally irrelevant.

Corbyn was never PM, is not in the Labour Party. Truss, on the other hand, is more than likely to be running the country in a month.

If you think that's good for this country, then you get all you deserve.
Click to expand...
But you voted for him to be PM.
 
tommytwojags said:
I don't know how she will do the leader's job. The thing is that you don't either despite your eagerness to tell us what a disastrous PM she will be.
Click to expand...
If you look at the clip above you would conclude that she doesn't have any core beliefs and will say almost anything that is expedient at the time.

What do you think of the idea of borrowing to fund tax cuts that is her distinguishing policy?

Personally I think it is immoral. Saddling our children with debt for free money now. It is also an inflationary measure at a time when we need to get inflation under control. This is one reason why I think she will be a poor PM. Do you support her plan?
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
If you look at the clip above you would conclude that she doesn't have any core beliefs and will say almost anything that is expedient at the time.

What do you think of the idea of borrowing to fund tax cuts that is her distinguishing policy?

Personally I think it is immoral. Saddling our children with debt for free money now. It is also an inflationary measure at a time when we need to get inflation under control. This is one reason why I think she will be a poor PM. Do you support her plan?
Click to expand...

Truss's economic policy of tax cutting is not my personal choice. Perhaps she will appoint a more prudent Chancellor and this will be tempered. Economics are one of many issues for a PM and I agree with Truss on the majority of her proposed policies. Either way, I'll be the first to criticise her if she gets it wrong and the voters will decide when she goes to the country in 2024.
 
Wizaard said:
No I didn't. I voted for my local candidate who lost to an ardent Brexiteer, if it makes you feel any better.
Click to expand...
You voted for a Labour candidate who in turn would have put Corbyn in as PM had the vote gone the right way for them.
You don't know what sort of job Corbyn would have done as PM and neither do I. We can only guess based on what we see and perceive.
And likewise neither of us know what sort of job Truss will do.
I actually agree with you in that I don't rate Truss just like I didn't rate Corbyn. But that could be totally wrong.
So you don't actually know about Truss, because your opinion is formed purely because she's a Tory.
And you'd have that same opinion whoever the Tories chose as leader.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
You voted for a Labour candidate who in turn would have put Corbyn in as PM had the vote gone the right way for them.
You don't know what sort of job Corbyn would have done as PM and neither do I. We can only guess based on what we see and perceive.
And likewise neither of us know what sort of job Truss will do.
I actually agree with you in that I don't rate Truss just like I didn't rate Corbyn. But that could be totally wrong.
So you don't actually know about Truss, because your opinion is formed purely because she's a Tory.
And you'd have that same opinion whoever the Tories chose as leader.
Click to expand...
Not because she's a Tory, because she's promising the earth to all and sundry with absolutely no rationale for how it will be paid for, changing her mind by the hour and a track record in a series of Government jobs as an idiot.

She will be a disaster for this country, just as we head into a recession that doesn't look to have an ending, inflation shooting up and massive issues with Brexit.

Apart from that, I'm sure she'll do a great job.
 
Wizaard said:
Not because she's a Tory, because she's promising the earth to all and sundry with absolutely no rationale for how it will be paid for, changing her mind by the hour and a track record in a series of Government jobs as an idiot.
She will be a disaster for this country, just as we head into a recession that doesn't look to have an ending, inflation shooting up and massive issues with Brexit.

Apart from that, I'm sure she'll do a great job.
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree with that she won't be very good. A disaster? I don't know that and like I said previously, neither do you.
I don't think Starmer is the answer, but I don't know that.
You speak like you know for certain, like you have some sort of crystal ball, when you quite obviously don't. Nobody does.
Your track record on here for getting things wrong would rival anybody.
Maybe that's because you're so one dimensional and pig headed when it comes to politics
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
You could put God in as leader of the Tory Party and they'd still find something to criticise.
Click to expand...

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Sound's like their ideal leader to me.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
If you look at the clip above you would conclude that she doesn't have any core beliefs and will say almost anything that is expedient at the time.

What do you think of the idea of borrowing to fund tax cuts that is her distinguishing policy?

Personally I think it is immoral. Saddling our children with debt for free money now. It is also an inflationary measure at a time when we need to get inflation under control. This is one reason why I think she will be a poor PM. Do you support her plan?
Click to expand...
Core beliefs might not actually be a particularly good thing, as it leads to the kind of dogmatic thinking that infected Thatcher, and is / was a big component of the lack of the populations trust in Corbyn. Core beliefs tend to be faith based not evidence based, but my issue with Truss is not that she flip-flops per se, its that she cant demonstrate any understanding of the positions she takes or even any understanding of why she holds those positions, it all comes down to whichever way the wind is blowing, as you say expedience, to appeal to The Daily Mail et al and their readers. Sunak is probably much smarter, but he is a dogmatic libertarian who's core belief is market forces to regulate economic and social society, which is empirically proven to be wrong.

