One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Rubbish. There was a conspiracy between both parties not to say how they intended to deal with our fiscal problems. Hunt's plans implied huge cuts in spending, but he was careful not to acknowledge that. Or say where those cuts might fall.
Starmer was every bit as silent.
No, not rubbish. There was a clear plan.
There might have been 8-9 billion of rounding to balance out, with slightly lower growth, as there is every year, and that would have been dealt with through a firm spending review.
Hunt and Sunak were focused on taxes for growth and attracting AI and tech companies. Their issue was not grasping the nettle on too many pensioner benefits so they could invest more in infrastructure.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
We're not far from the party receiving most votes receiving less than 30% of the vote. There's no telling what seats that would end up with, because it all depends on how the votes are distributed.
A party that came third in vote share could win the most seats. It would be pandemonium.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
For example not updating the spending review. The salted the eath and laid heffalump traps rather than sort out the finances.
Reeves needs to stop whinging about it though. No one likes a moaner. She needs to pull out a few rabbits from the hat too. There is a bit of theatre to a budget or it turns into a pasty tax fiasco. Giving WFP to those on UC for example.
Dishonest of her to moan about it. She knew just as well as Hunt that the figures didn't add up. Even if the detail hadn't been revealed.
Exactly. Both major parties were lying about the nations finances as many of us on PB pointed out during the campaign.
Yes, and I think she and Starmer are bad actors. They’re really hamming up the shock and incredulity. It’s actually rather cringe.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
That plan was like my "have a hot date with Margot Robbie by 2028/9" plan.
Whatever one thinks of the ambition in either case, there wasn't the remotest hint of a series of steps that might turn that ambition onto reality.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I'm hardly a natural Reform voter, but I do believe that the Conservative Party needs to crush Reform and establish itself as the only mainstream party on the Right.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Ha! Karma for Tugendhat! Will not be sorry to see him drop out at all after the absolute shitshow of opportunism and principle ditching he’s delivered over the last ten years.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
And which western government has suggested reforming the ECHR? Anyone who talks about it gets shouted down as "evil" or "fascist". The document is 65 years old, it was written in a different era of travel, it needs to be modernised and the four major European nations need to come to an agreement and force through changes to make it easier to deport illegal immigrants and foreign criminals. Without it parties like AfD, Reform, NR, Vox, FdI will continue to make big gains across the continent and then the ECHR will just get thrown out.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
Really?
Is there no behaviour by the party calling itself Conservative which would cause you to think "abstention isn't enough, I have to actively vote for the other lot?" I mean, I can understand disagreement about where the line is, and whether that line was crossed, but there is a line, surely?
jenrick is shit for this reason: he talks a big game on immigration but it just feels phoney. if feels forced. he comes across the same old Cameron types who pretend to be against mass immigration but secretly loves it and won't do much about it.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
There is too a considerable multiplier and leveling up effect as much public sector work is people on modest incomes in poorer regions. We can't all worth in tech finance in the SE.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
We'll vote for whom we fucking well please. That's democracy.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
I agree that we need more concrete plans to reach carbon net zero. That's why I voted LD after toying with Greens. I didn't vote for this government.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
That plan was like my "have a hot date with Margot Robbie by 2028/9" plan.
Whatever one thinks of the ambition in either case, there wasn't the remotest hint of a series of steps that might turn that ambition onto reality.
A plan, in other words.
Absolute nonsense.
There was a serious plan to have our debt falling by 2028-29 with market credibility and it was well on its way to being met.
I have being saying it for a couple of years so I am not going to change my mind now. I think Cleverly would be the Tories' best pick. He seems to be the one who is most recognisably a relatively normal human being. He is also decent on TV.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
Really?
Is there no behaviour by the party calling itself Conservative which would cause you to think "abstention isn't enough, I have to actively vote for the other lot?" I mean, I can understand disagreement about where the line is, and whether that line was crossed, but there is a line, surely?
No. And if I ever did so (which I wouldn’t) I'd lose all rights to call myself a lifelong Tory.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
He’s not any of the others, and he’s probably the one who is the least high profile with the public. Gives him a bit more of a fresh slate angle (don’t get me wrong, he has baggage, but they all do).
That's OK but as J D Vance has proved sometimes the more a public sees of a politician the less they like of them.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
I agree that we need more concrete plans to reach carbon net zero. That's why I voted LD after toying with Greens. I didn't vote for this government.
But you don't think it's fatuous to have the target in the absence of a Lib Dem government?
Would you welcome concrete plans to achieve net zero immigration?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
50% cuts across the board in the NHS to anyone who doesn't have a patient facing role. A 50% cut in the civil service in all departments, see what breaks if anything and then move from there.
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I'm hardly a natural Reform voter, but I do believe that the Conservative Party needs to crush Reform and establish itself as the only mainstream party on the Right.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Should the Labour Party crush the Lib Dems and establish itself as the only mainstream party of the left?
Rep. Mike Collins, who represents the district where the school shooting happened today in GA, was asked in 2022 if he favored ANY gun laws including red flag laws. The answer is no, he said God is the answer. https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1831373648810434991
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
I agree that we need more concrete plans to reach carbon net zero. That's why I voted LD after toying with Greens. I didn't vote for this government.
But you don't think it's fatuous to have the target in the absence of a Lib Dem government?
Would you welcome concrete plans to achieve net zero immigration?
No, because I don't think that a good policy. There should be a reasonable level of immigration, and that level will vary depending on the economics and skills shortages in the economy. Some years it might even be net emigration, but rarely due to our ageing population and below replacement fertility rate.
