Tories the future (part1)
Discussion
Esseesse said:
Redwood makes many good points there."Some of us were proud to help with the Bloomberg speech, and many were pleased with its clear message that democratic accountability had to rest in the UK from the people to their Parliament. That is what we are trying to restore by proposing we leave the EU."
The very best of luck with that, given CMD and the Frits. No pun intended.
desolate said:
Adam Ansel said:
There are some in Westminster who think that only by making Gove deputy PM can the current crisis be defused.
And what do normal, sane people think? Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
crankedup said:
don4l said:
crankedup said:
Meanwhile who is Governing and leading the Country.
As long as it isn't Clegg or Corbyn, I am not too bothered.Once we vote Leave, the quisling Cameron will be out on his backside.
We can then look forward to a proper Conservative party which will take us back to one nation politics as were practised by Maggie.
turbobloke said:
A reasonable if tainted question to ask, but their thoughts matter not a jot as to whether it'll happen or not.
Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
So "better than Prescott", I think that says all we need to know if that is the best you can come up with.Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
We have already had "anyone is better than Corbyn and Clegg" - these are not exactly ringing endorsements are they?
Breadvan72 said:
Whatever else may be said about Margaret Thatcher, being a one nation Tory isn't one of them. For good or ill, she was a very divisive figure.
What happened was that the Left, who hadn't seen or expected anything like it, reverted to type and the outpouring of hate for Thatcher is seen as her fault. What she did was what needed to be done to get Britain back to work and out of the red (no pun intended).
Abstract
This article explores the relationship between Margaret
Thatcher and One Nation Conservatism, and suggests that
they were not such an odd couple. Though not a One Nation
Conservative herself, Thatcher always viewed One Nation
Conservatism in terms of patriotism rather than
paternalism. This was an equally potent tradition of One
Nation thought which could also be traced back to
Disraeli. Thatcher recognised this and she was quite
prepared to exploit the alternative Disraelian ideal for
her own purposes. One Nation Conservatism, conceived as a
form of patriotism, enabled Thatcher to domesticate the
ideas of the American-led New Right: it was one nation of
property owners which she wanted to create in 1980s
Britain.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1361946...
glazbagun said:
It's quite amazing to think the Tories would let Europe tear then apart again after the wilderness it sent them to before.
Quite, and it's being led by quite a few of the same clowns as last time. Narcissistic, deluded, fools who think they're feeling the weight of history on their shoulders when it is in fact just their swollen egos. Cameron's strategy to unite the party behind him by keeping all factions at the top table for a long stretch then neuter the nut jobs in this referendum was a pretty good gambit, and it may still play out, but the lack of any credible opposition is emboldening the lunatics and it could still go horribly wrong. ATG said:
Quite, and it's being led by quite a few of the same clowns as last time. Narcissistic, deluded, fools who think they're feeling the weight of history on their shoulders when it is in fact just their swollen egos. Cameron's strategy to unite the party behind him by keeping all factions at the top table for a long stretch then neuter the nut jobs in this referendum was a pretty good gambit, and it may still play out, but the lack of any credible opposition is emboldening the lunatics and it could still go horribly wrong.
Some would say that Cameron is the nut job in this with his dismal negotiation and operation fear.desolate said:
So "better than Prescott", I think that says all we need to know if that is the best you can come up with.
We have already had "anyone is better than Corbyn and Clegg" - these are not exactly ringing endorsements are they?
No, but unless you can counter any of them they're probably "good enough". Politics is the art of the possible, after all.We have already had "anyone is better than Corbyn and Clegg" - these are not exactly ringing endorsements are they?
Oh and for the record I despise the vast majority of them of any and all parties.
Breadvan72 said:
Whatever else may be said about Margaret Thatcher, being a one nation Tory isn't one of them. For good or ill, she was a very divisive figure.
Oh, come on.You must admit that she healed Britain.
Or, do you really think that a chancellor who wanted to "squeeze the rich until the pips squeak" was a more unifying figure.
You cannot deny that the vast majority of Britons were far better off when she left office than when she took office. The poor were less poor and the wealthy were more wealthy. Everybody gained. The country was generally happy, and industrial relations were generally good.
desolate said:
turbobloke said:
A reasonable if tainted question to ask, but their thoughts matter not a jot as to whether it'll happen or not.
Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
So "better than Prescott", I think that says all we need to know if that is the best you can come up with.Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
We have already had "anyone is better than Corbyn and Clegg" - these are not exactly ringing endorsements are they?
"better than Prescott" really doesn't say very much at all. Like Huhne, Prescott is a liar. Sadly, he hasn't been prosecuted for it. It's fine to lie when you are talking about accepting a lordship. Tell the gullible fools that vote Labour that you would never accept a seat in the House of Lords, because you don't believe in "privilege". Jesus H Christ!
People voted for this thug.
Why on Earth do the public think that a ship's steward would be better able to represent them than a successful metals trader?
don4l said:
For the second time today, we are in agreement.
"better than Prescott" really doesn't say very much at all. Like Huhne, Prescott is a liar. Sadly, he hasn't been prosecuted for it. It's fine to lie when you are talking about accepting a lordship. Tell the gullible fools that vote Labour that you would never accept a seat in the House of Lords, because you don't believe in "privilege". Jesus H Christ!
People voted for this thug.
Why on Earth do the public think that a ship's steward would be better able to represent them than a successful metals trader?
two questions"better than Prescott" really doesn't say very much at all. Like Huhne, Prescott is a liar. Sadly, he hasn't been prosecuted for it. It's fine to lie when you are talking about accepting a lordship. Tell the gullible fools that vote Labour that you would never accept a seat in the House of Lords, because you don't believe in "privilege". Jesus H Christ!
People voted for this thug.
Why on Earth do the public think that a ship's steward would be better able to represent them than a successful metals trader?
1) what are we agreeing about?
2) why should the public think that a successful metals trader is better able to represent them than a ship's steward?
As an aside I have no dog in this fight as I never voted for any established political party so please don't confuse me with a Labour Party Apologist.
don4l said:
Breadvan72 said:
Whatever else may be said about Margaret Thatcher, being a one nation Tory isn't one of them. For good or ill, she was a very divisive figure.
Oh, come on.You must admit that she healed Britain.
Or, do you really think that a chancellor who wanted to "squeeze the rich until the pips squeak" was a more unifying figure.
You cannot deny that the vast majority of Britons were far better off when she left office than when she took office. The poor were less poor and the wealthy were more wealthy. Everybody gained. The country was generally happy, and industrial relations were generally good.
don4l said:
desolate said:
turbobloke said:
A reasonable if tainted question to ask, but their thoughts matter not a jot as to whether it'll happen or not.
Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
So "better than Prescott", I think that says all we need to know if that is the best you can come up with.Presclot was nowhere near DPM material, but needs must etc. At least Gove can construct a sentence, though his jab may need work.
We have already had "anyone is better than Corbyn and Clegg" - these are not exactly ringing endorsements are they?
"better than Prescott" really doesn't say very much at all. Like Huhne, Prescott is a liar.
The point, if anyone cares to read the post again this time more slowly maybe, is that people who are perceived as unsuitable due perhaps to being pig ignorant (Presclot) or intellectual and abrasive (Gove) get themselves into hierarchical positions for all sorts of reasons including attempts at shoring up Party unity - regardless of suitability.
Gove's calibre bears no comparison to Preclot and no such comparison was attempted.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff