The Conservative Party

Mr Kobayashi said:
The Liberals formed governments prior to universal franchise. It was structural change not party incompetence etc that forced their decline.

There is no space for them to replace the Conservatives as a party of goverment.

They may be able to attract the Tory wets but that isn't a big enough demographic.

They wouldn't be able to coherently pivot rightwards and scoop up racist grannies and protofascists attracted to Reform etc and keep socially liberal middle class voters within their tent.

The Tories could be destroyed but the Libdems are not ever likely to command a majority needed to form a goverment. Not whilst Labour exists.
Click to expand...
The split between Lloyd George and Asquith was the big reason the liberals declined so fast. The second split in 1931 because of disputes about free trade and whether to join the national unity government was another major setback.

But even with the Lloyd George/Asquith split and extension of the franchise the Liberals scored reasonable numbers:

26.4% and 163 seats in 1918.

28.8% and 115 seats in 1922.

29.7% and 158 seats in 1923.

There was a second big mistake in 1923-1924: letting Labour govern with a minority government, with the idea of allowing the people to see how incompetent they were. They could've done a real coalition government with them or even the conservatives.

Propping up Labour finished them off. That's when the Telegraph started supporting the Tories, and many of the free market zealots/Libertarians moved over as well.

After that they scored:

17.8% and 40 seats in 1924

23.6% and 59 seats in 1929.

Still fairly big on % but a lot smaller in seats.

After the second big split they scored:

10.6% and 72 seats it you combine the three liberal groups in 1931.

10.7% and 58 seats if you combine the three groups in 1935.

Post War politics polarised around the two main parties, with blips in the late 70's early 80's and again 2010 to 2015 but the political zeitgeist now doesn't feel like either of those periods. No poll is showing a major liberal revival, all the volatility is on the right.
 
A lot of people are just 'twisting in the wind.'

They are, literally, desperate. Nothing seems to be getting better - because it isn't. We are facing economic headwinds beyond the control of any party. Plus, most people are politically naive. They do not understand what the various philosophies want, or where following such policies might lead.

So someone comes along and 'says it how it is' and they are attracted to that person, because they see their opinions (or prejudices) reflected.

The fact that person might be a grifter, a liar, or just plain malign doesn't much bother them. It's what they say that counts. Even though it might be complete shite, the modern equivalent of Adolf blaming the Jews for Germany losing WW1. Even if it is bollocks, it's bollocks they like to hear said. Politicians trying to explain the complexities - and to be honest, they don't really try, because they know it flies above the heads of most people - will always struggle against simplistic slogans and 'telling it as it is'.
 
she is providing her political enemies with ammunition to fire back at her - she is a gift to all opposition Partys

 
Mr Kobayashi said:
The Liberals formed governments prior to universal franchise. It was structural change not party incompetence etc that forced their decline.

There is no space for them to replace the Conservatives as a party of goverment.

They may be able to attract the Tory wets but that isn't a big enough demographic.

They wouldn't be able to coherently pivot rightwards and scoop up racist grannies and protofascists attracted to Reform etc and keep socially liberal middle class voters within their tent.

The Tories could be destroyed but the Libdems are not ever likely to command a majority needed to form a goverment. Not whilst Labour exists.
Click to expand...
You’re probably right, but never say never. As we continue on our path of national decline things can and will rapidly change. Such decline is not likely to help the LibDems but they could benefit in the short-ish term if Labour are a disaster in the next four years and come to be viewed like the last lot. Incompetent and dodgy. In those circumstances the LibDems might be able to get to the mid 30s percentage wise. That’s enough for a majority, although the geographical spread of their voters doesn’t help.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You’re probably right, but never say never. As we continue on our path of national decline things can and will rapidly change. Such decline is not likely to help the LibDems but they could benefit in the short-ish term if Labour are a disaster in the next four years and come to be viewed like the last lot. Incompetent and dodgy. In those circumstances the LibDems might be able to get to the mid 30s percentage wise. That’s enough for a majority, although the geographical spread of their voters doesn’t help.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

The two occasions in the last fifty years where the Liberals had a sniff of power, the Lib/Lab pact in the late 70s and the coalition government in 2010 were different, but similar, economic woe coupled with a tired Labour government.

That scenario repeating is not difficult to imagine over the next four years or so. It's the main reason the right wing media paint such a dire economic picture. Don't get me wrong, it's not sunshine and lollipops for the British economy and Tory incompetence and Brexit still have a lot to to answer for, but things ain't as bad as the right wing media would have us believe, everyday is a catastrophe according to those parasitic f**kers.
 
Last edited:
The perfect fumble said:
Spot on.

The two occasions in the last fifty years where the Liberals had a sniff of power, the Lib/Lab Pact in the late 70s and the coalition government in 2010 where different, but similar, economic woe coupled with a tired Labour government.

That scenario is not difficult to imagine over the next four years or so. It's the main reason the right wing media paint such a dire economic picture. Don't get me wrong, it's not sunshine and lollipops for the British economy and Tory incompetence and Brexit still have a lot to to answer for, but things ain't as bad as the right wing media would have us believe, everyday is a catastrophe according to those parasitic f**kers.
Click to expand...
It’s actually pitiful how easily the mentally weak of middle England are gaslit by the right wing press.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It’s actually pitiful how easily the mentally weak of middle England are gaslit by the right wing press.
Click to expand...

