Liz Truss attempts to be relevant – politicalbetting.com
You can't expect economic growth and prosperity when companies are more focused on meeting meaningless diversity quotas and complying with radical climate change standards, rather than engaging in competition and generating money for their employees and the country. pic.twitter.com/flF9TSSxzq
Comments
-
Good Luck Liz!1
-
She needs to apologise to her old school first.2
-
You tell 'em Liz.1
-
She annoys me more than pineapple on pizza.
The biggest arse ache at work when it comes to not achieving growth is the absolute turd that is the current Brexit deal, then a government that tried to ignore the markets.7 -
But big shout out to Doug Seal who saw the Liz Truss comeback before anybody else.4
-
*Raises eyebrows*TheScreamingEagles said:But big shout out to Doug Seal who saw the Liz Truss comeback before anybody else.
I never knew.
This was some time ago, presumably?0 -
"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?1 -
Twitter releases more political ad data after POLITICO report
Twitter’s latest data shows revenue from political advertising since early March was more than 50 times higher than the company had previously reported.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/12/twitter-releases-more-political-ad-data-after-politico-report-00091667
1 -
Full marks for sheer pluck.
I mean, if I had ever messed up that badly at work, I doubt I would have wanted to show my face ever again.4 -
I'm not sure quite why she doesn't realise she's made herself into the definition of wrong.
Icarus gets a better press.
Of course she wasn't entirely wrong about all things, and she may not be so hopelessly wrong in the future, but the 'Liz Truss says' brand is simply the worst brand in politics ever. (There may have been slightly worse popes, but they're sometimes infallibly bad)
0 -
I wish I had the amount of self confidence and chutzpah Liz Truss possess.Stuartinromford said:Full marks for sheer pluck.
I mean, if I had ever messed up that badly at work, I doubt I would have wanted to show my face ever again.0 -
“Radical climate change…”
Still utterly delusional.1 -
Liz Truss would be perfect for the old "What's My Line?" TV show!
What's My Line? Election Day Special
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_l5_lLifg
Must say, LT but a pimple on the hind-end of creation, compared to Margaret Chase Smith.
OR even Karl Mundt!0 -
More "I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue".SeaShantyIrish2 said:Liz Truss would be perfect for the old "What's My Line?" TV show!
What's My Line? Election Day Special
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_l5_lLifg
Must say, LT but a pimple on the hind-end of creation, compared to Margaret Chase Smith.
OR even Karl Mundt!
Except she doesn't seem that sorry.0 -
Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?1
-
Spelled "delusion"?TheScreamingEagles said:
I wish I had the amount of self confidence and chutzpah Liz Truss possess.Stuartinromford said:Full marks for sheer pluck.
I mean, if I had ever messed up that badly at work, I doubt I would have wanted to show my face ever again.1 -
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
1 -
Didn't she talk about ensuring you win the argument so you can enact change? How is it our fault if she accepts she failed to do that?Luckyguy1983 said:You tell 'em Liz.
If she had sounded more convincing then just saying 'Growth is a good thing' then looking like a deer in headlights when asked about tax cuts she might have done a better job.0 -
How do they pay salaries if not by generating money?dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?0 -
Full marks for increasing her bank balance at the expense of credulous Americans.Stuartinromford said:Full marks for sheer pluck.
I mean, if I had ever messed up that badly at work, I doubt I would have wanted to show my face ever again.
BTW, the Heritage Foundation is SO 20th century. About as influential in today's debates as the Mickey Mouse Club.
BTW (also FYI) following election of You Know Who, the HF has gone full MAGA.
For example (from their wiki page):
"Heritage Action opposed the $40 billion military aid package for Ukraine passed in May 2022 after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, breaking from its previous positions of support for such aid. The Heritage Foundation's foreign policy director at the time, Luke Coffey, said he was ordered to retract his earlier statements supporting aid to Ukraine. Coffey subsequently left the Heritage Foundation."2 -
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
2 -
Doesn't Liz need to get arrested if she wants to be relevant now?0
-
Tedious it may be. But is it unfairly tedious? I think a lot of people are clear they would like an alternative to how things are currently managed. It's one reason a lot of people were so enthusiastic about Corbyn, albeit a very different kind of project.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
Political leaders have to expect opposition to their ideas, and overcome them if they believe it to be a good idea. Some good ideas will fail when they don't manage it. Many bad ideas will also fail when they don't manage it, and occasionally we get lucky and they do manage to get a good idea through.
Truss didn't manage it. Things are crappy enough she could improve her reputation by saying she wanted to do things differently (even as she presented as the continuity candidate in the leadership contest in every other way). But if she seems like she is complaining about the fact people opposed her plans she will find that hard.2 -
Yes. Not required. A tiny number of people get to be PM of this great country. Liz Truss is one of them. I have no doubt that she has/had great vision and ideas, though the straw men of the snippet doesn't display them well.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
It is hard to exaggerate the extent to which, having been given this golden ticket of being PM, she blew it by hubris, incompetence and disdain.