The working age population has been broadly stable over recent years, the growth in population has been the elderly retired. Without inward migration our dependency ratio would be untenable for the economy.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I'm hardly a natural Reform voter, but I do believe that the Conservative Party needs to crush Reform and establish itself as the only mainstream party on the Right.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Should the Labour Party crush the Lib Dems and establish itself as the only mainstream party of the left?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Both CR and MPB are enjoying a moment of vindication for supporting the world championship election loser. It's very obliging of Starmer to be so God-awful to allow them to wax lyrical about the halcyon days of Sunak and Hunt.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
The fiscal rule was to balance the budget in five years. Five years in the future never comes. It's always five years away. That's what they did in the most recent Tory budget.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
That plan was like my "have a hot date with Margot Robbie by 2028/9" plan.
Whatever one thinks of the ambition in either case, there wasn't the remotest hint of a series of steps that might turn that ambition onto reality.
A plan, in other words.
Absolute nonsense.
There was a serious plan to have our debt falling by 2028-29 with market credibility and it was well on its way to being met.
Two things here.
1. The plan always had in it the hole created by the fiction of the fuel duty escalator being reinstated 2. The 5th year fiscal rule is arguably the single biggest obstacle to government investment in long term infrastructure. It means you can spaff billions now big make up for it by cancelling investment in year 5. One of the reasons HS2 got the chop.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
And which western government has suggested reforming the ECHR? Anyone who talks about it gets shouted down as "evil" or "fascist". The document is 65 years old, it was written in a different era of travel, it needs to be modernised and the four major European nations need to come to an agreement and force through changes to make it easier to deport illegal immigrants and foreign criminals. Without it parties like AfD, Reform, NR, Vox, FdI will continue to make big gains across the continent and then the ECHR will just get thrown out.
Which western government has suggested reforming the ECHR? Well, the UK one, for starters.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
Yup, unless you voted Tory in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't a true Tory.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Far too early for that. Corbynistas were insulting Lib Dems as yellow Tories all the way up to 2019.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
That!s a bit unfair.
The Tories did a lot to try and bribe pensioners.
*Looks around in a northerly direction for the incoming ballistic turnip*
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
Well, it’s a good thing then that I gave you a bunch of other examples!
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
The fiscal rule was to balance the budget in five years. Five years in the future never comes. It's always five years away. That's what they did in the most recent Tory budget.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
We had a £90billion budget deficit but the Tories gave away pre election tax cuts funded with imaginary efficiency savings and undefined spending cuts.
It's why they lost their reputation for economic competence. For all her many faults Maggie wouldn't have stood for that.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Both CR and MPB are enjoying a moment of vindication for supporting the world championship election loser. It's very obliging of Starmer to be so God-awful to allow them to wax lyrical about the halcyon days of Sunak and Hunt.
Says the supporter of lettuce Liz. She destroyed our party in the first place. If Rishi had won with the idiot members rather than Liz the Tories would have 100 more seats than now and the path back to power would be much easier.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I'm hardly a natural Reform voter, but I do believe that the Conservative Party needs to crush Reform and establish itself as the only mainstream party on the Right.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Should the Labour Party crush the Lib Dems and establish itself as the only mainstream party of the left?
Indeed if the Tories just focused on seats they were first and second in 2024 and squeezed Reform there and Reform just focused on seats they were first and second and squeezed the Tories there we could get a hung parliament next time.
After all Labour gave the LDs a largely free run in their target seats in July as the LDs largely did for Labour in their targets and it worked out well for both in terms of seat gains from the Tories
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
In the original definition of being aligned with the US and the European NATO members in foreign policy it is very much the West, as are Korea and Australia.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
That's absurd tribalism, not democracy.
Not in the slightest. It's called loyalty to one's own party.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
Well, it’s a good thing then that I gave you a bunch of other examples!
If it's such a mainstream position across the West, why was Reform's advocacy of net zero immigration here treated as extreme? Are we out of step with our peers?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Both CR and MPB are enjoying a moment of vindication for supporting the world championship election loser. It's very obliging of Starmer to be so God-awful to allow them to wax lyrical about the halcyon days of Sunak and Hunt.
Says the supporter of lettuce Liz. She destroyed our party in the first place. If Rishi had won with the idiot members rather than Liz the Tories would have 100 more seats than now and the path back to power would be much easier.
His ongoing defence and veneration of Liz Truss is truly weird.
Ha! Karma for Tugendhat! Will not be sorry to see him drop out at all after the absolute shitshow of opportunism and principle ditching he’s delivered over the last ten years.
Hardly surprising if there’s a dearth of trust.
If a few Stride votes go to Tugendhat next time he stays in (even if he and Stride get no Priti voters he knocks out Stride).
If Priti's votes go en masse to Jenrick (as Badenoch and Cleverly clearly lent some votes to Stride to knock her out) and then Stride's votes go en masse to Tugendhat you could end up with a final 2 of Jenrick v Tugendhat still
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
In the original definition of being aligned with the US and the European NATO members in foreign policy it is very much the West, as are Korea and Australia.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I'm hardly a natural Reform voter, but I do believe that the Conservative Party needs to crush Reform and establish itself as the only mainstream party on the Right.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Should the Labour Party crush the Lib Dems and establish itself as the only mainstream party of the left?
He's half right - the Tories can't win without getting a significant chunk of Reform voters back - however the route to doing that is having a real plan to aggressively reduce immigration, and showing they really mean it, rather than some fantasy Reform beating 'move to the centre'.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
50% cuts across the board in the NHS to anyone who doesn't have a patient facing role. A 50% cut in the civil service in all departments, see what breaks if anything and then move from there.
