Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Hell of a lot more fun when it's the other team!
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Hell of a lot more fun when it's the other team!
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Ah, i actually forgot it was the libs in power there for a moment, too used to a world ruled by the right! Sounds like a familiar dynamic, the issue of trying to widen your appeal without fracturing your base. The uk labour party has embraced the strategy of seriously courting the right, even trying to outflank the tories on some cultural and economic issues, and hoping not to piss off too much of the existing base in the process, incorporating the old Blair doctrine of "they have no place else to go". Personally, i think they might be in for a rude awakening.
Poor old Starmer, they used him to start cleansing the party of the evil clique of lefty corbynite cranks and now he's outlived his usefulness, they're preparing to fuck him over, the same way they did the previous two leaders. And no doubt, get someone even more wretched in to replace him.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Hell of a lot more fun when it's the other team!
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Ah, i actually forgot it was the libs in power there for a moment, too used to a world ruled by the right! Sounds like a familiar dynamic, the issue of trying to widen your appeal without fracturing your base. The uk labour party has embraced the strategy of seriously courting the right, even trying to outflank the tories on some cultural and economic issues, and hoping not to piss off too much of the existing base in the process, incorporating the old Blair doctrine of "they have no place else to go". Personally, i think they might be in for a rude awakening.
The Conservatives here are, to be fair to them, a bit hemmed in by the emergence of a crazier party on the right that is siphoning off some of their base. So, do they move to the centre to appeal to right-Liberal voters, or do they move right to choke off the competitor but risk losing centrists? The last leader kinda sorta tried to do the former in last year's election and failed (partly because he was transparently working both sides of the room, ensuring both sides thought he was lying), but the frontrunner to replace him is playing to the nuts. My suspicion is that regardless of who wins the next leadership fight, the Conservatives will split like they did in the 90s. There's no trust in the tent between the dysfunctional nuts and the functional nuts.
Canada's got the same shit going on, except with the Conservatives.
Hell of a lot more fun when it's the other team!
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Ah, i actually forgot it was the libs in power there for a moment, too used to a world ruled by the right! Sounds like a familiar dynamic, the issue of trying to widen your appeal without fracturing your base. The uk labour party has embraced the strategy of seriously courting the right, even trying to outflank the tories on some cultural and economic issues, and hoping not to piss off too much of the existing base in the process, incorporating the old Blair doctrine of "they have no place else to go". Personally, i think they might be in for a rude awakening.
The Conservatives here are, to be fair to them, a bit hemmed in by the emergence of a crazier party on the right that is siphoning off some of their base. So, do they move to the centre to appeal to right-Liberal voters, or do they move right to choke off the competitor but risk losing centrists? The last leader kinda sorta tried to do the former in last year's election and failed (partly because he was transparently working both sides of the room, ensuring both sides thought he was lying), but the frontrunner to replace him is playing to the nuts. My suspicion is that regardless of who wins the next leadership fight, the Conservatives will split like they did in the 90s. There's no trust in the tent between the dysfunctional nuts and the functional nuts.
I think you fundamentally can't have a large party (and certainly not in mostly two-party systems like the US and Uk) where it wont be fractured along these lines and leaders face these critical hard choices and almost impossibly delicate balancing acts. The UK tories will generally cleave themselves in half for 3-4 years but by election time, they'll almost by magic staple themselves together again and put up a united front. Because ultimately, for all their differences, they are bound together by the good of the party and it trumps the good of the country or the people. I guess that's partly why they are such a formidable election winning machine.
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Ah, i actually forgot it was the libs in power there for a moment, too used to a world ruled by the right! Sounds like a familiar dynamic, the issue of trying to widen your appeal without fracturing your base. The uk labour party has embraced the strategy of seriously courting the right, even trying to outflank the tories on some cultural and economic issues, and hoping not to piss off too much of the existing base in the process, incorporating the old Blair doctrine of "they have no place else to go". Personally, i think they might be in for a rude awakening.
The Conservatives here are, to be fair to them, a bit hemmed in by the emergence of a crazier party on the right that is siphoning off some of their base. So, do they move to the centre to appeal to right-Liberal voters, or do they move right to choke off the competitor but risk losing centrists? The last leader kinda sorta tried to do the former in last year's election and failed (partly because he was transparently working both sides of the room, ensuring both sides thought he was lying), but the frontrunner to replace him is playing to the nuts. My suspicion is that regardless of who wins the next leadership fight, the Conservatives will split like they did in the 90s. There's no trust in the tent between the dysfunctional nuts and the functional nuts.