To get to be PM and overlook the fact that implementation of radical change in a parliamentary democracy is difficult political art is as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.1 -
Heritage Foundation used to be a power in the land.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
Now it's just a clapped-out clique of MAGA-maniacs. And Putin suck-ups.0 -
The ridicule is deserved.Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
I suspect her fat fee will be some recompense.0 -
Is that really all she did? Was there nothing she could have done to be more prepared, or encourage more support for her goals?Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.0 -
And then she starts going on about woke too.TheScreamingEagles said:She annoys me more than pineapple on pizza.
The biggest arse ache at work when it comes to not achieving growth is the absolute turd that is the current Brexit deal, then a government that tried to ignore the markets.
Her biggest opponents were the money markets. Hardly a bastion of wokeness. She’s deluded as to why she failed.3 -
I don't know about the USA, but do think tanks ever really have power? They seem to exist for no other reason than to give politicians a pretend feeling their ideas are based on some kind of coherent ideology, rather than some loose, probably contradictory set of ideals. And to provide a ready source of one touch removed political quotes for news organisations.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Heritage Foundation used to be a power in the land.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
Now it's just a clapped-out clique of MAGA-maniacs. And Putin suck-ups.0 -
Fair! The total nonentity that is Liz Truss really isn't worth it.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
0 -
Well once we are out of the IMF, ECHR, UN and NATO we will finally see the benefits of Brexit.0
-
Out of curiosity, how do ex-Presidents make their money after leaving office?0
-
Yes, it's worth noting that she wasn't wrong about absolutely everything- and we do have a growth and productivity problem.algarkirk said:
Yes. Not required. A tiny number of people get to be PM of this great country. Liz Truss is one of them. I have no doubt that she has/had great vision and ideas, though the straw men of the snippet doesn't display them well.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
It is hard to exaggerate the extent to which, having been given this golden ticket of being PM, she blew it by hubris, incompetence and disdain.
To get to be PM and overlook the fact that implementation of radical change in a parliamentary democracy is difficult political art is as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.
It's just that (unfunded) shock & awe tax cuts - seemingly alone - were a pretty crazy way to do it, unless she could demonstrate it would be self-funding in fairly short order to the satisfaction of the markets lending the money.
The rest is dogma.2 -
Can someone please pay me £10k to deliver a speech please?
I could say all sorts of stuff. Nazis. Pineapple. Innuendo. Betting tips.
I've got it all.2 -
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?0 -
FPT:
Please tell me it's the Tribbles.viewcode said:I appreciate that you all seem to be invested around Succession, but I need to point out that we are close to Star Trek Picard series 3 episode 9 of 10. Leaked screenshots of the last episodes are available online and they give away crucial plot points including who the main villain is. If you want links to same please let me know.
[evil grin]0 -
Just rhetoric tailored to the audience.Taz said:
And then she starts going on about woke too.TheScreamingEagles said:She annoys me more than pineapple on pizza.
The biggest arse ache at work when it comes to not achieving growth is the absolute turd that is the current Brexit deal, then a government that tried to ignore the markets.
Her biggest opponents were the money markets. Hardly a bastion of wokeness. She’s deluded as to why she failed.0 -
Indeed. The point of the Heritage Foundation is employees should be paid as little as businesses can get away with.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?0 -
Well, I don't have 10k, but I think if you said this you'd have an audience, since it cuts to the heart of things pretty well.Casino_Royale said:Can someone please pay me £10k to deliver a speech please?
I could say all sorts of stuff. Nazis. Pineapple. Innuendo. Betting tips.
I've got it all.Casino_Royale said:
It's just that (unfunded) shock & awe tax cuts - seemingly alone - were a pretty crazy way to do it, unless she could demonstrate it would be self-funding in fairly short order to the satisfaction of the markets lending the money.algarkirk said:
Yes. Not required. A tiny number of people get to be PM of this great country. Liz Truss is one of them. I have no doubt that she has/had great vision and ideas, though the straw men of the snippet doesn't display them well.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
It is hard to exaggerate the extent to which, having been given this golden ticket of being PM, she blew it by hubris, incompetence and disdain.
To get to be PM and overlook the fact that implementation of radical change in a parliamentary democracy is difficult political art is as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.1 -
Don't know about UK, but in USA number of think tanks have been quite influential & significant politically.kle4 said:
I don't know about the USA, but do think tanks ever really have power? They seem to exist for no other reason than to give politicians a pretend feeling their ideas are based on some kind of coherent ideology, rather than some loose, probably contradictory set of ideals. And to provide a ready source of one touch removed political quotes for news organisations.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Heritage Foundation used to be a power in the land.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
Now it's just a clapped-out clique of MAGA-maniacs. And Putin suck-ups.