Borrowing to fund tax cuts isnt necesarily immoral but it is stupid, because tax cuts do literally nothing for economic growth and productivity, if she was to borrow for actual productive purposes it would be different. Until we can break the cycle of thinking about market forces, and supply side economics (tax cuts, deregulation, reduced rights et al) and its associated social issues eg the need for between 4-6% unemployment and for at least 20% of the workforce to be in low paid INSECURE employment (with few rights) to maintain low wages, then its almost impossible to build something more equitable or even something that is at its core a stable model. Even the so called left are incapable of addressing the core issues, in that they will simply tinker at the edges of freemarket supply side economics with maybe a Keynsian bias to it.

Corbyn had some good ideas or they would have been if we were still living in 1982 or maybe even 1952, but that world doesnt exist, and Corbyns dogmatic traditionalist socialiam is not appropriate or even functional today.
 
Lost Seasider said:
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Sound's like their ideal leader to me.
Click to expand...
all hail the Hitch
 
According to various media today Keir Clueless seems rather forgetful about declaring things. Looks like he is a gooner oh dear another reason not to like him.😜🤣🤣🤣
 
Wizaard said:
This is what you get from Tories. Self interested twats to a man or woman

metro.co.uk

Rishi literally boasted about taking money from the poor to give to richer towns

The ex-chancellor's comments were branded 'weird and dumb' by members of his own party.
metro.co.uk metro.co.uk
Click to expand...

This is Rishi Sunak signing off his defeat in the battle to be Tory leader. It's not a Tory plan any more than it's a Labour plan and it won't become party policy. Keep slagging off the Tories for things that won't happen though.
 
Costero Poderoso said:
Core beliefs might not actually be a particularly good thing, as it leads to the kind of dogmatic thinking that infected Thatcher, and is / was a big component of the lack of the populations trust in Corbyn. Core beliefs tend to be faith based not evidence based, but my issue with Truss is not that she flip-flops per se, its that she cant demonstrate any understanding of the positions she takes or even any understanding of why she holds those positions, it all comes down to whichever way the wind is blowing, as you say expedience, to appeal to The Daily Mail et al and their readers. Sunak is probably much smarter, but he is a dogmatic libertarian who's core belief is market forces to regulate economic and social society, which is empirically proven to be wrong.

Borrowing to fund tax cuts isnt necesarily immoral but it is stupid, because tax cuts do literally nothing for economic growth and productivity, if she was to borrow for actual productive purposes it would be different. Until we can break the cycle of thinking about market forces, and supply side economics (tax cuts, deregulation, reduced rights et al) and its associated social issues eg the need for between 4-6% unemployment and for at least 20% of the workforce to be in low paid INSECURE employment (with few rights) to maintain low wages, then its almost impossible to build something more equitable or even something that is at its core a stable model. Even the so called left are incapable of addressing the core issues, in that they will simply tinker at the edges of freemarket supply side economics with maybe a Keynsian bias to it.

Corbyn had some good ideas or they would have been if we were still living in 1982 or maybe even 1952, but that world doesnt exist, and Corbyns dogmatic traditionalist socialiam is not appropriate or even functional today.
Click to expand...
Interesting and thought provoking , balanced post this. It’s exactly this kind of debate that we should be having instead of the current trend - by all Parties and they’re associated Social Media Trolls- of name calling, scratching eyes out and dirt-digging. I’m not saying some of this didn’t happen in the past but it is amped up to a particular shrill, hyperbolic level now.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
I believe Cameron was voted in by the populous, albeit he had a coalition government. The same couldn't be said for Gordon Brown who like Boris and May was voted in by the Party.
Click to expand...
Prime Ministers are appointed, not elected. Moreover, it wasn't the electorate that made sure it was 'call me Dave' in Downing Street, it was the Lib Dems wot won it for the Tories.
 
tommytwojags said:
This is Rishi Sunak signing off his defeat in the battle to be Tory leader. It's not a Tory plan any more than it's a Labour plan and it won't become party policy. Keep slagging off the Tories for things that won't happen though.
Click to expand...
Won't happen? It's already happened. He's brought it in as Chancellor. This is why places like Redditch and Maidstone were the first to get levelling up money.
 
Costero Poderoso said:
Borrowing to fund tax cuts isnt necesarily immoral but it is stupid, because tax cuts do literally nothing for economic growth and productivity, if she was to borrow for actual productive purposes it would be different.
Click to expand...
Good example was Gordon Brown, post world banking crash, continuing to fund large public projects, to try to, and achieve, a soft economic landing. The Tories got in and promptly put us into recession.

Do not forget, all those Sunak supporters, our ex chancellor was not only a green card holder whilst an MP, he also made his fortune by contriving, with his mates, to wreck the world's economy by betting against Banks ability to survive a liquidity issue. He is, and always has been, part of the problem.
 