“Good things come to those who wait”

_120497983_063058366-1.jpg


All he needs to do is not fuck up and do nothing, and if it all goes south someone will come knocking.
 
they will have got 4 months "winding down money" - thats 4 months pay - about £30k before tax - telling lies is in their DNA which is hardly something to attract a future possible employer. That and going around abusing your constituents is an indicator of your character.

www.thelondoneconomic.com

Sympathy in short supply for ex-Tory MPs who can't find work

It appears as though The Telegraph has finally found some unemployed people it sympathises with, Adam Bienkov pointed out.
www.thelondoneconomic.com www.thelondoneconomic.com
 
bluethrunthru said:
Their 2024 intake is just as full of bellends as the 2019 was

Click to expand...

Unbelievable arrogance from Angela Eagle. Whilst the question was poorly constructed, Eagle will have been perfectly aware as to its intention.
Asylum seekers can jump the queue for NHS appointments . There is a NHS initiative / process called " 987 Inclusion"
Hospitals, GP practices etc adopting this will see Asylum seekers ( and some other categories ) in 15 mins if they just pop in regardless of who or how long other patients have been waiting.
A while ago someone told me this happened in their GP practice, I told them they must be wrong, they must have been a medical priority. She said not, she spoke to the receptionist, I still couldn't believe it - it was true.
Look it up - 987 Inclusion.
Eagle will have known that this was what the question was about.
Another example of our politicians disregarding the legitimate concerns of their electorate. No doubt she would not want to discuss this in Parliament.
 
Hertzblue said:
Unbelievable arrogance from Angela Eagle. Whilst the question was poorly constructed, Eagle will have been perfectly aware as to its intention.
Asylum seekers can jump the queue for NHS appointments . There is a NHS initiative / process called " 987 Inclusion"
Hospitals, GP practices etc adopting this will see Asylum seekers ( and some other categories ) in 15 mins if they just pop in regardless of who or how long other patients have been waiting.
A while ago someone told me this happened in their GP practice, I told them they must be wrong, they must have been a medical priority. She said not, she spoke to the receptionist, I still couldn't believe it - it was true.
Look it up - 987 Inclusion.
Eagle will have known that this was what the question was about.
Another example of our politicians disregarding the legitimate concerns of their electorate. No doubt she would not want to discuss this in Parliament.
Click to expand...
Parliament can discuss anything.

If Bool wanted to use 987 inclusion (whatever it is) as a Barb, she could have done.

The fact she didn’t suggests it’s just another random conspiracy theory.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Parliament can discuss anything.

If Bool wanted to use 987 inclusion (whatever it is) as a Barb, she could have done.

The fact she didn’t suggests it’s just another random conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

It's been presented in a deliberately misleading manner. Undocumented migrants are mentioned in it, but it is not just for them - it is for a whole range of people. What was presented above is the GBNews/Telegraph version.

They still need a referral from a GP (as far as I can tell), and are given a time and date to appear. They can't just show up on spec.

“Many Inclusion Health (IH) patients struggle to attend A&E due to the long delays waiting to be seen, which can often trigger withdrawal symptoms and other issues. To combat this, the IH team at University College London Hospitals (UCLH) have set up the 987 initiative, so-called because email referrals should have '987' in the subject line to make it easier to find them.

987 is a route for patients to attend University College Hospital (UCH) and have an A&E level of access to tests/treatments, but without the prolonged waits and other problems associated with attending A&E spontaneously.”

So who are Inclusion Health patients?

“IH patients, meaning over 18s who:
  • are homeless
  • use, or have used, class A drugs
  • are on methadone/buprenorphine
  • struggle with persistent alcohol misuse
  • are undocumented migrants
  • have other issues that mean they may have been excluded from good quality healthcare in the past.”
 
Hertzblue said:
Unbelievable arrogance from Angela Eagle. Whilst the question was poorly constructed, Eagle will have been perfectly aware as to its intention.
Asylum seekers can jump the queue for NHS appointments . There is a NHS initiative / process called " 987 Inclusion"
Hospitals, GP practices etc adopting this will see Asylum seekers ( and some other categories ) in 15 mins if they just pop in regardless of who or how long other patients have been waiting.
A while ago someone told me this happened in their GP practice, I told them they must be wrong, they must have been a medical priority. She said not, she spoke to the receptionist, I still couldn't believe it - it was true.
Look it up - 987 Inclusion.
Eagle will have known that this was what the question was about.
Another example of our politicians disregarding the legitimate concerns of their electorate. No doubt she would not want to discuss this in Parliament.
Click to expand...


987 inclusion (health) only applied to the University Colleges in London tho doesn’t it ? You’ve been watching GB News again haven’t you ?
 
Hertzblue said:
Unbelievable arrogance from Angela Eagle. Whilst the question was poorly constructed, Eagle will have been perfectly aware as to its intention.
Asylum seekers can jump the queue for NHS appointments . There is a NHS initiative / process called " 987 Inclusion"
Hospitals, GP practices etc adopting this will see Asylum seekers ( and some other categories ) in 15 mins if they just pop in regardless of who or how long other patients have been waiting.
A while ago someone told me this happened in their GP practice, I told them they must be wrong, they must have been a medical priority. She said not, she spoke to the receptionist, I still couldn't believe it - it was true.
Look it up - 987 Inclusion.
Eagle will have known that this was what the question was about.
Another example of our politicians disregarding the legitimate concerns of their electorate. No doubt she would not want to discuss this in Parliament.
Click to expand...
Hmm sounds like bullshit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top