Such as the Heritage Foundation, in its day. Which came and went a while back.0 -
The only reason she's any status is some very wealthy people like hearing their own ideas regurgitated from these 'think tank' networks.kle4 said:
Is that really all she did? Was there nothing she could have done to be more prepared, or encourage more support for her goals?Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.
She's got to roll back down the political hill or what is the penalty for pushing such ridiculous policies?
0 -
I can understand why people think I drew this cartoon but I didn't.
3 -
Again FPT (sorry):
On first glance I thought that was Bob Mortimer doing a character.BlancheLivermore said:This is Javier Milei, Argentine right wing presidential candidate
Fabricant should get some tips
1 -
Who are the big hitters now?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Don't know about UK, but in USA number of think tanks have been quite influential & significant politically.kle4 said:
I don't know about the USA, but do think tanks ever really have power? They seem to exist for no other reason than to give politicians a pretend feeling their ideas are based on some kind of coherent ideology, rather than some loose, probably contradictory set of ideals. And to provide a ready source of one touch removed political quotes for news organisations.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Heritage Foundation used to be a power in the land.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
Now it's just a clapped-out clique of MAGA-maniacs. And Putin suck-ups.
Such as the Heritage Foundation, in its day. Which came and went a while back.0 -
There were just 2 possible outcomes of a process the PM initiated by his government's legislation, knowing that either was about equally possible. No other body than government can have the civil service assist in preparing for governing eventualities. Cameron was at fault.Scott_xP said:
The failure to prepare for Brexit doesn't lie with those who didn't want it, campaigned against it, and pointed out what a clusterfuck it would be.algarkirk said:as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.
3 -
I don't think anyone has claimed Harris is an intellectual legal giant...kle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?0 -
No Picard spoilers.ohnotnow said:FPT:
Please tell me it's the Tribbles.viewcode said:I appreciate that you all seem to be invested around Succession, but I need to point out that we are close to Star Trek Picard series 3 episode 9 of 10. Leaked screenshots of the last episodes are available online and they give away crucial plot points including who the main villain is. If you want links to same please let me know.
[evil grin]
Anyone spoiling Picard for me will see me a deliver a righteous anger that you would mistake me for Jules Winnfield.1 -
I could also try the full Lord Flashheart for the after dinner circuit if I get short of material:
"Hey girls, look at my machinery!"0 -
She shouldn't be out of place then with the other numpties.TheKitchenCabinet said:
I don't think anyone has claimed Harris is an intellectual legal giant...kle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?0 -
I've not seen any episodes, nor know anything about it. If this is the last season I may have to binge watch over a long weekend.TheScreamingEagles said:
No Picard spoilers.ohnotnow said:FPT:
Please tell me it's the Tribbles.viewcode said:I appreciate that you all seem to be invested around Succession, but I need to point out that we are close to Star Trek Picard series 3 episode 9 of 10. Leaked screenshots of the last episodes are available online and they give away crucial plot points including who the main villain is. If you want links to same please let me know.
[evil grin]
Anyone spoiling Picard for me will see me a deliver a righteous anger that you would mistake me for Jules Winnfield.0 -
But why does this need to be re-hashed? Of course Liz Truss didn't succeed as PM - if she'd succeeded, she would still be PM, regardless of the very real circumstantial and political obstacles that stood in her way, which Sunak has neatly dodged with his supine acquiescence in being completely shit.kle4 said:
Tedious it may be. But is it unfairly tedious? I think a lot of people are clear they would like an alternative to how things are currently managed. It's one reason a lot of people were so enthusiastic about Corbyn, albeit a very different kind of project.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
Political leaders have to expect opposition to their ideas, and overcome them if they believe it to be a good idea. Some good ideas will fail when they don't manage it. Many bad ideas will also fail when they don't manage it, and occasionally we get lucky and they do manage to get a good idea through.
Truss didn't manage it. Things are crappy enough she could improve her reputation by saying she wanted to do things differently (even as she presented as the continuity candidate in the leadership contest in every other way). But if she seems like she is complaining about the fact people opposed her plans she will find that hard.
The people who think this political failure requires her to maintain a trappist silence forever (who also happen to be people who were vigorously opposed to her agenda) have said their bit - I'm not sure what new they think they're bringing to the conversation.0 -
I did say "if".TheKitchenCabinet said:
I don't think anyone has claimed Harris is an intellectual legal giant...kle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?0 -
I think Liz was brave in the best sense of the word and was attempting to do something genuinely innovative.
Where she showed herself manifestly unsuited to the job, however, was in not understanding, via incompetence or hubris, that the markets wouldn't give her a free pass just because she had a new plan.
Anyone can be genuinely innovative if they ignore the consequences of their actions and don't plan to address any likely criticism in advance and this is where she failed and failed badly.