Wizaard said:
Won't happen? It's already happened. He's brought it in as Chancellor. This is why places like Redditch and Maidstone were the first to get levelling up money.
Click to expand...
Liz Truss has been no more responsible for Tory levelling up policy than Keir Starmer, but you carry on blaming her.
You describe Tories as "Self interested twats to a man or woman". Sounds like you have some serious issues you need to deal with.
 
tommytwojags said:
Liz Truss has been no more responsible for Tory levelling up policy than Keir Starmer, but you carry on blaming her.
You describe Tories as "Self interested twats to a man or woman". Sounds like you have some serious issues you need to deal with.
Click to expand...
You're clearly not familiar with the concept of Cabinet responsibility. She was and is part of the Cabinet that have approved these deals.
 
Another class debate full of insightful problem solving issues 😂😂 like it or lump it one of them will be PM , get over it and stop moaning. You will get your day in the sun to post your X in the box soon enough.
 
Scaramanga said:
Another class debate full of insightful problem solving issues 😂😂 like it or lump it one of them will be PM , get over it and stop moaning. You will get your day in the sun to post your X in the box soon enough.
Click to expand...
Go on then. Explain to me how the current Foreign Secretary and recent Chancellor bear absolutely no responsibility for any Governmrnt decision made since 2019?
 
Tangerinemoss said:
Good example was Gordon Brown, post world banking crash, continuing to fund large public projects, to try to, and achieve, a soft economic landing. The Tories got in and promptly put us into recession.

Do not forget, all those Sunak supporters, our ex chancellor was not only a green card holder whilst an MP, he also made his fortune by contriving, with his mates, to wreck the world's economy by betting against Banks ability to survive a liquidity issue. He is, and always has been, part of the problem.
Click to expand...
i wouldn't necesarily agree that Brown put a great deal of money into productive uses, he predominently injected massive amounts of capital (post banking crash) into the banks who then used it to prop up assets and their own bonuses. Its also notable that Brown was a grand proponent of off balance sheet accounting for an awful lot if not all major government projects whilst he was in office, and those debts will be a liability and a cost until i think its around 2030 ish, at which point something has to be done about them.
 
Wizaard said:
Go on then. Explain to me how the current Foreign Secretary and recent Chancellor bear absolutely no responsibility for any Governmrnt decision made since 2019?
Click to expand...
Well first you have to show me where I said they didn’t 😂
 
Wizaard said:
This is what you get from Tories. Self interested twats to a man or woman
Click to expand...
Parliamentary Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone launched an inquiry into Keir Starmer's activities following accusations of non-declaration of earnings, gifts, benefits or hospitality. After finding evidence of non-declaration Ms Stone extended her search to 12 months and found the Leader of the Opposition failed to register eight interests, five more than the ones alleged in the original complaint. She found Sir Keir had breached paragraph 14 of the House of Commons' Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament.

No self-interest there then. I'd say one failure to declare could be described as careless but eight must surely be intentional.
 
Last edited:
I can’t for the life of me understand why this has to go on until September, ballot papers have been sent, 10 days should be more than sufficient and a day to count, if that. We know what each candidate stands for now so just get on with it
 
tommytwojags said:
Parliamentary Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone launched an inquiry into Keir Starmer's activities following accusations of non-declaration of earnings, gifts, benefits or hospitality. After finding evidence of non-declaration Ms Stone extended her search to 12 months and found the Leader of the Opposition failed to register eight interests, five more than the ones alleged in the original complaint. She found Sir Keir had breached paragraph 14 of the House of Commons' Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament. No self-interest there then. I'd say one failure to declare could be described as careless but eight must surely be intentional.
Click to expand...
kier starmer is not an individual to be trusted, he has proven through his whole career that he is complicit in all kinds of immoral and dubious behaviour of government and state entities. At heart he is functionary doing whatever his masters tell him. If he got into power he would be about as effective as any of the undesirables that the Tories put up. Hes another one whose flip flopping is driven by media profile and Like Liz Truss has i think little comprehension of why he takes certain "policy" routes. The thing that really bothers me about starmer is as a human rights "activist" (in his own past words) just how much he has abandoned clear breaches of human rights that he had very many opportunities and the position and authority to resolve. I think he is an individual without much in the way of concience and is more than happy to lie in a very calculating way openly.
 
Costero Poderoso said:
kier starmer is not an individual to be trusted, he has proven through his whole career that he is complicit in all kinds of immoral and dubious behaviour of government and state entities. At heart he is functionary doing whatever his masters tell him. If he got into power he would be about as effective as any of the undesirables that the Tories put up. Hes another one whose flip flopping is driven by media profile and Like Liz Truss has i think little comprehension of why he takes certain "policy" routes. The thing that really bothers me about starmer is as a human rights "activist" (in his own past words) just how much he has abandoned clear breaches of human rights that he had very many opportunities and the position and authority to resolve. I think he is an individual without much in the way of concience and is more than happy to lie in a very calculating way openly.
Click to expand...
Spot on. Or more succinctly, he's a Grade A **.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top