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
A 50% cut across the civil service would mean around 260,000 dismissals - presuming that would do wonders for processing asylum claims, sorting out planning appeals etc.
I can't speak to the use of agency staff in terms of numbers but as for consultants, they are often used in local Government to provide a specialism or fill a short term gap in a particular area. A Council isn't going to make a full time role of what a Consultant provides - often, Members want Consultants because they can't or won't believe what Officers tell them and want an "independent" view. If you can spare £1,500 a day you can get a lot of independent view.
To be fair, with most Councils short of money, the days of easy money for Consultants are probably over. As for Chat bots, already being used by Councils to resolve simple transactions.
Most of what you propose is impractical and would cause huge disruption but fine if you can persuade the Conservative Party it's "the answer" - it hasn't been up to now.
I'm not saying there's no fat to cut in parts of the "public sector" but there isn't a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Both CR and MPB are enjoying a moment of vindication for supporting the world championship election loser. It's very obliging of Starmer to be so God-awful to allow them to wax lyrical about the halcyon days of Sunak and Hunt.
Says the supporter of lettuce Liz. She destroyed our party in the first place. If Rishi had won with the idiot members rather than Liz the Tories would have 100 more seats than now and the path back to power would be much easier.
His ongoing defence and veneration of Liz Truss is truly weird.
He must be the only one in the whole country.
What I don't understand about it is that she really wasn't very good. It's not like she was some misunderstood soul that will be appreciated in the future as a visionary. She was just crap, inarticulate, gave her boyfriend the second most important job in the country and then proceeded to just wreck the country's reputation for fiscal responsibility that had been hard won by the Tories over the 12 years prior to her after Labour trashed it in 2007-2009.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
The fiscal rule was to balance the budget in five years. Five years in the future never comes. It's always five years away. That's what they did in the most recent Tory budget.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
No I'm not. The budget would have ensured debt was falling as a %GDP by 2028-29.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
Well, it’s a good thing then that I gave you a bunch of other examples!
If it's such a mainstream position across the West, why was Reform's advocacy of net zero immigration here treated as extreme? Are we out of step with our peers?
The policy was criticised for being stupid. Stupid politicians have been elected in other countries.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
We'll vote for whom we fucking well please. That's democracy.
There we go, a bit of spunk.
Sure, but you don't say you're a lifelong Tory. So many of you are missing the fucking point but at least you didn't post the seat count again for the 4,679th time and said something at least vaguely different.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Any government with a policy of that, but no underpinning of actual concrete plans to achieve it is just being fatuous.
Would you say the same about net zero carbon emissions?
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
I agree that we need more concrete plans to reach carbon net zero. That's why I voted LD after toying with Greens. I didn't vote for this government.
But you don't think it's fatuous to have the target in the absence of a Lib Dem government?
Would you welcome concrete plans to achieve net zero immigration?
No, because I don't think that a good policy. There should be a reasonable level of immigration, and that level will vary depending on the economics and skills shortages in the economy. Some years it might even be net emigration, but rarely due to our ageing population and below replacement fertility rate.
The working age population has been broadly stable over recent years, the growth in population has been the elderly retired. Without inward migration our dependency ratio would be untenable for the economy.
I think that last sentence should be:
Without inward migration our dependency ratio would be untenable for the continued featherbedding of the over 60s.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Is this the beginning of the Tory charm offensive to win back lost voters?
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
Both CR and MPB are enjoying a moment of vindication for supporting the world championship election loser. It's very obliging of Starmer to be so God-awful to allow them to wax lyrical about the halcyon days of Sunak and Hunt.
Says the supporter of lettuce Liz. She destroyed our party in the first place. If Rishi had won with the idiot members rather than Liz the Tories would have 100 more seats than now and the path back to power would be much easier.
His ongoing defence and veneration of Liz Truss is truly weird.
He must be the only one in the whole country.
What I don't understand about it is that she really wasn't very good. It's not like she was some misunderstood soul that will be appreciated in the future as a visionary. She was just crap, inarticulate, gave her boyfriend the second most important job in the country and then proceeded to just wreck the country's reputation for fiscal responsibility that had been hard won by the Tories over the 12 years prior to her after Labour trashed it in 2007-2009.
He thinks she represents the purest form of Thatcher's spirit and she was only blocked by the blob.
Ha! Karma for Tugendhat! Will not be sorry to see him drop out at all after the absolute shitshow of opportunism and principle ditching he’s delivered over the last ten years.
Hardly surprising if there’s a dearth of trust.
If a few Stride votes go to Tugendhat next time he stays in (even if he and Stride get no Priti voters he knocks out Stride).
If Priti's votes go en masse to Jenrick (as Badenoch and Cleverly clearly lent some votes to Stride to knock her out) and then Stride's votes go en masse to Tugendhat you could end up with a final 2 of Jenrick v Tugendhat still
This is a really good point. A lot of people are assuming this vote represents the actual level of support for each candidate. That's hugely naive, particularly with 120 MPs.
This is the political equivalent of cycling's elimination race - the key is not to cross the line first, but to ensure your rival crosses it last.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
Well, it’s a good thing then that I gave you a bunch of other examples!
If it's such a mainstream position across the West, why was Reform's advocacy of net zero immigration here treated as extreme? Are we out of step with our peers?
The policy was criticised for being stupid. Stupid politicians have been elected in other countries.