All the markets needed, all we needed was a "costed" plan which explained where the money would come from. It might have strained credibility but at least we would have seen her workings. And, given the subject of his PhD I cannot believe that Kwasi didn't have some workings somewhere.3 -
It might need to be rehashed because she is commenting about it, and naturally is presenting the best possible explanation for what happened, which invites responses. What new is she bringing after all? But as you say she shouldn't have to be silent. Therefore when she justifies herself she will face rebuttal, and probably always will. That's consequence.Luckyguy1983 said:
But why does this need to be re-hashed? Of course Liz Truss didn't succeed as PM - if she'd succeeded, she would still be PM, regardless of the very real circumstantial and political obstacles that stood in her way, which Sunak has neatly dodged with his supine acquiescence in being completely shit.kle4 said:
Tedious it may be. But is it unfairly tedious? I think a lot of people are clear they would like an alternative to how things are currently managed. It's one reason a lot of people were so enthusiastic about Corbyn, albeit a very different kind of project.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
Political leaders have to expect opposition to their ideas, and overcome them if they believe it to be a good idea. Some good ideas will fail when they don't manage it. Many bad ideas will also fail when they don't manage it, and occasionally we get lucky and they do manage to get a good idea through.
Truss didn't manage it. Things are crappy enough she could improve her reputation by saying she wanted to do things differently (even as she presented as the continuity candidate in the leadership contest in every other way). But if she seems like she is complaining about the fact people opposed her plans she will find that hard.
The people who think this political failure requires her to maintain a trappist silence forever (who also happen to be people who were vigorously opposed to her agenda) have said their bit - I'm not sure what new they think they're bringing to the conversation.1 -
Weave all that into a solid helping of anti-woke rhetoric and I expect you'd find a large enough audience on YouTube if you wanted it.Casino_Royale said:Can someone please pay me £10k to deliver a speech please?
I could say all sorts of stuff. Nazis. Pineapple. Innuendo. Betting tips.
I've got it all.0 -
They thought it was an 80%+ chance they'd win 60:40. Remain had whopping leads pre-campaign, and they thought undecideds would break for that rather than Leave as they actually did.algarkirk said:
There were just 2 possible outcomes of a process the PM initiated by his government's legislation, knowing that either was about equally possible. No other body than government can have the civil service assist in preparing for governing eventualities. Cameron was at fault.Scott_xP said:
The failure to prepare for Brexit doesn't lie with those who didn't want it, campaigned against it, and pointed out what a clusterfuck it would be.algarkirk said:as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.
But, please, let's not debate it again.2 -
NOT a legal or practical requirement. As quick review of past & present SCOTUS will confirm.TheKitchenCabinet said:
I don't think anyone has claimed Harris is an intellectual legal giant...kle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?
Until latter 20th century, few inside OR outside the Beltway even pretended that Supremes were ipso facto legal giants.
Was argument on behalf of a few, for example Oliver Wendell Holmes. But NOT the norm, which was MUCH more oriented to politically-connected and/or -relevant lawyers, including many who had little experience as judges, or even in conventional legal practice.0 -
They’re also somewhere to keep your political allies in well paid jobs while you’re out of office. Remember that incoming administrations staff themselves largely with unelected people who aren’t full time civil servants.kle4 said:
I don't know about the USA, but do think tanks ever really have power? They seem to exist for no other reason than to give politicians a pretend feeling their ideas are based on some kind of coherent ideology, rather than some loose, probably contradictory set of ideals. And to provide a ready source of one touch removed political quotes for news organisations.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Heritage Foundation used to be a power in the land.dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
Now it's just a clapped-out clique of MAGA-maniacs. And Putin suck-ups.
In the US some are substantial bases of political power and influence.0 -
Lord Bath surely?kle4 said:
Is that really all she did? Was there nothing she could have done to be more prepared, or encourage more support for her goals?Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.
At least Truss was able to form a cabinet!
0 -
Evening all 😀
Truss and Kwarteng made the classic error of assuming the world stands still and just as no one told Jeremy Corbin it wasn’t 1979 any more, no one told Truss it wasn’t 1986.
Her message of fundamentalist capitalism played well once but the world has changed and the notion people would happily accept being a little wealthier in order for the very rich to become a lot wealthier just wouldn’t fly in the post-pandemic world where notions of fairness reign supreme.
The public recoil from the immediate policy announcements told us we were no longer Thatcher’s children and that Thatcherism had gone the way of democratic socialism.0 -
Yes. But in the modern political realm diagnosing the problem(s) is easy. Most PBers can list growth, productivity, war, world hunger, China, Trumpism, education, NHS, Russia, debt, deficit, climate change, corruption, organised crime, high level tax, low level services and a number of other problems.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, it's worth noting that she wasn't wrong about absolutely everything- and we do have a growth and productivity problem.algarkirk said:
Yes. Not required. A tiny number of people get to be PM of this great country. Liz Truss is one of them. I have no doubt that she has/had great vision and ideas, though the straw men of the snippet doesn't display them well.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
It is hard to exaggerate the extent to which, having been given this golden ticket of being PM, she blew it by hubris, incompetence and disdain.
