Not all deluded people vote conservative, but all conservative voters are deluded, and Brexit was an absolute conservative wet dream..jfc deluded conservatives
Not all deluded people vote conservative, but all conservative voters are deluded, and Brexit was an absolute conservative wet dream.
The “PopCon” movement claims to want to “restore democratic accountability to Britain and deliver popular conservative policies”.
But polling by Savanta seen by HuffPost UK shows Truss - who was forced to quit as PM after just 49 days in office - is the least popular politician the firm asks voters about.
Geez, what is up with US and British politics. It's madness.The most unpopular conservative PM the country has ever had starts a group called "popular conservatism", and the woman who was appointed PM by a few thousand Tory Party members wants to "restore democratic accountability"
Exclusive: Liz Truss Remains Really Unpopular Ahead Of 'Popular Conservatism' Launch, Poll Reveals
"Popular Conservatism couldn’t find a more unpopular spokesperson if they actively tried."www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
So I can vote?
I've made an account on BBC so I can use their iplayer to watch Little Britain. Does that count?Depends if you are an "ex-pat" (or can plausibly pretend to be one).
Maybe Chales will abdicate due to illness.
More Misery For Rishi Sunak As Poll Suggests Tories Could Win Fewer Than 100 Seats
Labour's lead is widening as the general election gets closer.www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
Though
(a) 93 seats is about 92 more than they deserve (I would allow them 1 for the sake of diversity)... and
(b) it's remarkable how distorting FPTP is - the SNP with a predicted 3.4% of the vote getting 18 seats, while the Greens with nearly twice as many on 6% would only get their existing single seat, and Reform would likely get no seats with 10% of the vote vs the Lib Dems getting 34 seats with the same vote share. All because, I assume, of how their votes are distributed geographically (plus the long-standing over-representation of Scotland).
I have a can of Lyle's Golden Syrup in the pantry! I'm so in.Depends if you are an "ex-pat" (or can plausibly pretend to be one).
Camilla will see to it. Then she'll have Charlesmediocris' boys sent to the Tower and place her own daughter on the throne, England's first Catholic monarch since Henry VIII. The Bowles Dynasty will finally drive the Krauts out of England. Incidentally, Camilla is descended from both the House of Stuart and the House of Bourbon.Three words spring to mind: cold dead hands
Ex-PM Boris Johnson said, “I commend this invigorating tract!”, while Republican US senator Mike Lee predicted: “Truss will be a leader in this fight for years to come and her book pulls no punches in describing the stakes of today and the challenges of tomorrow.”
It's not like we don't have our problems as well, but at least it feels nice to be able to choose between more than two parties.I have no idea whom I'm going to vote for in the next election.
What I would like is a party that prioritises the environment and more socialist policies in general. I'd like to kick the tories out but I'm not sure I really see much benefit in voting for Labour if they're going to act like tory-lite anyway.
I hate the idea of tactical voting (though I did it in the last election for Corbyn), and I'm not convinced of its necessity this time. The UK needs to do a 180 on so many topics, and another Nu-Labour (ie. Blair era) might improve some things a bit, but overall what worries me with Labour is that IMO they have the perception that they can either be true to traditional Labour values (ie. a type of socialism), or they can win elections by being tory-lite.
America has the same problem but in a far more extreme fashion. In America's situation I'd absolutely tactically vote for the Democrats. I'm wondering whether the UK's problem isn't as far from America's as I'd like to think. Perhaps I should just vote for Labour in the hope that a) they get elected and b) that improves the chances for left-wing politics in general.
While the notion of voting for the winning side would be satisfying on some personal level, I know I'm not going to be placing the deciding vote. I'm fine with the idea of just voting for the party that actually (and I cynically acknowledge the downside of this) says the things I want to hear.
Perhaps it's the more mature thing to try to put as much weight behind the least awful, most likely election winner as possible, ie. Labour? Some improvement is better than no improvement, right? Some improvements may lead to more improvements in the political landscape (though I think this will only really happen if the tories are relegated to third place or beyond)?
If only I was rich enough not to have to work or retired already, I think I'd be happy badgering my local MP etc as one of my hobbies.
I have no idea whom I'm going to vote for in the next election.
Labour’s win in Kingswood means the Conservatives have now lost nine byelections in the course of this parliament – one more than the eight defeats suffered by the 1992-97 Conservative administration led by John Major. It means the Conservative government has lost more byelections in a single parliament than any government since the 1960s.
Murdoch.Geez, what is up with US and British politics. It's madness.
Wait for it, far more entertainingYea, they lost the other one as well (an 18,000 majority overturned). Can we _please_ have an election now? Or do we have to wait for another 20+ Tory MPs to be caught in sex or financial scandals?