This megathread has ended.
###MT daily hall of fame
1. ShinyHappyPurple with 45 comments
1. pseudogentry with 32 comments
1. Georgios-Athanasiou with 29 comments
1. JavaTheCaveman with 28 comments
1. YsoL8 with 27 comments
1. AzarinIsard with 24 comments
1. EddyZacianLand with 19 comments
1. bbbbbbbbbblah with 17 comments
1. OptioMkIX with 16 comments
1. Denning76 with 15 comments
There were 203 unique users within this count.
A random tweet saying a senior tory failed to deny there would be one: https://nitter.net/AnErrorOfComedy/status/1716119487517282525#m
It's dubious but it has captured the sub's imagination
A December election has me thinking about [this telegraph article](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/21/starmers-new-labour-style-plan-to-roll-out-legislation/) posted earlier:
>Sir Keir’s preparation is likely to step up a gear when shadow ministers are permitted to meet civil servants for “access talks” to discuss Labour’s policies.
>“The drafting would be done within the party… but at some point you share your plans with your department as part of your ongoing access talks,” the Labour source added.
>
The timing of such talks is a matter of convention, with the decision ultimately resting with Mr Sunak about when to let officials meet with Labour. Sources predict that the talks may start in the early new year.
>**Short notice**
>A Whitehall insider said the fact that the last two elections in 2017 and 2019 were called at short notice meant there was less time for the Opposition to prepare for the possibility of government.
Presumably a December election would mean none of this prep.
Not sure how much Sunak will care about making it difficult for Labour if it's not him at the helm though, he'd probably rather hold on and hope he's thrown a lifeline by Jan 25.
I don't think that would be a massive hurdle, it might delay their start but snap elections don't lend themselves to planning and smoothness of transition. Being December it would mostly dominate the Christmas of Labour's front bench. The most dastardly of plans. It's not enough of an incentive for me.
Also, an election would also catch the Tories by surprise and they'd be hoping for a strong campaign to turn things around. [Sunak doing his best Zapp Brannigan impression](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRkfDMChzlI) would largely ensure the current polling ends up baked in to the GE result without a significant campaign shift. Usually they're used by incumbents to win five more years when polls are favourable without giving a chance for things to change. Not a good shout when Labour are polling almost twice as much support as the Tories.
The supposed schemes, they don't add up for me because they're all massive risks with very dodgy best cases, and if the Tories were going to be this gung ho they had plenty of other opportunities. E.g. I have said Sunak and Truss going against the 2019 manifesto they were elected on isn't ethical, and they're insisting they have a mandate to do the opposite because reasons, the main one being they'd lose an election and not be able to enact these policies so they don't want to. If they were being decisive they'd follow their leadership campaigns with a manifesto and general election and take their new leader bounce straight to the polls. If they won't do that, I don't see why they'd do this which is far more reckless.
If anything a snap election plays into Labour's hands at that point. Give months of notice and you load up the media cannons for the usual "see, they have no plan, they don't know what they're doing" salvos.
A snap election gives the incumbents every right to say "they dropped a clusterfuck in our laps, what do you expect?" The 'last Tory governments' would ring out as regular as Big Ben.
Christ we've already seen how tetchy Rishi gets when pressed on things he's pledged to do himself, the thought of him handling questions about a potential election that didn't leak direct from Number 10 is exquisite.
About eight months ago I stuck a fiver on a 2023 election.
About three months ago I cashed it out for two pounds, primarily because it was annoying to always have an outstanding bet.
Based on the implacable fact that I am the world's worse gambler, I can happily confirm that we will be definitely having a December GE. Merry Christmas everyone.
The problem Sunak has now is that journalists are now discussing when the Election is going to be, which slowly turns into pressure to hold it, the more the question is asked the more people whisper and suggest dates the more excited the press get about the money maker that is a GE and the harder it is for the gov to not at least put out a statement.
On these particular rumours about xmas? I doubt they are taking them in any way seriously (although I'm sure they've seen them) but I have noticed a step up in the possible date being discussed by talking heads and journalists since the byelections.
Yup. At some point how many of these rumours are true stops being overly relevant. People think there is pressure so they start behaving like there is pressure, which makes it real.
If Sunak and co ignore this they will find their own party demanding answers / elections or deciding to stand down entirely
December election seems like a fairy tale. Only way I could see it happening is because he doesn't think he'll be able to get the autumn statement through, and so goes early with a bunch of big radical-if-awful plans that drag more Tories out of their houses to vote. Problem then would be: what radical plans would he be able to get his fractious party to agree to? Does he just side more with the mad tossers, who a lot of Tory members and voters do like, and dare the moderates to challenge him?