To get to be PM and overlook the fact that implementation of radical change in a parliamentary democracy is difficult political art is as big a fail, if not bigger, than Cameron's failure to prepare a plan for Brexit.
It's just that (unfunded) shock & awe tax cuts - seemingly alone - were a pretty crazy way to do it, unless she could demonstrate it would be self-funding in fairly short order to the satisfaction of the markets lending the money.
The rest is dogma.
Truss can list some of them too. It's the formation and implementation of solutions that counts when you are PM. Epic fail.6 -
I believe she was quite focused on locking up black people. So would probably fit right in with the Justiceskle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?0 -
The all knowing powers of wikipedia, Andrew Gimson and Iain Dale don't tend to include Lord Bath as an official PM. But I don't doubt there will be a push to include him and Waldegrave. They failed too hard to even count I guess.StillWaters said:
Lord Bath surely?kle4 said:
Is that really all she did? Was there nothing she could have done to be more prepared, or encourage more support for her goals?Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.
At least Truss was able to form a cabinet!0 -
That's not all she did, but I think that is what's upset people here the most.kle4 said:
Is that really all she did? Was there nothing she could have done to be more prepared, or encourage more support for her goals?Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes, the insistence on Liz repenting and dressing herself in sackcloth and ashes for daring to defy the forces of 'dull competence [sic]' is another delightful feature of the PB claw-sharpening that goes on whenever she says anything.TheScreamingEagles said:
Only when Liz Truss admits her mistakes.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.0 -
£10K is Third Division rates for a third rate prime minister. Theresa May remarkably picked up £100K for a speech. Not sure what the organisers expected for that money - unless it was a rerun of May's conference speech where she lost her voice and the set collapsed around her - which was hilarious if excruciating.Casino_Royale said:Can someone please pay me £10k to deliver a speech please?
I could say all sorts of stuff. Nazis. Pineapple. Innuendo. Betting tips.
I've got it all.0 -
[mimes zipping up lips and throwing away the key]TheScreamingEagles said:
No Picard spoilers.ohnotnow said:FPT:
Please tell me it's the Tribbles.viewcode said:I appreciate that you all seem to be invested around Succession, but I need to point out that we are close to Star Trek Picard series 3 episode 9 of 10. Leaked screenshots of the last episodes are available online and they give away crucial plot points including who the main villain is. If you want links to same please let me know.
[evil grin]
Anyone spoiling Picard for me will see me a deliver a righteous anger that you would mistake me for Jules Winnfield.0 -
A lovely piece of special pleading. I love the idea that the job of government and civil service is to have plans only for one future contingent at a time. Call it 'Truss level planning'.Scott_xP said:
Nopealgarkirk said:No other body than government can have the civil service assist in preparing for governing eventualities. Cameron was at fault.
Until the vote it wasn't an eventuality, and after the vote Cameron wasn't PM1 -
Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob “beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/16462348581870100482 -
Evening all.ohnotnow said:Again FPT (sorry):
On first glance I thought that was Bob Mortimer doing a character.BlancheLivermore said:This is Javier Milei, Argentine right wing presidential candidate
Fabricant should get some tips
That's the first horsehair wig I've seen.0 -
There is nothing in the videoclip above that references her time in office at all. She's not even addressing UK policy directly, but US policy.kle4 said:
It might need to be rehashed because she is commenting about it, and naturally is presenting the best possible explanation for what happened, which invites responses. What new is she bringing after all? But as you say she shouldn't have to be silent. Therefore when she justifies herself she will face rebuttal, and probably always will. That's consequence.Luckyguy1983 said:
But why does this need to be re-hashed? Of course Liz Truss didn't succeed as PM - if she'd succeeded, she would still be PM, regardless of the very real circumstantial and political obstacles that stood in her way, which Sunak has neatly dodged with his supine acquiescence in being completely shit.kle4 said:
Tedious it may be. But is it unfairly tedious? I think a lot of people are clear they would like an alternative to how things are currently managed. It's one reason a lot of people were so enthusiastic about Corbyn, albeit a very different kind of project.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
Political leaders have to expect opposition to their ideas, and overcome them if they believe it to be a good idea. Some good ideas will fail when they don't manage it. Many bad ideas will also fail when they don't manage it, and occasionally we get lucky and they do manage to get a good idea through.
Truss didn't manage it. Things are crappy enough she could improve her reputation by saying she wanted to do things differently (even as she presented as the continuity candidate in the leadership contest in every other way). But if she seems like she is complaining about the fact people opposed her plans she will find that hard.