What's stupid about long-term net zero immigration? Should we not aim for stability?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
Yup, unless you voted Tory in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't a true Tory.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
We'll vote for whom we fucking well please. That's democracy.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
Yup, unless you voted Tory in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't a true Tory.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
But who proudly claims loyalty to a party, aside from a few at the extremes? I didn't vote Tory in 2024. I don't mind you calling me not a true Tory. Because I'm not. I happened to vote Tory 2001-2019, but not out of any sort of loyalty - it was because for varying reasons I favoured either the Con candidate or a Con government over the realistic alternative. You can't shame people into voting Tory.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
Every party fucked up.
Reform fucked up by getting a fifth more votes than the LibDems, but ending up with the same number of seats as the DUP.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
That's absurd tribalism, not democracy.
Not in the slightest. It's called loyalty to one's own party.
You don't get to call yourself one if you're not.
That's just axiomatic.
I dont't agree. The people that have wrestled the Party of that name into their control aren't, and my idea of "true Tories" should be trying to get shot of them and rebuild the party. The best way I can see to start that is total destruction at the ballot box.
Likewise, I think "true Republicans" should be doing their best to ensure that Karmala gives Trump a total shellacking and that nothing is done to help Trump-backed candidates in the Senate/House.
Unless Toryism is such thin gruel that it is purely a brand and not an approach to politics.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
We'll vote for whom we fucking well please. That's democracy.
There we go, a bit of spunk.
Sure, but you don't say you're a lifelong Tory. So many of you are missing the fucking point but at least you didn't post the seat count again for the 4,679th time and said something at least vaguely different.
I'm surprised you have the energy to peel apart your semen-encrusted sheets in the morning
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
Every party fucked up.
Reform fucked up by getting a fifth more votes than the LibDems, but ending up with the same number of seats as the DUP.
Reform - 4,117,221 votes, 5 seats. That's more than 800,000 votes per seat. DUP - 172,0589 votes, 5 seats. That's less than 35,000 votes per seat.
Edit to add:
Labour, mind you, got 411 seats off 9,704,655 votes, for a scarcely believable 23,612 votes per seat.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
50% cuts across the board in the NHS to anyone who doesn't have a patient facing role. A 50% cut in the civil service in all departments, see what breaks if anything and then move from there.
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
A 50% cut across the civil service would mean around 260,000 dismissals - presuming that would do wonders for processing asylum claims, sorting out planning appeals etc.
I can't speak to the use of agency staff in terms of numbers but as for consultants, they are often used in local Government to provide a specialism or fill a short term gap in a particular area. A Council isn't going to make a full time role of what a Consultant provides - often, Members want Consultants because they can't or won't believe what Officers tell them and want an "independent" view. If you can spare £1,500 a day you can get a lot of independent view.
To be fair, with most Councils short of money, the days of easy money for Consultants are probably over. As for Chat bots, already being used by Councils to resolve simple transactions.
Most of what you propose is impractical and would cause huge disruption but fine if you can persuade the Conservative Party it's "the answer" - it hasn't been up to now.
I'm not saying there's no fat to cut in parts of the "public sector" but there isn't a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.
I regularly work with teams of council direct labour kerbside refuse collectors. When new journeymen Directors of Frontline Services are recruited, their remit is to cut costs without reducing service provision. So in they come realising their only costs to cut are the Labour force. Say they start with 100 collectors and their cost cutting target is a 30% reduction so 30 are laid off. The new Service Director polishes his halo and probably gets a promotion elsewhere. He has after all cut costs by 30%. However, the service provision is sub-standard and the complaints are up 500%. So in order to equalise the service 10 agency staff are employed, still the complaints come in, so another 10 are recruited, and then another 10. So we are back up to 100 heads but the costs for those 30 agency heads are 40% higher per head than the DLO 70. So the 30 are given permanent contracts. We have a 100 headcount just as we started. Then the Chief Executive recruits another Section Director and the cycle starts again.
PB armchair economists know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
The fiscal rule was to balance the budget in five years. Five years in the future never comes. It's always five years away. That's what they did in the most recent Tory budget.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
No I'm not. The budget would have ensured debt was falling as a %GDP by 2028-29.
Just as was promised.
Do you really believe that fuel duty would have been increased as the budget set out? Are you that naive?
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She was sacked by Teresa May for dishonestly. We all make mistakes but few have that sort of effrontery.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
Every party fucked up.
Reform fucked up by getting a fifth more votes than the LibDems, but ending up with the same number of seats as the DUP.
Hard to see what they could have done to distribute their vote better. Your voters are where they are - hard to move them around. I think they probably exceeded their expectations.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
Yup, unless you voted Tory in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't a true Tory.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
But who proudly claims loyalty to a party, aside from a few at the extremes? I didn't vote Tory in 2024. I don't mind you calling me not a true Tory. Because I'm not. I happened to vote Tory 2001-2019, but not out of any sort of loyalty - it was because for varying reasons I favoured either the Con candidate or a Con government over the realistic alternative. You can't shame people into voting Tory.
Especially when those doing the "shaming" themselves have no shame. AND no fucking clue.
Those two statements are not contradictory, so long as the labour force participation rate has risen.
The labour force participation rate was 78% in 1990 and 78% now.
I don't think total UK labour force participation rate has ever been 78%! Now, male UK labour force participation might have been that, but I'd be staggered if combined male, female was much higher than 72-74%, and it has been rising over time as more and more women have entered the workforce.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
50% cuts across the board in the NHS to anyone who doesn't have a patient facing role. A 50% cut in the civil service in all departments, see what breaks if anything and then move from there.
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
A 50% cut across the civil service would mean around 260,000 dismissals - presuming that would do wonders for processing asylum claims, sorting out planning appeals etc.
