Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Who the hell would want the job? Surely any Tory with leadership ambitions is going to want to wait until after they've lost the next election rather than carry the blame for the actions of the last five PMs?

I think they may want not to win the GE.

Let someone else clean the shit off the carpet.

I'm sure that's true, even more reason, as a Tory with ambition, to keep your head down so none the shit sticks to you.

The way things are going they're, hopefully, going to get their arses kicked so badly that they'll have no chance in the next but one election, either. That means no Tory with ambitions of being Prime Minister will touch the job after Sunak. With most of the 2019 intake likely to be out there isn't a lot of them to choose from. Braverman it is.

Death rattle of the Tory party.

But not 'post me nihil'. Some other monstrosity will raise its head.

On the other hand would someone put themselves forward who would be happy to be in opposition, to manage the breathing space. No shit on their shoes, no tough decisions to (not) make, heckle from the sidelines, whilst the party tries to reinvent itself

But there again, I’m forgetting their inbred divine right to be the party of government, and that each and everyone of them has an all consuming, naked ambition to get as far up the greasy pole as possible

Porkie Penny Mordor would probably delight in the job and the bumped-up salary. That's a lot of cake ...

Can’t even think of a Brexit zealot wanting to grab the tiller because the revolution is being betrayed. Even Steve Baker no longer wants to touch the top job with a barge pole for that reason.

Oboogie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 02, 2023 2:08 pm Who the hell would want the job? Surely any Tory with leadership ambitions is going to want to wait until after they've lost the next election rather than carry the blame for the actions of the last five PMs?

A new leader wouldn't have to win, just do better than the last election. It wouldn't have to be like William Hague 1997-2001. Any ambitious politician is going to back themselves to do that. The trouble with waiting is that somebody else appears in the meantime, or something happens to you.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sat Sep 02, 2023 7:19 pm A new leader wouldn't have to win, just do better than the last election.

But the Tories are not going to win, let alone improve on Johnson's 80 seat majority.

I meant the election after. Apologies if I misunderstood.

Rishi has had a pretty crap Summer all his attempted relaunches have quickly unravelled. His reshuffle this week was utterly pathetic, which would suggests that he is incredibly weak. He failed to slap down Ian Duncan Smith when he supported vandalism against ULEZ cameras.

He now has to decide if he wants to stick it out to the bitter end or cut and run sooner. Which ever option he choses he is likely to lose.

Sunak’s pep talk to the troops from October last year.

Rishi Sunak, the incoming prime minister, has told MPs that the Conservative party is facing an “existential threat”, in his first address to them on becoming party leader, after Penny Mordaunt failed to get 100 nominations to reach the threshold to trigger a ballot.
In his speech, given behind closed doors to MPs, Sunak said the party should “unite or die” and vowed he would return the party to the values of its 2019 manifesto, which helped win the party an 80-seat majority.
Ruling out an early general election, he said he would lead a government of serious Conservative values and make his first priority tackling the economic crisis. https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... n-withdraw

... unite or die ... return the party to the values ... first priority ... economic crisis ...

By Jove, I think that he actually believes the vapid nonsense which he reads from his prompt cards whenever he is within spitting distance of a microphone.

I'm beginning to feel rather embarrassed for him.

Don't.

Many years ago I shared an office with my bestie Alan. During a particularly trying day he passed me a note which simply said "You wanted the fucking job".

Same.

Turns out Sunak’s fingerprints are all over the (in)action plan on schools.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... il-servant

Sunak acknowledged “the timing is frustrating” for parents preparing to send their children back to school for the autumn. But he added: “There are around 22,000 schools in England and the important thing to know is that we expect that 95% of those schools won’t be impacted by this.”

OK Rish!, here's 100 people, right in front of you. All have been fed a slow acting poison, but you only have antidote for 95 of them. Which 5 are unlucky, and how do you tell them - to their faces - that they're fucked? And how many kickings do you expect to receive?

This must be what Greg Hands calls "strength of character".

Education Department- Chancellor, we haven't spent enough on school buildings in recent years.
Chancellor- na na na you're getting the same as before.

Same man now Prime Minister- It's rubbish to say I didn't give them enough money, it was the same as before (when it also wasn't enough).

Sunak today accused Starmer of “political opportunism”. This is meant as an insult, though I’m a bit puzzled as to why it ought to be thought of as such. Starmer is the leader of the opposition. Quite literally, his JOB is to hold the government accountable. It shouldn’t be in the slightest degree surprising that as such, he will be on the look-out for opportunities to do so, and fully to exploit these if and when they arise. Why on earth is Sunak pretending to be appalled by this ?

See also : the frequently slung accusation of “playing politics”. We’re not “playing” anything, we’re fucking doing politics. Again, it is quite literally our job as professional politicians.

Is this truly how far the standard of political debate has fallen ?

It is also stupid to talk about political opportunism when parliament has been closed for nearly 2 months. How can you bring up these issues when parliament is not sitting?