Tory Scum Rebels

[jamesbrown]

They decided on the rules for the leadership contest just before it started. Timelines, etc. This one was deliberately done quite quickly.
And my question was not if the rules changed, but if they can change them ad-hoc and basically do what they want.

The 1922 has complete discretion over the rules. However, the existing rule is that a newly appointed party leader cannot face a confidence vote within the first 12 months of their appointment.

All of this noise about a new leader will come primarily from Sunakites and other people that didn't want Truss in the first place. If the Tory MPs actually ditched her, the broader party would completely implode and it wouldn't help them in the next GE anyway. Better for her to lose in the upcoming GE, which the Tories are going to lose anyway. That way, there will be less bitterness and they can reunite around some bland centrist (or perhaps not ).

[d000hg]

The 1922 has complete discretion over the rules. However, the existing rule is that a newly appointed party leader cannot face a confidence vote within the first 12 months of their appointment.

All of this noise about a new leader will come primarily from Sunakites and other people that didn't want Truss in the first place. If the Tory MPs actually ditched her, the broader party would completely implode and it wouldn't help them in the next GE anyway. Better for her to lose in the upcoming GE, which the Tories are going to lose anyway. That way, there will be less bitterness and they can reunite around some bland centrist (or perhaps not ).

Yes they were rumbling about changing the no-confidence rules for Boris before he got forced out. In reality, if Liz is to go it is more the norm to resign "I realise we are not looking in the same direction, etc".
Until Kwiz blundered in, the Tories were well set to easily win the next GE. External crises cause upset but also opportunities for easy popularity wins - furlough, energy support, etc. If they want Liz out they need to move quick and get it over with, while there is time for the new person to make some quick wins.

[malvolio]

The 1922 has complete discretion over the rules. However, the existing rule is that a newly appointed party leader cannot face a confidence vote within the first 12 months of their appointment.

All of this noise about a new leader will come primarily from Sunakites and other people that didn't want Truss in the first place. If the Tory MPs actually ditched her, the broader party would completely implode and it wouldn't help them in the next GE anyway. Better for her to lose in the upcoming GE, which the Tories are going to lose anyway. That way, there will be less bitterness and they can reunite around some bland centrist (or perhaps not ).

What JB said. In spades.

Please let's not confuse the bawling of a few dozen, largely irrelevant, passed over or otherwise annoyed MPs with the genuine feeling of the party, in the House or outside it, much less the general public. We have a Parliamentary democracy in the UK, not a plebiscite driven by the antisocial media reporting what they think the public wants to hear.

[Whorty]

Can't help but think if Truss and her team had grovelled a bit with Rishi, convinced him to stay as chancellor, then the Tories would be romping it.

They could even have done a deal ala Blair/Brown ... support me for 2 terms as my chancellor and I'll step aside and you take take the reigns.

If Labour do get in next time, and they push through with PR, then the Tories will never be in power again with a majority.

Interesting times indeed.

Should add ... whilst Truss doesn't seem to have total control, the real issue here is her chancellor has zero concept of what he's doing. But then she appointed him so I guess ultimately she's to blame for that

[AtW]

«Suella Braverman has accused Tory rebels of staging a “coup” to force the Government to scrap its plan to abolish the 45p top rate of income tax.

The Home Secretary singled out Michael Gove for specific criticism as she said she was “very disappointed” that some Tory MPs had led calls for the proposal to be ditched.

Ms Braverman said those MPs had undermined Liz Truss as she told Chopper’s Politics: "We should be supporting her and I am very disappointed to say the least by how some of our colleagues have behaved."

The Home Secretary said she was "disappointed about the subsequent reversal but I accept their reasons”.»

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...ty-conference/

[Gibbon]

If Labour do get in next time, and they push through with PR, then the Tories will never be in power again with a majority.

Until Scotland becomes independent which will be the Labour cost for SNP support. The Tories got in by themselves in 2015 because of suspicions of a Lab/SNP pact.

In fact the thought of Krankie lording it over English politics would be divisive and I'm sure I read recently that Starmer won't have PR in the manifesto because he knows this.

[malvolio]

Until Scotland becomes independent which will be the Labour cost for SNP support. The Tories got in by themselves in 2015 because of suspicions of a Lab/SNP pact.

In fact the thought of Krankie lording it over English politics would be divisive and I'm sure I read recently that Starmer won't have PR in the manifesto because he knows this.

Starmer also said he wouldn't consider a pact with the Lib Dems come election time; Labour just won't be contesting seats that are strongly Lib Dem or where the LDs have a good chance of replacing a Tory.

Add it to the growing list of obfuscation coming from his office.

[d000hg]

Starmer also said

Well it must be true then. Until it gives hima sniff of power.

[Whorty]

Starmer also said he wouldn't consider a pact with the Lib Dems come election time; Labour just won't be contesting seats that are strongly Lib Dem or where the LDs have a good chance of replacing a Tory.

Add it to the growing list of obfuscation coming from his office.

Seems like a good tactic to me ... anyone but Tory.

I've never voted Labour in my life, but if I lived in a marginal seat between Tory and Labour there is no way the Tories would ever get my vote ... and I'm an ex Tory voter up until 2010, but never again.

I'm all for 'pacts' or a coalition ... keeps the larger party in line a bit and we get less extreme policies.

[malvolio]

Seems like a good tactic to me ... anyone but Tory.

I've never voted Labour in my life, but if I lived in a marginal seat between Tory and Labour there is no way the Tories would ever get my vote ... and I'm an ex Tory voter up until 2010, but never again.

I'm all for 'pacts' or a coalition ... keeps the larger party in line a bit and we get less extreme policies.

OK, but first you might want to study the way PR elections and coalitions work in the real world. They both mean you are probably led by the least electable of the main parties in the election. And our last experiment with a coalition wans't too successful, was it...?