I can't speak to the use of agency staff in terms of numbers but as for consultants, they are often used in local Government to provide a specialism or fill a short term gap in a particular area. A Council isn't going to make a full time role of what a Consultant provides - often, Members want Consultants because they can't or won't believe what Officers tell them and want an "independent" view. If you can spare £1,500 a day you can get a lot of independent view.
To be fair, with most Councils short of money, the days of easy money for Consultants are probably over. As for Chat bots, already being used by Councils to resolve simple transactions.
Most of what you propose is impractical and would cause huge disruption but fine if you can persuade the Conservative Party it's "the answer" - it hasn't been up to now.
I'm not saying there's no fat to cut in parts of the "public sector" but there isn't a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.
I regularly work with teams of council direct labour kerbside refuse collectors. When new journeymen Directors of Frontline Services are recruited, their remit is to cut costs without reducing service provision. So in they come realising their only costs to cut are the Labour force. Say they start with 100 collectors and their cost cutting target is a 30% reduction so 30 are laid off. The new Service Director polishes his halo and probably gets a promotion elsewhere. He has after all cut costs by 30%. However, the service provision is sub-standard and the complaints are up 500%. So in order to equalise the service 10 agency staff are employed, still the complaints come in, so another 10 are recruited, and then another 10. So we are back up to 100 heads but the costs for those 30 agency heads are 40% higher per head than the DLO 70. So the 30 are given permanent contracts. We have a 100 headcount just as we started. Then the Chief Executive recruits another Section Director and the cycle starts again.
PB armchair economists know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Exactly the same stupid approach applied in the retail bank I used to work for.
Directors were forever lauding their own success in 'streamlining', 'de-layering', and 'productivity improvements' but the total number of staff, employees + contract, only ever seemed to go up even though the business was not growing.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
PM forced to resign, successor forced to resign, successor goes to the country. That's how it worked with Boris's stonking majority.
Yes; it's very fragile. 33.7% of the vote, and fewer actual votes than Corbyn in both 2017 and 2019 is precarious. But curiously all the parties are precarious. Put together Labour's low vote numbers. the Reform splitting Tory seats, the inevitable fragility of LDs massive numbers and SNP meltdown. The policy issues are all boring us to death, but the subterranean psephology and tactics is remarkable.
And it is not only the UK. Anyone heard how our USA friends are getting on? And France. And Germany. And Italy. And Canada.
What's interesting to me is that all of the traditional parties seem to be struggling with all the same problems and none of them will work together to formulate a plan to combat illegal immigration. Even within the EU there is so much disagreement on how to handle it with Italy the only country talking sense and more widely across the world countries on the receiving end of illegal immigration need to start discussions on reform the ECHR and UN convention on refugees to take into account modern mobility of people vs when those were written.
A smart Tory leader will go down this route rather than try and go it alone like they did last time with the Rwanda policy. There needs to be a much broader agreement on what to do about illegal immigration and it needs to come from the UK, Germany, France and Italy in Europe so the ECHR can be reformed and no longer used as a shield for deportation by illegal immigrants and foreign criminals.
Established elites across Europe and the West still think it's ick to deal with illegal/mass immigration, because they'd both be shunned in their social circles and they also benefit from it economically in their personal ones.
This is risible nonsense. Some bizarre culture war/great replacement theory mash-up. Governments across Europe and the West are working to tackle illegal immigration. The commentariat spend their whole time talking about immigration. And you, Casino, as a very high earner who sends his kids to private school, you are the elite.
Which western government has a policy of net zero migration?
Casino talked of dealing with “illegal/mass immigration”. Not having mass immigration would not have to be net zero migration.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
Japan isn't Western for "most" definitions of the West. Western is not a synonym for developed.
During the 80s, a popular trope on the Left was that democracy was only really for Western European white people. Trying to “impose” it elsewhere was nasty. And culturally inappropriate.
The interesting exception of South Africa just got you called racist if you asked about it.
When you mentioned Japan, that was lumped in with Western Europe….
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
That's absurd tribalism, not democracy.
Not in the slightest. It's called loyalty to one's own party.
You don't get to call yourself one if you're not.
That's just axiomatic.
I dont't agree. The people that have wrestled the Party of that name into their control aren't, and my idea of "true Tories" should be trying to get shot of them and rebuild the party. The best way I can see to start that is total destruction at the ballot box.
Likewise, I think "true Republicans" should be doing their best to ensure that Karmala gives Trump a total shellacking and that nothing is done to help Trump-backed candidates in the Senate/House.
Unless Toryism is such thin gruel that it is purely a brand and not an approach to politics.
Or, closer to home, lifelong Labour supporters who looked at JCorbz in 2019 and thought "however ghastly Johnson is, Corbyn simply has to be stopped".
Technically, I suppose they stop being lifelong Labour supporters. But I'm not sure that technical definition is helpful. One can support the values of a party and think "this particular iteration of the party doesn't embody those values and it must be thrown down, even at the cost of letting another party win."
Funnily enough, the loyalty test is the kind of thing that the Corbynites said- "we are the true socialists, the rest of you should just (go away) and join the Tories." And making the experience of being in a party so dismal that only the fanatics are left is straight out of the hard left playbook. Finding an excuse to ignore contrary voices is an excellent tactic to get your own way.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
Yup, unless you voted Tory in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't a true Tory.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
But who proudly claims loyalty to a party, aside from a few at the extremes? I didn't vote Tory in 2024. I don't mind you calling me not a true Tory. Because I'm not. I happened to vote Tory 2001-2019, but not out of any sort of loyalty - it was because for varying reasons I favoured either the Con candidate or a Con government over the realistic alternative. You can't shame people into voting Tory.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She was sacked by Teresa May for dishonestly. We all make mistakes but few have that sort of effrontery.
If she was working for her at one time I'd be seriously impressed.
We don't see it as Western because of our Eurocentric maps.
An illiterate comment. If we were “Eurocentric” then Europe would be the centre, not the West, in the same manner as China sees itself as the centre.
Japan is a developed world capitalist democracy with relatively few natural resources.
It has some advantages as a country: a highly educated workforce, an easily defensible geographic position, and high savings rates. It has also has disadvantages, of which an inverted population pyramid is by far the most serious.
I would be surprised indeed if the normal laws of economics did not apply to Japan.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
Not really, the Tories weren't planning to massively jack up spending on pointless state largesse - and they did have a plan to get us back to black.
Did they bollocks. They put off having any realistic fiscal plan to the other side of the election, exactly as Starmer did.
Nonsense. More hysteria from you.
There was a fiscal plan to have debt dropping as a %GDP by 2028-29 when the tax thresholds would be unfrozen as well.
Always five years in the future, and always with policies that they knew they wouldn't implement, like increasing fuel duty. Deferred every budget.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
It wasn't fiction. They were on course to deliver it.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
The fiscal rule was to balance the budget in five years. Five years in the future never comes. It's always five years away. That's what they did in the most recent Tory budget.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
No I'm not. The budget would have ensured debt was falling as a %GDP by 2028-29.
Just as was promised.
Do you really believe that fuel duty would have been increased as the budget set out? Are you that naive?
No, I believe other cuts would have been made in public sector spending. But don't forget growth being on a better trajectory either.
One thing I have noticed, and this is purely based on anecdote, is many people who were previously very sure in themselves about voting to oust the Tories are now much less sure about their decision. If the next leader can harness this sentiment I think a win in 2029 isn't off the table.
People who are natural small c conservatives abandoned the party in July but even this small taste of their first Labour government since they were teenagers or in their early 20s has begun to make them see sense.
Yep, the best antidote to Labour is seeing Labour in office.
So many people I know are properly shitting it about this budget at the end of October.
Everybody knew there was going to be a reckoning - there should have been one immediately after the pandemic, a one off tax raid to try and recoup some of the millions thrown at the economy by Sunak when Chancellor (parts of which were defrauded by some).
We are still borrowing £80-£90 billion a year - the priority must be to get the public finances back somewhere near balance and that's going to need a mix of tax rises and spending cuts and that's what October will be about.
You don't like the answer but it involves cutting state employment by a substantial number and completely reworking the benefits system. There is no path to a balanced budget while 3m people sit in sickness benefits and 1/5 people are on the state payroll, the other 4 people simply don't pay enough tax to cover it all.
All a bit glib and predictable from the Conservative end of the fence - call it "austerity" or just having another pop at the "public sector".
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
50% cuts across the board in the NHS to anyone who doesn't have a patient facing role. A 50% cut in the civil service in all departments, see what breaks if anything and then move from there.
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
A 50% cut across the civil service would mean around 260,000 dismissals - presuming that would do wonders for processing asylum claims, sorting out planning appeals etc.
I can't speak to the use of agency staff in terms of numbers but as for consultants, they are often used in local Government to provide a specialism or fill a short term gap in a particular area. A Council isn't going to make a full time role of what a Consultant provides - often, Members want Consultants because they can't or won't believe what Officers tell them and want an "independent" view. If you can spare £1,500 a day you can get a lot of independent view.
To be fair, with most Councils short of money, the days of easy money for Consultants are probably over. As for Chat bots, already being used by Councils to resolve simple transactions.
Most of what you propose is impractical and would cause huge disruption but fine if you can persuade the Conservative Party it's "the answer" - it hasn't been up to now.
I'm not saying there's no fat to cut in parts of the "public sector" but there isn't a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.
I regularly work with teams of council direct labour kerbside refuse collectors. When new journeymen Directors of Frontline Services are recruited, their remit is to cut costs without reducing service provision. So in they come realising their only costs to cut are the Labour force. Say they start with 100 collectors and their cost cutting target is a 30% reduction so 30 are laid off. The new Service Director polishes his halo and probably gets a promotion elsewhere. He has after all cut costs by 30%. However, the service provision is sub-standard and the complaints are up 500%. So in order to equalise the service 10 agency staff are employed, still the complaints come in, so another 10 are recruited, and then another 10. So we are back up to 100 heads but the costs for those 30 agency heads are 40% higher per head than the DLO 70. So the 30 are given permanent contracts. We have a 100 headcount just as we started. Then the Chief Executive recruits another Section Director and the cycle starts again.
PB armchair economists know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Exactly the same stupid approach applied in the retail bank I used to work for.
Directors were forever lauding their own success in 'streamlining', 'de-layering', and 'productivity improvements' but the total number of staff, employees + contract, only ever seemed to go up even though the business was not growing.
Productivity has only ever improved by improving the process - generally through mechanisation.
So, when it comes to kerbside refuse collection - how can we make it possible for the employee to collect the more refuse for the same or *less* effort and time? Better trucks? Better bins that can be automatically emptied into the trucks?
Those two statements are not contradictory, so long as the labour force participation rate has risen.
The labour force participation rate was 78% in 1990 and 78% now.
I don't think total UK labour force participation rate has ever been 78%! Now, male UK labour force participation might have been that, but I'd be staggered if combined male, female was much higher than 72-74%, and it has been rising over time as more and more women have entered the workforce.
