A Question for Tory Supporters

BobQ

martinbuckley wrote: »

I'm very envious of those of you who live in marginal seats where your vote really will count. I'm in a gammon-eating, Brexit-loving constituency where the previous Tory MP had a >20,000 majority.

Know what you mean but the problem with a marginal is knowing which way to vote will yield the desired result.

Arklight

Breaking news:

Nine Russian business people who gave money to the Conservative Party are named in a secret intelligence report on the threats posed to UK democracy which was suppressed last week by Downing Street.

Oligarchs and other wealthy Tory donors were included in the report on illicit Russian activities in Britain by the cross-party intelligence and security select committee (ISC), whose publication was blocked by No 10.

Some Russian donors are personally close to the prime minister. Alexander Temerko, who has worked for the Kremlin’s defence ministry and has spoken warmly about his “friend” Boris Johnson, has gifted more than £1.2m to the Conservatives over the past seven years.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-tory-donors-named-in-secret-report-z98nqpkx0

More sleaze, more corruption. Just another day for the Tories. The party for sale to anyone with enough money, foreign or domestic.

BobQ

zarf2007 wrote: »

Loving the planned labour £1.2tn splurge (though the real figure will likely to be far higher)....I think they have a winning formula here, get elected, splash cash around so that it looks like your making big improvements to people’s lives, bankrupt the country and then when your kicked out of power and the tories are back in and have to implement austerity again, sit on the sidelines moaning about how mean and nasty they are.

More interesting were the explanations by the Chancellor and another Minister on how the figure of £1.2tr was derived. (Add up every vague suggestion made by a Labour spokesman over the past 3 years and claim it will be in their manifesto). When asked how much the Tories would spend the spokesmen has not got a clue.

People should remember that in 2017 the Tories failed to cost their own plans and publish the result. Labour at least did that.

How come the Tories know more about the cost of Labour plans than they do about their own?

The Tories wont even tell us the cost of following the PMs Brexit Plan.

zarf2007

BobQ wrote: »

More interesting were the explanations by the Chancellor and another Minister on how the figure of £1.2tr was derived. (Add up every vague suggestion made by a Labour spokesman over the past 3 years and claim it will be in their manifesto). When asked how much the Tories would spend the spokesmen has not got a clue.

People should remember that in 2017 the Tories failed to cost their own plans and publish the result. Labour at least did that.

How come the Tories know more about the cost of Labour plans than they do about their own?

The Tories wont even tell us the cost of following the PMs Brexit Plan.

Please, no one even challenged labours so called costings back then, if they had they would realise what a farce they were, but the press will not ask any serious questions. Watch the same happen again when labour publish their new one. And I can’t wait for the nationalisation of the electricity industry again, let’s enjoy the endless power cuts and crap service we hark back to all those years ago.

Arklight

BobQ wrote: »

More interesting were the explanations by the Chancellor and another Minister on how the figure of £1.2tr was derived. (Add up every vague suggestion made by a Labour spokesman over the past 3 years and claim it will be in their manifesto). When asked how much the Tories would spend the spokesmen has not got a clue.

People should remember that in 2017 the Tories failed to cost their own plans and publish the result. Labour at least did that.

How come the Tories know more about the cost of Labour plans than they do about their own?

The Tories wont even tell us the cost of following the PMs Brexit Plan.

”https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-live-general-election-brexit-remembrance-day-labour-corbyn-bow-a9197021.html

Business minister Kwasi Kwarteng refused to say how much Boris Johnson’s election pledges would cost – despite attacking Labour’s “reckless” spending plans.

The Conservative MP dodged the question during a TV interview after repeating his party’s claim that Jeremy Corbyn’s plans amounted to £1.2 trillion over five years.

In what was quickly described as a “car crash interview”, Mr Kwarteng told Sky News’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday: “I’m not going to bandy around figures.” Ms Ridge replied: “But that’s what you’ve been doing for Labour.

It's bad enough to now know your own figures. But to not be able to predict you might need them in an interview where you specifically intend to talk about the other side's spending is rather remiss.

But wait., this was hours ago, and they apparently - still - can't cost their own manifesto.

lisyloo

martinbuckley wrote: »

I'm very envious of those of you who live in marginal seats where your vote really will count. I'm in a gammon-eating, Brexit-loving constituency where the previous Tory MP had a >20,000 majority.

I don’t think it’s a simple as looking at the numbers and I’d encourage you not to loose heart.