The people who think this political failure requires her to maintain a trappist silence forever (who also happen to be people who were vigorously opposed to her agenda) have said their bit - I'm not sure what new they think they're bringing to the conversation.0 -
Of course.Driver said:
How do they pay salaries if not by generating money?dixiedean said:"Generate money for their employees?"
Unless they are a profit sharing co-operative they don't do that anyway do they?
Or is payment of a wage for a task done an act of kindly altruism?
Or can the Heritage Foundation simply not express itself in plain English?
But if they generate more money, does that go to the employee?
Certainly not automatically. And quite usually not at all.1 -
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.2 -
Even Kevin McCarthy?TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/16462348581870100480 -
I was referring generically to her defences. Guido for instance quotes her talking about her time in office directly, and referring to her UK policy (in an effort to encourage US policy)Luckyguy1983 said:
There is nothing in the videoclip above that references her time in office at all. She's not even addressing UK policy directly, but US policy.kle4 said:
It might need to be rehashed because she is commenting about it, and naturally is presenting the best possible explanation for what happened, which invites responses. What new is she bringing after all? But as you say she shouldn't have to be silent. Therefore when she justifies herself she will face rebuttal, and probably always will. That's consequence.Luckyguy1983 said:
But why does this need to be re-hashed? Of course Liz Truss didn't succeed as PM - if she'd succeeded, she would still be PM, regardless of the very real circumstantial and political obstacles that stood in her way, which Sunak has neatly dodged with his supine acquiescence in being completely shit.kle4 said:
Tedious it may be. But is it unfairly tedious? I think a lot of people are clear they would like an alternative to how things are currently managed. It's one reason a lot of people were so enthusiastic about Corbyn, albeit a very different kind of project.Luckyguy1983 said:Can we just take everyone's tedious sarcasm in response to this snippet as read?
Political leaders have to expect opposition to their ideas, and overcome them if they believe it to be a good idea. Some good ideas will fail when they don't manage it. Many bad ideas will also fail when they don't manage it, and occasionally we get lucky and they do manage to get a good idea through.
Truss didn't manage it. Things are crappy enough she could improve her reputation by saying she wanted to do things differently (even as she presented as the continuity candidate in the leadership contest in every other way). But if she seems like she is complaining about the fact people opposed her plans she will find that hard.
The people who think this political failure requires her to maintain a trappist silence forever (who also happen to be people who were vigorously opposed to her agenda) have said their bit - I'm not sure what new they think they're bringing to the conversation.
My tax cuts… faced coordinated resistance. And we didn’t just face coordinated resistance from within the Conservative Party, or even inside the British corporate establishment. We faced it from the IMF, and even President Biden. So, my warning to you here today is it’s not enough just to have the right ideas. It’s not enough even to have broad support for those ideas. We need to be able to take on those who resist change, and who don’t want change. And we need to be able to ensure that we’re winning the argument enough to do that…”
https://order-order.com/2023/04/12/truss-rips-corporate-establishment-for-downfall/
Pretty clear she is referencing her time in office. She is not philosophising in a vaccum.3 -
Here's a picture of them performing the haka.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
0 -
I did like a headline yesterday about whether he could put pressure on the DUP - didn't seem like he would be the ideal person to do that.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.0 -
But it’s not just that audience, it’s the wider audience she’s speaking to as the speech has been widely publicised prior to it being made, especially if she is trying to launch some sort of comeback.Nigelb said:
Just rhetoric tailored to the audience.Taz said:
And then she starts going on about woke too.TheScreamingEagles said:She annoys me more than pineapple on pizza.
The biggest arse ache at work when it comes to not achieving growth is the absolute turd that is the current Brexit deal, then a government that tried to ignore the markets.
Her biggest opponents were the money markets. Hardly a bastion of wokeness. She’s deluded as to why she failed.
Such nonsense just comes over as deluded.1 -
I don't think it was an expected free pass because it was a "new plan".TOPPING said:I think Liz was brave in the best sense of the word and was attempting to do something genuinely innovative.
Where she showed herself manifestly unsuited to the job, however, was in not understanding, via incompetence or hubris, that the markets wouldn't give her a free pass just because she had a new plan.
Anyone can be genuinely innovative if they ignore the consequences of their actions and don't plan to address any likely criticism in advance and this is where she failed and failed badly.
All the markets needed, all we needed was a "costed" plan which explained where the money would come from. It might have strained credibility but at least we would have seen her workings. And, given the subject of his PhD I cannot believe that Kwasi didn't have some workings somewhere.
It was because it fitted in with their own ideology. Which they believed the markets shared. So would bend the facts to their views.