I’m talking about the working age population, to emphasise that it has grown, contrary to @Foxy’s post.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
The Conservatives are likely to be called upon to govern very soon. I'm not saying this as some sort of Casino Royalesque bravado; I didn't even vote for them. SKS is genuinely a bit shit. He may also have fairly significant skeletons that may or may not have an impact on his already severely waning popularity.
But Labour have a Commons majority of 9,823. How on earth are they toppled outside war/plague/civil strife?
Curious maths and vote splitting got Labour where they are on a tiny % of the vote; similar forces could turn it the other way. FWIW I think next time will possibly depend on whether the nation veers in one of two ways, both possible:
To shore up the centre left mainstream, with Labour and LD being in fact unacknowledged allies (possible because English seats split up handily mostly either Con v Lab or Con v LD and not LD v Lab).
Or to look to a some form of Toryreform party (currently of course splitting votes) under the name Conservative, offering a really different, though thought out and costed (ie not Truss) alternative.
I want neither of these, but I'm a One Nation Tory.
It's a bit early to speculate, but I think it is certain the next election will be a cracker psephologically. It might even offer real alternatives policywise too.
A One Nation Tory who voted, um, Labour.
Yes. My guess is there were about 1-2 million of us. Maybe more. I have voted Tory for nearly 50 years. The Tory vote went from 14 m (2019) to just under 7 m (2024). And we were right.
No, you weren't. You made a fucking stupid decision and enabled a socialist.
I will never let you forget it.
Thanks. Lear puts it better:
I will have such revenges on you both, That all the world shall—I will do such things,— What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth.
I don't mind floating voters deciding to vote Labour. I can understand centrists deciding differently.
But what really grates my goat is people who have the temerity to claim to be loyal lifelong Tories who, when the chips are down, actually voter Labour without a flicker.
No one owes a political party loyalty. Politicians certainly don't display any.
If you're a lifelong Tory you do. And you never ever vote for our truest enemy.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
That's absurd tribalism, not democracy.
Not in the slightest. It's called loyalty to one's own party.
You don't get to call yourself one if you're not.
That's just axiomatic.
I dont't agree. The people that have wrestled the Party of that name into their control aren't, and my idea of "true Tories" should be trying to get shot of them and rebuild the party. The best way I can see to start that is total destruction at the ballot box.
Likewise, I think "true Republicans" should be doing their best to ensure that Karmala gives Trump a total shellacking and that nothing is done to help Trump-backed candidates in the Senate/House.
Unless Toryism is such thin gruel that it is purely a brand and not an approach to politics.
Total destruction at the ballot box would mean the Conservative Party ceases to exist, so that doesn't follow.
You wash your hands of it or you can stay and fight for what you want it to be.
And I don't agree that "true Republicans" should aid and abet their enemy either. They can simply refuse to campaign or support Trump, and argue and advocate for their own policy platform.
If you vote for your opponents then you deserve what they give to you, good and hard.
Comments
There might have been 8-9 billion of rounding to balance out, with slightly lower growth, as there is every year, and that would have been dealt with through a firm spending review.
Hunt and Sunak were focused on taxes for growth and attracting AI and tech companies. Their issue was not grasping the nettle on too many pensioner benefits so they could invest more in infrastructure.
Politicians certainly don't display any.
A party that came third in vote share could win the most seats. It would be pandemonium.
If you're unhappy you stay at home, or spoil your ballot.
Whatever one thinks of the ambition in either case, there wasn't the remotest hint of a series of steps that might turn that ambition onto reality.
A plan, in other words.
That's why I liked Priti: I thought she was best placed to take on the mantle of Johnson and begin rebuilding that coalition. Conservative MPs thought differently.
Hardly surprising if there’s a dearth of trust.
It was a complete work of fiction. You're clever enough to see that.
Is there no behaviour by the party calling itself Conservative which would cause you to think "abstention isn't enough, I have to actively vote for the other lot?" I mean, I can understand disagreement about where the line is, and whether that line was crossed, but there is a line, surely?
he will never win over reform voters.
Let's have some specifics - which "state payroll" jobs are you going to lose, Police, Fire, Armed Forces, School Teachers? As an aside, everyone on the "state payroll" pays taxes as well and spends money and contributes to the economy even if they are paid from public funds.
Tories 121 seats
https://www.theccc.org.uk/2024/07/18/uk-off-track-for-net-zero-say-countrys-climate-advisors/
The Climate Change Committee's assessment is that only a third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the country's 2030 target are currently covered by credible plans
There was a serious plan to have our debt falling by 2028-29 with market credibility and it was well on its way to being met.
You fight your battles inside your own party.
If so I would recommend more charm and less offensiveness.
The reason it slipped previously- see the budget of 2018 or 2019, for example - was because of the black swan event of Covid.
Then, we had the CoL crisis and inflationary spike with interest rates that destroyed the old plan, and a need for higher defence spending.
I don't expect everyone to be happy about all that but they are good reasons why the government had a very difficult wicket.
Would you welcome concrete plans to achieve net zero immigration?
I'd also freeze public sector pay in the middle for a period of 5 years, the only way to move up the pay scale is to get promoted or leave for the private sector.
Another easy cut is banning the use of agency staff across the state, no more locums being paid 4x the rate and doctors and nurses being lured into agency work. Just kill the entire sector. I have no issue with them working in the private sector or if the private hospitals want to waste money on locums but the agency rip off merchants need to be cut asap. Another easy cut is putting a hard cap on consultancy fees and the use of external consultants.
I would also cut a deal with OpenAI to introduce AI chat bots across all departments so that phone agents are free to actually talk to people who need it.