I think you fundamentally can't have a large party (and certainly not in mostly two-party systems like the US and Uk) where it wont be fractured along these lines and leaders face these critical hard choices and almost impossibly delicate balancing acts. The UK tories will generally cleave themselves in half for 3-4 years but by election time, they'll almost by magic staple themselves together again and put up a united front. Because ultimately, for all their differences, they are bound together by the good of the party and it trumps the good of the country or the people. I guess that's partly why they are such a formidable election winning machine.
That sounds more like the Liberals here. Canada's Conservatives are divided between rural and urban constituencies and Western Canada and the East, with the rural/West the angry, crazy, xenophobic, conspiracy-minded base. The base has also gutted the right from having anything approaching an intellectual, principled component. It's just kneejerk "own the libs" all the time, with every attack frothing and hysterical. Satisfying to the base, but repellent to two-thirds of the population.
The fear is that if the Conservatives really embrace the Trumpy side of things, they just have to wait until the Liberals addiction to corruption finally catches up with them and they get tossed. I'm not quite as worried about that because the Conservatives have largely given up trying to speak to anyone but their base, and it's pretty damned impossible to get a majority without appealing to non-crazies. That's the difference now—Conservatives aren't trying to appeal to the iffy voter.
Ah, i actually forgot it was the libs in power there for a moment, too used to a world ruled by the right! Sounds like a familiar dynamic, the issue of trying to widen your appeal without fracturing your base. The uk labour party has embraced the strategy of seriously courting the right, even trying to outflank the tories on some cultural and economic issues, and hoping not to piss off too much of the existing base in the process, incorporating the old Blair doctrine of "they have no place else to go". Personally, i think they might be in for a rude awakening.
The Conservatives here are, to be fair to them, a bit hemmed in by the emergence of a crazier party on the right that is siphoning off some of their base. So, do they move to the centre to appeal to right-Liberal voters, or do they move right to choke off the competitor but risk losing centrists? The last leader kinda sorta tried to do the former in last year's election and failed (partly because he was transparently working both sides of the room, ensuring both sides thought he was lying), but the frontrunner to replace him is playing to the nuts. My suspicion is that regardless of who wins the next leadership fight, the Conservatives will split like they did in the 90s. There's no trust in the tent between the dysfunctional nuts and the functional nuts.
I think you fundamentally can't have a large party (and certainly not in mostly two-party systems like the US and Uk) where it wont be fractured along these lines and leaders face these critical hard choices and almost impossibly delicate balancing acts. The UK tories will generally cleave themselves in half for 3-4 years but by election time, they'll almost by magic staple themselves together again and put up a united front. Because ultimately, for all their differences, they are bound together by the good of the party and it trumps the good of the country or the people. I guess that's partly why they are such a formidable election winning machine.
That sounds more like the Liberals here. Canada's Conservatives are divided between rural and urban constituencies and Western Canada and the East, with the rural/West the angry, crazy, xenophobic, conspiracy-minded base. The base has also gutted the right from having anything approaching an intellectual, principled component. It's just kneejerk "own the libs" all the time, with every attack frothing and hysterical. Satisfying to the base, but repellent to two-thirds of the population.
It feels like we're in some kind of Bizarro dimension here where the Liberals dynamic closely corresponds with the tories and that of the Canadian conservatives with UK labour. It's actually quite uncanny and has piqued my interest to explore a little further.
Re: Hey limeys
Posted: 17 Jun 2022, 2:24pm
by Low Down Low
Whatever you think about Assange, I'm very encouraged to hear this. Also a chance the new Australian pm might intervene too.
Re: Hey limeys
Posted: 22 Jun 2022, 6:29pm
by Kory
edit-wrong thread
Re: Hey limeys
Posted: 23 Jun 2022, 5:49am
by Marky Dread
I'm disappointed that the other "Hey Limeys" has 152 posts. Making me sad for this "Hey Limeys" thread. There just has to be more equality around here.
Re: Hey limeys
Posted: 06 Jul 2022, 6:49am
by Low Down Low
Is Johnson toast this time? I think he is. Possibly definitely. Anyway, great to see all these brave honourable tory politicians stand up and draw a line in the sand. Nobody can be proven to be an amoralistic, inveterate liar for the 55th time and get away with it.
Is Johnson toast this time? I think he is. Possibly definitely. Anyway, great to see all these brave honourable tory politicians stand up and draw a line in the sand. Nobody can be proven to be an amoralistic, inveterate liar for the 55th time and get away with it.
Is Johnson toast this time? I think he is. Possibly definitely. Anyway, great to see all these brave honourable tory politicians stand up and draw a line in the sand. Nobody can be proven to be an amoralistic, inveterate liar for the 55th time and get away with it.
As always, this captures the moment when these things happen: