Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

midlandsgrimpeur

Active Member
Weird thing that makes no sense to me is how they seem to have no interest in growing or broadening their base, instead just looking to exclude existing supporters - the "support this policy or get out".

And lower supporter numbers means lower income, less campaigning come election, fewer activists knocking on doors, etc.

And that looks like their deliberate plan.

I don't think they have any skilled political operators left that actually know how to. It's down to a few chancers scratching around for a handful of voters, throwing out ill informed policy ideas on a whim.
 

C R

Guru
They are doubling down. And down, and down, and down.......

I think you meant halving.
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member
I am afraid that they have learned that Donald Trump's approach works in the polls...especially at a time when people are very disillusioned with politics and their lot.

The world is losing the ability for rational thought and in desperation are listening to snake-oil salesmen.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: C R

icowden

Shaman
 

icowden

Shaman
In other news, here's a Daily Mail column about integration from Henry Morris
s%2F2f337cdb-5bff-462b-9716-be47d852fdbe_2480x3242.jpg
 

icowden

Shaman
Seriously?? Is this another Matthew-Parris-Garroting-Cyclists incident - needed to submit a column after 2 bottles of Bordeaux?!
I mean the last sentence alone makes it sound like deliberate gammon parody!
No - not seriously. Henry Morris is the satirist previously known as the Secret Tory.
 
Having spent some time with West Australians recently, they can't understand why the UK government aren't more in favour of private healthcare and private education as it reduces the burden on the state significantly, whilst you are still paying for the state service through taxation.

The Netherlands Has that system basically in fact every one pays for what we would call private here (yes there are some private hospitals in the Netherlands, but not like here) and if you're below and certain tress hold you get the amount you need to pay back via a benefit payment. (alltough they have slightly changed it to be paid directly to insurers now. )

It doesn't really saves money but it makes it easier for the government to claim it does because the private companies and in an extent the taxpayer pays for the bill of not collectable insurance premiums.
But the hospitals and such all get their money so they perform greatly on paper, so problem successfully moved to a other desk. And with several private insurance companies you get policies like ''get this and this rate if you stay healthy'' which makes them sponsor/give discount or include gym memberships so capitalism wise it works out great.


Using education as an example, let's say is costs £5,000 pa for the state to educate a child. They would subsidise private education by say £2,000 pa, so the state is saving £3,000 pa on educating the child, with the parents picking up the rest of the cost. It's such a different mindset to the envy of the UK. Nationally, around 37% of students go to private schools in Australia!
Which would also mean that these private school cist would rise significanly if hat 37% drops on the other hand it makes the insentive on the goverment to improve state funded schools smaller.



No. If anything, the tories were screwed when they chose Johnson, who proceeded to drive anyone with any common sense out of the party. They were pretty F***ed before then, but their current situation is the logical result of Johnson and his 'get brexit done' kool-aid.
I politely disagree, like i said if they get Johnson back or Cameron for that matter they will get more votes, because is not about what they say but it's because they say it. Farage sadly has the same thing, I mean on paper he should have everything against him but still he gets away with setting up new political parties like cans of soda, and lying and or at the very least selling half truths.

Weird thing that makes no sense to me is how they seem to have no interest in growing or broadening their base, instead just looking to exclude existing supporters - the "support this policy or get out".

And lower supporter numbers means lower income, less campaigning come election, fewer activists knocking on doors, etc.

And that looks like their deliberate plan.
That's like a gambler addicts antics ''if only this that i might get X which will make up for Y'' in this context X loyals want Y out so only X remains and then their would be unity. But at the same time Y wants the same thing but he other way around.
But just like gambling the odd are not always in your favor and thus the current mess X and Y trying to out each other and anything in between caught in the ''you have to chose thing''

Not that much different from the USA before Trump 1
 
Top Bottom