Very much so, yes.
david
joined 2 years ago
Well in that sense, they've been remarkably successful. Literally billions of public money gone through the VIP lane and unrepaid business loans during covid. Nearly every tax cut giving more money to the already well off and less to below average earners. Wealth inequality soaring to help them feel superior.
OK, but he did claim he was going to stay on as an MP. Come to think of it, that's a bit of an admission that he's going to lose the election and then be replaced as leader of the Conservative Party.
Hopefully considerably less powerful soon.
It's only a story because it's so incredibly rare that members of the public get the chance to criticise his crazy policies to his face, in terms ordinary folk can relate to.
Ah yes, because another five years of the Conservative Party is just what the country needs. Spoken like a true leftist.
It's not just Brexit, it's also austerity and stealth austerity, massive and chronic cuts to public services, stagnation of minimum wage, underfunded NHS and health and social care, underinvestment, Trussonimics, waste of government money on contracts for cronies (aka the VIP lane) and of course don't forget systematic, sustained and deliberate suppression of wages in the public sector alongside deregulation and lack of regulation in the private sector in the face of the growth of the gig economy, which is just tech companies circumventing almost all laws about workers rights. But yes, definitely Brexit too.
The truth is that Rishi Sunak is very happy to sacrifice the young to bad outcomes because he doesn't think they'll vote for him anyway so he can punch down without fear of electoral impact.
I don't see anything correct in spending £20k of their election budget on a logo. No one likes new logos and everyone thinks they're not worth the money. Well thank goodness this one is!
Yeah, Pret a Manger has a reputation for being expensive and pretentious, whereas Greggs has a reputation for being cheap and unpretentious.
The point of Betteridge's law isn't really that they're false, it's that the editor hasn't got the evidence that it's true because if they did it wouldn't be a question.
In this case it's a hard no. The main threat to Labour isn't the greens it's people thinking it's a forgone conclusion and not voting, the new constituencies that reduce the number of city seats because poor people register to vote less than others, which reduces the number of Labour MPs, voter disenfranchisement, the Conservative Party election machine which will narrow the polls as we go through the weeks and biased coverage from the print and broadcast media.
Last night a BBC report on the election has several minutes covering Rishi's "energetic" election campaign with plenty of clips of him claiming to like talking to people, then a single soundbite from each of Labour, Lib Dems, SNP and Reform followed by a still of Keir Starmer with a voice over saying he was campaigning too and then a one minute segment on controversy once Diane Abbot. The message was "Rishi is working hard to meet lots of ordinary people, here's some quotes for balance, and Labour are divided." I think the Conservatives are far more divided and that Labour will work far harder for ordinary people, but I'm not a conservative donor who's been appointed to make editorial decisions about BBC politics, so what would I know?
The Conservative Party is notoriously unforgiving of leaders who lose general elections, and currently pathologically addicted to leadership elections. I'd be very surprised if he's not gone by the end of the year even if he does exceptionally well in the general election.