Rep. Mike Collins, who represents the district where the school shooting happened today in GA, was asked in 2022 if he favored ANY gun laws including red flag laws. The answer is no, he said God is the answer.
https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1831373648810434991
The working age population has been broadly stable over recent years, the growth in population has been the elderly retired. Without inward migration our dependency ratio would be untenable for the economy.
Greenland is a Western country and has net emigration. Do you count Mexico as a western government? They have net emigration too. I don’t know whether either have that as a policy aim!
The obvious Western country (for most definitions of the West) with low immigration as a policy is Japan. Greece and France have immigration rates (relative to their population sizes) about a third of the UK. Portugal have recently announced a very significant tightening of their immigration rules. The French passed immigration reform late last year that was aimed at reducing numbers. I could go on.
It was never going to happen. Your constructing a make-believe version of the last Tory government that never existed.
1. The plan always had in it the hole created by the fiction of the fuel duty escalator being reinstated
2. The 5th year fiscal rule is arguably the single biggest obstacle to government investment in long term infrastructure. It means you can spaff billions now big make up for it by cancelling investment in year 5. One of the reasons HS2 got the chop.
Just as unless you voted Labour in 2019 AND 2024 you ain't true Labour.
If you fall in neither of the above categories you are a floating voter really (unless say you voted for a minor party like the LDs or SNP in both GEs)
The Tories did a lot to try and bribe pensioners.
*Looks around in a northerly direction for the incoming ballistic turnip*
It's why they lost their reputation for economic competence. For all her many faults Maggie wouldn't have stood for that.
After all Labour gave the LDs a largely free run in their target seats in July as the LDs largely did for Labour in their targets and it worked out well for both in terms of seat gains from the Tories
You don't get to call yourself one if you're not.
That's just axiomatic.
He must be the only one in the whole country.
If Priti's votes go en masse to Jenrick (as Badenoch and Cleverly clearly lent some votes to Stride to knock her out) and then Stride's votes go en masse to Tugendhat you could end up with a final 2 of Jenrick v Tugendhat still
I can't speak to the use of agency staff in terms of numbers but as for consultants, they are often used in local Government to provide a specialism or fill a short term gap in a particular area. A Council isn't going to make a full time role of what a Consultant provides - often, Members want Consultants because they can't or won't believe what Officers tell them and want an "independent" view. If you can spare £1,500 a day you can get a lot of independent view.
To be fair, with most Councils short of money, the days of easy money for Consultants are probably over. As for Chat bots, already being used by Councils to resolve simple transactions.
Most of what you propose is impractical and would cause huge disruption but fine if you can persuade the Conservative Party it's "the answer" - it hasn't been up to now.
I'm not saying there's no fat to cut in parts of the "public sector" but there isn't a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.
Just as was promised.
Sure, but you don't say you're a lifelong Tory. So many of you are missing the fucking point but at least you didn't post the seat count again for the 4,679th time and said something at least vaguely different.
Without inward migration our dependency ratio would be untenable for the continued featherbedding of the over 60s.
He possibly fancies her as well.
This is the political equivalent of cycling's elimination race - the key is not to cross the line first, but to ensure your rival crosses it last.
She wouldn't be in politics if she wasn't.
You can't shame people into voting Tory.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1119783/full-time-workers-in-the-uk/
Reform fucked up by getting a fifth more votes than the LibDems, but ending up with the same number of seats as the DUP.
Likewise, I think "true Republicans" should be doing their best to ensure that Karmala gives Trump a total shellacking and that nothing is done to help Trump-backed candidates in the Senate/House.
Unless Toryism is such thin gruel that it is purely a brand and not an approach to politics.
DUP - 172,0589 votes, 5 seats. That's less than 35,000 votes per seat.
Edit to add:
Labour, mind you, got 411 seats off 9,704,655 votes, for a scarcely believable 23,612 votes per seat.
PB armchair economists know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
If you start at Saipan for example.
We don't see it as Western because of our Eurocentric maps.
Directors were forever lauding their own success in 'streamlining', 'de-layering', and 'productivity improvements' but the total number of staff, employees + contract, only ever seemed to go up even though the business was not growing.
The interesting exception of South Africa just got you called racist if you asked about it.
When you mentioned Japan, that was lumped in with Western Europe….
Technically, I suppose they stop being lifelong Labour supporters. But I'm not sure that technical definition is helpful. One can support the values of a party and think "this particular iteration of the party doesn't embody those values and it must be thrown down, even at the cost of letting another party win."
Funnily enough, the loyalty test is the kind of thing that the Corbynites said- "we are the true socialists, the rest of you should just (go away) and join the Tories." And making the experience of being in a party so dismal that only the fanatics are left is straight out of the hard left playbook. Finding an excuse to ignore contrary voices is an excellent tactic to get your own way.
Oh how we laughed at them on the right.
It's a shame it's not more common IMHO
Definitely a video @SandyRentool would like to see.
It has some advantages as a country: a highly educated workforce, an easily defensible geographic position, and high savings rates. It has also has disadvantages, of which an inverted population pyramid is by far the most serious.
I would be surprised indeed if the normal laws of economics did not apply to Japan.
So, when it comes to kerbside refuse collection - how can we make it possible for the employee to collect the more refuse for the same or *less* effort and time? Better trucks? Better bins that can be automatically emptied into the trucks?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/280032/uk-economic-activity-rate/
You wash your hands of it or you can stay and fight for what you want it to be.
And I don't agree that "true Republicans" should aid and abet their enemy either. They can simply refuse to campaign or support Trump, and argue and advocate for their own policy platform.
If you vote for your opponents then you deserve what they give to you, good and hard.