But they don't have an ideology. Very few outside active politics do.0 -
Come out ye Black and Tans !!TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob “beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/16462348581870100481 -
To be fair, the Unionists don't identify with the Black and Tans. Nor would any sane person, for that matter.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.0 -
She doesn't seem to be running out of people wanting to hire her even though it has been some years since she was in office - she must be doing something right, as far as they are concerned.FF43 said:
£10K is Third Division rates for a third rate prime minister. Theresa May remarkably picked up £100K for a speech. Not sure what the organisers expected for that money - unless it was a rerun of May's conference speech where she lost her voice and the set collapsed around her - which was hilarious if excruciating.Casino_Royale said:Can someone please pay me £10k to deliver a speech please?
I could say all sorts of stuff. Nazis. Pineapple. Innuendo. Betting tips.
I've got it all.0 -
She’s a perfectly competent lawyer.Foxy said:
She shouldn't be out of place then with the other numpties.TheKitchenCabinet said:
I don't think anyone has claimed Harris is an intellectual legal giant...kle4 said:
Well, yes, but if her lawyering skills are reasonable then her being a mediocre politician would not make her out of place on the Court.StillWaters said:
The idea of sending a mediocre politician to the Supreme Court for political convenience is disturbing.eek said:
Harris needs to be offloaded elsewhere sooner rather than later. Isn't she a lawyer so the ideal plan would be to send her to the Supreme court (which I'm sure was a rumoured plan).Driver said:
I think point 4 - maybe not necessarily one of those, but a VP who is sensible, competent and doesn't drive away swing voters - is actually essential. If Biden does that he's going to win by a landslide that even the paranoid would see couldn't be overturned.ydoethur said:Optimal scenario for the US system of government:
1) Trump loses in the primaries to DeSantis;
2) Butthurt, he alleges vote rigging and runs as an independent;
3) DeSantis quits as Governor of Florida to focus on being nominee;
4) Biden selects Whitmer, Ossoff or Buttigieg as his VP;
5) Biden wins in an absolute landslide, due to the split vote, consigning both Trump and DeSantis to the outer darkness;
6) Biden then retires for undisclosed health reasons, leaving a capable President in charge;
7) A sane Republican nominee - Haley, perhaps? - emerges in 2028 and wins easily.
4 and 6 are not essential, but they would be optimal.
The problem is, the VP role is occupied by someone who doesn't necessarily fulfil any of those three requirements. And who was the last POTUS to jettison their VP before their re-election bid?
But neither a legal academic, nor a judge, which is the norm.
There’s actually a reasonable argument for having someone less specialised in constitutional law on the court, but I doubt it would get much traction.0 -
She (or rather her henchman) announced historically huge tax cuts that were not only unfunded, but came about a week after promising to underwrite everyone's energy bills for 2 years. She literally wrote cheques she couldn't cash. If there had been a David Laws coming into the treasury after Kwarteng's departure he might have noticed and leaked a little note saying "there is no money left" (which Greg Hands would then tweet on a daily basis until 2035).
I see this story and I think "bless". I kind of wish she'd stuck around for longer because it seems unfair Sunak's Tories aren't suffering more in the polls for the sheer stupidity of that short period of government., coming as it did after 2 years of Britain Trump.1 -
Maybe they hunt a lot and eat lots of venison at Rules?Taz said:
And then she starts going on about woke too.TheScreamingEagles said:She annoys me more than pineapple on pizza.
The biggest arse ache at work when it comes to not achieving growth is the absolute turd that is the current Brexit deal, then a government that tried to ignore the markets.
Her biggest opponents were the money markets. Hardly a bastion of wokeness. She’s deluded as to why she failed.0 -
It's all just part of her coping mechanism I suppose. But the picture she paints of British business is surely a grotesque caricature. I've worked in the private sector for twenty-five years and have never encountered anything like the wacky woke practices she claims are now the norm. That sort of irresponsible rhetoric might actually deter investment if anyone is silly enough to give it credence. And that, along with Brexit, is the last thing we need. Reckless, unpatriotic, damaging and facile is my take.2
-
Very Auxieward.Taz said:
Come out ye Black and Tans !!TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob “beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/16462348581870100482 -
Man. My family makes the family in Succession look sane and normal0
-
Slight problem there. The Unionists don't appeal to anyone at all in GB. Apart from a few Tories. And not many of them either, vide that poll posted in the last thread. Well worth a look if you missed it - it was quite a surprise.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.0 -
I thought Truss had done enough to survive into the new year at least, and it would have been interesting to see what might have happened if she could have weathered just a couple more months.TimS said:She (or rather her henchman) announced historically huge tax cuts that were not only unfunded, but came about a week after promising to underwrite everyone's energy bills for 2 years. She literally wrote cheques she couldn't cash. If there had been a David Laws coming into the treasury after Kwarteng's departure he might have noticed and leaked a little note saying "there is no money left" (which Greg Hands would then tweet on a daily basis until 2035).
