Rishi Sunak

Don’t know what the worst, that or your Racist Bingo game. I’ll let other’s decide. IMHO they are both S.hite.

 

You've never said.

 

If anyone's going for it, it's Micky G. He might let Sunak land the first blow, but he's been after PM for years.

 

Cummings is in the Gove camp too. Heaven help us!

 

At the end of the day, there’s not a single politician that I agree with every stance on.

I’d take someone eloquent and respectable like Sunak over blithering idiots like BJ and Gove every time

 

What's the difference? a Tory is still a Tory, eloquent or otherwise.

 

After 10 years of austerity the Tories were there for the taking, unfortunately Labour were at a loss of how to take advantage.

Yes, it was a one off, being dubbed the Brexit Election, but these flip flop voters as you call them who wanted Brexit and voted Tory were offered no alternative from the opposition. Years after the referendum ( which Corbyn initialled said he would respect the result of) I believe people were fed up of talk and lack of action. Along came Boris, who said he’d make Brexit happen, whereas Labour were indecisive giving it the yes but no but, and then their leader decided to sit on the fence. Brexit supporters were taken in by Boris and his unwavering determination to see Brexit through and any MP against him was given the boot to get everyone in the party to toe the line.

Labour may have had better policies, but surely at that time someone in the Labour camp should have realised policies were going to count for nothing in this election, and Brexit would be the deciding factor, although Corbyn still decided to sit on the fence to try and appease everyone.

As @Donny-Red says lower in this thread, the party would lose votes whichever way they turned. Surely this was the point that strong leadership was needed.

The vote might have split Labour, but it was time for someone to stand up and say ‘Look, with the way things are we are going to be leaving the EU regardless, so what is the lesser of two evils, Brexit overseen by a Labour government in charge or a Conservative one.’

There’s plenty of terms such as ‘Tory apologist’ being said in various threads, but what about Labour apologists who think the party could have not done anything different. Some on here were so against Brexit they were happy to vote against Labour if they supported Brexit without a further referendum, which may as well been a vote for the Tories in that they were taking a vote away from Labour and giving it to a party with no chance of getting in power.

Did Labour decided to sit this parliamentary term out? Getting Labour supporters to turn against people who voted Tory and Brexit, rather then turning on each other if they were to oversee Brexit? Then in 5 years time after we were already out of the EU with probably more austerity and significant job losses come riding to the rescue of the country?

 

You could have just put "Yes it was about Brexit".

 

Along with, and so obviously Labour couldn’t possibly have won.

 

Nearly 20 years ago (2000-2004), Rishi Sunak was an investment banker at Goldman Sachs - just a couple of years before their "practices" were implicated as one of the big reasons in the credit crunch (see also Sajid Javid at Deutsche Bank). This led directly to the lost decade of austerity. People might blame Labour for the credit crunch (particularly Tories), but Sunak and Javid (among many) were the actual *cause* of the credit crunch.

He is married into money - his father-in-law is a billionaire, founder of Infosys. A bit of a "Yes" man too - he agreed to work with Cummings advisors when Javid quit.

He is another East Indian Asian who is in the top ranks of the Tories - with Patel and Javid - which is unusual for immigrants (most support Labour), but they come from a system that was institutionally racist - White->Asian->Black.

Given his heritage and the card-carrying membership of the Tory party, the only way he will get to be leader of the party is if the MPs put him through against Javid, Patel or Cleverly for the party vote. I can't see him winning against a white candidate.

 

That’s not true. It’s well known to anyone that’s followed Corbyn that he’s anti-EU. It was pressure from within his own party including Starmer that meant Labour went forward with a second referendum plan.

Instead of keeping the party happy he should’ve stood up for his beliefs more & told Watson, Starmer & co where to go even though I’m a remainer.

 

Go on, why couldn’t they have possibly won?

Lacking a strong leader who could unite the party and make them see what the outcome of divisions in the party would lead to?

 

Simple maths.
Campaign for Leaving the EU, they lose fewer votes to UKIP etc but lose more than half their core votes to the Lib Dem’s, pick up absolutely no Tory votes. Gives an even bigger Tory majority than we ended up with.

A strong smart leader campaigning for Remain or a 2nd referendum, lose a third of their core vote to UKIP / Tories, possibly pick up a tiny number of Tory voters and poss some Lib Dem’s in marginal seats.

But as I’ve said - the split of Leave / Remain within the Labour core vote meant that there was no way that the numbers could work. We can pontificate all night about Corbyns real stance on the EU; but it’s irrelevant, they knew the only possible chance they had was to try to not alienate as many voters as possible by sitting on the fence.

Brexit will be a distant memory by the next election and it’ll be a completely different ball game.

 

Agreed, which is why I posted other day saying Country would have come a long way if he did.

 

Wasn’t it a time to put party politics before peoples own personal preferences regarding Brexit?

Dont the people who’d have voted Lib Dem if Labour decided to compete with the Tories with a Leave campaign bear some responsibility for putting the Tories back into power?

As they complain about no deal Brexit and chlorinated chickens, wouldn’t they have preferred for their party to lead the way out of the EU whether they were for or against? For a better leave deal, and to keep the chicken in the US?

 

A minister who votes in line with the government? What a revelation!

Have you been to the press with this incredible information?

 

What is it you’re not seeing?
The country was split 50:50 on Brexit. The majority of Pro Brexit voters are traditional Tory voters.
There’s no subtlety, no way that Labour could win most votes short of the Tory party ceasing to exist.

Likewise if the Labour Party cease to exist and we had a magic single pro EU party, they could have possibly won an election in a theoretical world where the pro EU vote all voted for them and the anti EU voters were split amongst UKIP Tory etc.

Party politics is irrelevant, the election was about Brexit, and at least 48% of the population don’t want it, but importantly the majority of those that did would vote Tory anyway.

 

It does
(Other posts have more detail)

 

For balance most of those votes would be before he was a minister

 

No, the FPTP voting system accounts for a "complete landslide", where a party winning an extra 1.2% of the vote can win 46 seats. Over 55% of the country voted against the Tory Brexit, but that is what we are getting.