Mailwatch(ed) Forum

davidjay wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 11:13 pm The (to my mind at least) tweely-irritating Marsh family chip in.

https://x.com/MarshSongs/status/1791947802316001384

How do they get their kids to fall in line like that? They’re like not all they seem sinister aliens from Doctor Who

Eh? They lookm perfectly normal to me.
How can you object to a family of musicians making left-wing songs to satirise the government?

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 9:54 pm The students didn't talk to them because they weren't worth talking to.

I think debating is a massively overrated thing, but having seen Braverman be reduced to talking about tofu by Yvette Cooper, I think most of them could have handled her.

It's not so much the debate.

It's GB news and the Telegraph - who regularly report Sunak "destroying" Starmer at PMQs.
They'll cherry pick a couple of clips and create the legend of "Suella the Destroyer with 'Fakts and Logik'"

Protest laws found to be unlawful by high court. Braverman will be furious at this. Good.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/art ... ourt-rules

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 9:21 am Eh? They lookm perfectly normal to me.
How can you object to a family of musicians making left-wing songs to satirise the government?

It's part my irrational loathing of squeaky-clean perfect families, part as Youngian said, how come the kids are all so
compliant and part a bit of unease that however laudible the sentiment, I feel uneasy at kids that young being publicly political.

Suella Braverman, The Triratna Buddhist Order and The London Buddhist Centre

Enlightened ones set the record straight.

https://thebuddhistcentre.com/londonbud ... ist-centre

A recent Guardian article incorrectly stated that Ms Braverman is a member of the Triratna Buddhist Order and attends the London Buddhist Centre twice a month.

The London Buddhist Centre wishes to clarify that Ms Braverman is neither a member of the Triratna Buddhist Order nor has she attended the Centre in recent times.

Wiki wrote:member of the Triratna Buddhist Order.[154] She took her oath of allegiance as an MP on the Buddhist Dhammapada.[155]

[154] "Suella Braverman, The Triratna Buddhist Order and The London Buddhist Centre". London Buddhist Centre. 23 May 2023. Archived from the original on 2 September 2023. Retrieved 7 September 2023.

Washing their hands:
https://thebuddhistcentre.com/londonbud ... ist-centre

Braverman is first out of the swamp to claim the Tories need to move further right to see off reclaim. No real surprise other than I thought she might at least wait until election day itself.

Leadership election starts before the general election.

IIRC, the (no longer relevant) Edwina Currie caused a stir by saying she thought Labour would win easily. The rest of the party played it straight for the team until the results came in.

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:29 pm Braverman is first out of the swamp to claim the Tories need to move further right to see off reclaim. No real surprise other than I thought she might at least wait until election day itself.

Go on Tory activists make Suella leader.

An outcome much to be desired...

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:29 pm Braverman is first out of the swamp to claim the Tories need to move further right to see off reclaim. No real surprise other than I thought she might at least wait until election day itself.

The trouble is political parties do not learn from the mistakes of other parties. After 1979, some in the Labour Party said the reason they lost was because they were not socialist enough. The result after several years of arguing was the 1983 election manifesto. We all know how that ended. If Suella wishes to move the Conservative Party even further to the right then fine. Don’t expect electoral success will follow automatically. If she did become leader Starmer would be able very easily to associate her with the failures of the last 14 years.

It would be interesting to go down the other leg of the trousers of time and see what the result of the 1983 election would have been if there hadn't been military action in the South Atlantic the year before. Or, if the Falklands war had taken place but with Argentina the winners.

The problem is that as many have said over time, elections are decided in the centre ground. But if your party's taken a beating, it's likely that the bulk of survivors are from the hard core. "If only you lot were more like us" they say, and survivor bias kicks in. It's a bit like those apocryphal stories about aircraft repairs in the war - they looked at the planes that made it back and patched up the bits they got shot through. They didn't look at the downed planes and check where they got hit.

On top of that, and the inevitable group chat among the survivors, there's the need to repair the immediate damage and shore up your core support lest it go further toward the extremes. So whoever's left in the room starts to dictate the direction of travel.

Unless the Tory party amends its rules about leadership elections they could now end up with a leadership election every year. With only 121 MPs the threshold for no confidence letters must now be down to 18 MPs. If the new leader were to reshuffle the shadow cabinet at any point any sacked shadow ministers would soon be able to muster up enough letters to trigger a leadership contest.

Is it proportionately more headbanger than before? Haven't done the Maths. But it might well be a problem, I agree.

One more immediate problem is stopping the membership getting the chance to vote for a headbanger as leader.

"Problem"?

satnav wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 7:28 pm Unless the Tory party amends its rules about leadership elections they could now end up with a leadership election every year. With only 121 MPs the threshold for no confidence letters must now be down to 18 MPs. If the new leader were to reshuffle the shadow cabinet at any point any sacked shadow ministers would soon be able to muster up enough letters to trigger a leadership contest.

Maybe the five families can organise a timeshare.

Yug wrote: ↑Thu Jul 04, 2024 8:42 am It would be interesting to go down the other leg of the trousers of time and see what the result of the 1983 election would have been if there hadn't been military action in the South Atlantic the year before. Or, if the Falklands war had taken place but with Argentina the winners.

From what I remember the polls were moving back towards the Tories in early 1982. Then you had the appalling Labour campaign. It might not have been as bad but the result would have been the same.

If Suella Braverman does emerge as the Tory leader will she actually be able to establish a shadow cabinet? I'd be very surprised if the likes of Jeremy Hunt would be in a rush to serve under her.

The new leader will need at least 20 MPs in their shadow cabinet and there are probably another 20 odd post just below cabinet level that will need to be shadowed. The Tories will also be expected to supply 10 MPs to chair various select committees as well as 60 odd MPs to serve on the various select committees.

The next speaker will probably be a Tory and there will also be at least one deputy speaker.

If a couple of dozen MPs refuse to play ball with the new leader the opposition is going to look very patchy.