I live in a tory seat with a 15k majority however it was Lib dem before.
I’m a moderate tory remainer who won’t be voting tory.
I think there could be a swing in my seat despite the large majority because I think there’s a lot of moderates (the sort the tories are losing).

Arklight

[Sunday Time journalist, Charlotte] Edwardes accused Johnson of groping her leg during an event at the offices of The Spectator, a British magazine the future Prime Minister edited between 1999 and 2005. Johnson has denied the claims. The allegations were made by Edwardes, 45, in a Sunday Times article on Sept. 29.

She wrote: “I’m seated on Johnson’s right; on his left is a young woman I know. More wine is poured; more wine is drunk. Under the table I feel Johnson’s hand on my thigh. He gives it a squeeze. His hand is high up my leg and he has enough inner flesh beneath his fingers to make me sit suddenly upright.”

After confiding in the young woman on Johnson’s left, the guest tells her “Oh god, he did exactly the same to me,” Edwardes claimed.

Responding to the allegations on the first day of the Conservative Party conference, Johnson’s spokesperson said: “This allegation is untrue.” Edwardes responded in a Tweet: “If the prime minister doesn’t recollect the incident then clearly I have a better memory than he does.”

At least one of Johnsons’s own cabinet colleagues believes the allegations have some substance. Health Secretary Matt Hancock came to Edwardes’ support, saying she was “trustworthy.” Amber Rudd, the former Work and Pensions Secretary, said she agreed with Hancock.

https://time.com/5689788/boris-johnson-charlotte-edwardes-jennifer-arcuri/

Perhaps if Johnson didn't have such a fine pedigree of lying, repeatedly, to everyone including the Queen. He'd be more likely to be believed when he claims he isn't a predatory sleaze. Acts that even inspired the not noticeably pro Left, Piers Morgan to claim he had acted with "treason."

The lying reveals a profound disdain for the traditions, institutions and laws that sustain Britain’s parliamentary ecosystem. Whitehall officials say rules of proper behaviour are simply torn up. “We can do as we please,” runs the refrain in Downing Street.

Mr Johnson’s public refusal to say he will uphold the law in all circumstances underpins this contempt. If the government can cheat, it will; Mr Gove’s preference for “listening to the people” over reasoned argument speaks to the same tilt towards demagogy. Strip democracy of trust, self-restraint and shared truths and what remains is a majoritarianism of the mob.

https://www.ft.com/content/645d8786-d9f2-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

Boris Johnson’s flirtation with dishonesty has cost him at least three jobs and damaged his standing with the people of Liverpool and London.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-lies-conservative-leader-candidate-list-times-banana-brexit-bus-a8929076.html

'So Boris Johnson made the Queen an unwitting accomplice to a crime! Even by Brexit standards, this is unprecedented and astonishing.

'Boris has told a lot of lies in his life, but lying to the Queen may prove a lie too far. In the old days, he'd have been taken straight to the Tower.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7498739/Piers-Morgan-says-Boris-Johnson-committed-treason-proroguing.html

Cakeguts

Arklight wrote: »

To what? Do you know anything about the Tory candidate? Their voting history? Their ideals? Their name?

To be honest I don't care. All I want is an MP who might do a bit more for his voters and who might actually live in the area. Ours at the moment promised that he would move to live in the area when he was voted in and then moved from where he was currently living to somewhere about 20 miles away. Someone else told me that his excuse for this was that his children might get bullied in a local school. That tells you everything about what he has a Labour politician for this area thinks about our local schools.



Not only does he not live locally he hasn't sent his children to a local school and he doesn't do anything for his constituents. Anyone else has the chance of being better than that. They really can't be worse.



I see in other areas that their local MPs open school fetes or visit hospices or help out at local charity events. As I said. Ours does nothing. We are all paying him to do nothing. You can forget what he looks like because you never see him.

phillw

Cakeguts wrote: »

I see in other areas that their local MPs open school fetes or visit hospices or help out at local charity events.

I would never vote for someone who wasted their time doing such manipulative things.

Herzlos

Cakeguts wrote: »

To be honest I don't care.

And that's why politics are so badly screwed at the moment.

All I want is an MP who might do a bit more for his voters and who might actually live in the area.

Then presumably you need to care enough to pick a candidate who lives locally? But how do you know if they'll do any better for the area? You could be electing someone worse locally, from a worse party nationally, purely because you don't like that the incumbent doesn't live locally.


Personally, I'd be all for there being a requirement for the candidates to have lived in the area for an election cycle before standing there - it avoids issues like that as well as the idea of parachuting politicians into safe seats.