I see this story and I think "bless". I kind of wish she'd stuck around for longer because it seems unfair Sunak's Tories aren't suffering more in the polls for the sheer stupidity of that short period of government., coming as it did after 2 years of Britain Trump.0 -
It wasn't a surprise.Carnyx said:
Slight problem there. The Unionists don't appeal to anyone at all in GB. Apart from a few Tories. And not many of them either, vide that poll posted in the last thread. Well worth a look if you missed it - it was quite a surprise.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.
Back in 2019 there was a poll of Tory members which showed a majority were prepared to see Northern Ireland leave the UK if they could get their Brexit.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye2 -
The one Wings over Scotland commissioned? He certainly commissioned a very similar poll as I recall.TheScreamingEagles said:
It wasn't a surprise.Carnyx said:
Slight problem there. The Unionists don't appeal to anyone at all in GB. Apart from a few Tories. And not many of them either, vide that poll posted in the last thread. Well worth a look if you missed it - it was quite a surprise.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.
Back in 2019 there was a poll of Tories/Brexiteers/Tory members which showed a majority were prepared to see Northern Ireland leave the UK if they could get their Brexit.0 -
They need to decide whether it's reality 1 or 2.Stark_Dawning said:It's all just part of her coping mechanism I suppose. But the picture she paints of British business is surely a grotesque caricature. I've worked in the private sector for twenty-five years and have never encountered anything like the wacky woke practices she claims are now the norm. That sort of irresponsible rhetoric might actually deter investment if anyone is silly enough to give it credence. And that, along with Brexit, is the last thing we need. Reckless, unpatriotic, damaging and facile is my take.
Reality 1: business is hopelessly woke and part of the new elite (TM Matt Goodwin) holding back Britain. Or
Reality 2: the private sector is always right, unlike those woke lazy public sector layabouts who are holding back Britain.
or actually they don't, because they're very comfortable with doublethink when it suits them.2 -
That poll was hilarious, and (one would like to think) a wake up call for some of the posturing politicians in NI. Because I expect a similar poll taken in the Republic would come up with something similar.Carnyx said:
Slight problem there. The Unionists don't appeal to anyone at all in GB. Apart from a few Tories. And not many of them either, vide that poll posted in the last thread. Well worth a look if you missed it - it was quite a surprise.Casino_Royale said:
He's such a dipstick.TheScreamingEagles said:Joe Biden has just sewn up 100% of the Irish American vote in 2024.
🚨Joe Biden gaffe alert: @POTUS just said his rugby player cousin @KearneyRob“beat the hell out of the Black and Tans”….instead of the @AllBlacks
https://twitter.com/SMurphyTV/status/1646234858187010048
I can't think of any American worse suited to appeal to the Unionists.0 -
Truss states "You can't expect economic growth and prosperity when companies are more focused on meeting meaningless diversity quotas and complying with radical climate change standards, rather than engaging in competition and generating money for their employees and the country." It is clearly nonsense. Companies do no such thing. Which is more likely, she doesn't know how business works, or she is trying to fool people?2
-
Yes; to be out of office that fast you need to make multiple mistakes simultaneously, and I think Truss did indeed make multiple errors on various levels. The 'establishment/deep state' theory oversimplifies by implying that it was only the proposed policy direction that led to her downfall.kle4 said:
A PM being ousted so swiftly is utterly unprecented - I don't think she needs to be permanently ostracised, but I do think the rebuttal that she was defeated by the forces of the deep state or establushment or anti growth coalition or whatever it is called to be a bit misplaced, since unless she was a once in a century talent all PMs face challenges, and none of them collapsed instantly in the face of that. At some level that is on her.
0 -
I think you've just accurately summarised the human condition.TimS said:
They need to decide whether it's reality 1 or 2.Stark_Dawning said:It's all just part of her coping mechanism I suppose. But the picture she paints of British business is surely a grotesque caricature. I've worked in the private sector for twenty-five years and have never encountered anything like the wacky woke practices she claims are now the norm. That sort of irresponsible rhetoric might actually deter investment if anyone is silly enough to give it credence. And that, along with Brexit, is the last thing we need. Reckless, unpatriotic, damaging and facile is my take.
Reality 1: business is hopelessly woke and part of the new elite (TM Matt Goodwin) holding back Britain. Or
Reality 2: the private sector is always right, unlike those woke lazy public sector layabouts who are holding back Britain.
or actually they don't, because they're very comfortable with doublethink when it suits them.0 -
She’s telling her paying hosts what they want to hear.Smart51 said:Truss states "You can't expect economic growth and prosperity when companies are more focused on meeting meaningless diversity quotas and complying with radical climate change standards, rather than engaging in competition and generating money for their employees and the country." It is clearly nonsense. Companies do no such thing. Which is more likely, she doesn't know how business works, or she is trying to fool people?
Supply and demand - all capitalists understand how that works.1 -
Prediction: referendum on proportional representation for Westminster on Thursday 1st May 2025.
Anyone think it's likely?1