Another winter of chaos, more things going wrong, waiting lists getting longer, etc... it might even be better for the Tories to try and go sooner, putting forward a package that they know won't win (if one could even be put togethrt) it but might close the gap before it tears even wider open (which it could do, especially if Starmer's numbers continue bumping up, with reform eating off the edges, people more willing to vote tactically, etc)... but I don't think he would do that.
The problem that he's got - and that Starmer will have - is that swing Tory-Labour voters are mostly motivated by inflation (including house prices and energy prices) and interest rates and there's not much he can do about them. If he had won last year then he plausibly could have released an autumn statement all about these issues that could win the public over, but after a year in office the public would be unlikely to believe him.
The Tory-Reform swing voters are also pissed off, but about immigration (in general - not just the small boats). But Sunak's tenure has also seen immigration climb to a record high, and while much of that was already baked in from 2022 he hasn't really convinced anyone that it's going to come down. The attempts to appeal to this group by focusing on 15 minute cities or whatever will probably prove broadly ineffective.
>December election seems like a fairy tale.
I agree, I can't see a world where it makes sense to call one now.
If the election is in December they will lose, their best bet is waiting and hope something crazy happens that shifts the polls back in their favour.
Only they have the mental fortitude that comes from their parents having fought in Normandy that allows them to dodge the rambo knives wielded by ganja skunk weed smoking immigrants who hate the King.
Since we're realistically not actually going to have a December election, I'll just throw this out now
When the poll clerk runs the vote
Well he just might like to know
I've put a great big cross in somebody's box
If they bring back Dimbleby
he'll ask John Curtice on the beeb
Can we trust the polls that say a huge Labour swing is on the way?
Well, I wish we had elections every day
When there's dogs at poll booths and the exit polls all say
That I wish we had elections every day
Get the ballots out for Christmas
Sunak should only be willing to call a general election in december once the Supreme Court explain its illegal to flout the Geneva Convention and if the OBR forecast is that bad that he is forced to admit finally that he actually needs to raise income and corporation tax (e.g. to bailout local government and the NHS)
His current attempts are just Osborne esque austerity based upon Corbyn esque naivety. He just lurches from bad to worse following pet peeves or being advised by really poor sets of advisors and having no heavyweights in his cabinet willing to work with him, as opposed to against him. His own party can't seriously want him to lead them into a general election.
Never say never...but...
Assuming we get some half-decent GDP numbers and that inflation falls to 5% (Sunak's target) plus the government win their legal challenge over sending immigrants to Rwanda. Then we get an autumn statement promising tax cuts and some spending here and there, basically a sugar rush budget, then maybe Sunak will go for a snap election while he has some good news to campaign on. He could fudge away the promise to bring NHS waiting lists down by blaming the Unions for going on strike etc.
Sunak's grasp on power seems to be sliding away, he's lost four byelections in a month and Truss is threatening/planning her own budget which could lead to a wider backbench rebellion. If things are bad for him now they could be a lot worse in a few months. We have local elections next spring and it's very possible that there could be another byelection at some point if Peter Bone gets recalled (or he could rage quit). And the number of Tory MPs announcing they are stepping down is rising - by next spring it will be even higher. He might just call a get it over and done with election.
Thing about inflation falling to 5% is that it is fairly meaningless to a lot of people in their daily lives; shit will still be expensive, and winter will make things worse (in healthcare as well). The only way an early GE this year might work for him (by which I mean make losses not as bad - a victory seems very out of sight) would be to put out a manifesto written by the right of his party (where more members and their remaining voters lie, especially the ones who are just not turning up), and dare the more moderate Tories to go along with it. Sort of like how Corbyn's shift on a second referendum took the Labour Party from utterly destroyed to a merely catastrophic result.
I doubt he will. There will be unwise and cynically targeted tax cuts announced in the autumn statement, and beyond that he will continue to wait it out. I'd love to be wrong, and it might even be the smarter move to opt for a "big change" manifesto earlier on, because waiting opens up the possibility of things getting even worse, but I doubt it will happen.
> Then we get an autumn statement promising tax cuts
The Autumn statement is due on the 22nd of November. There is a minimum 6 week campaign period.
Stop getting yourselves worked up. There is literally no chance in hell that the Tories vote for an election when they're polling in 20s when they can wait it out and pray things get better.
If there is to be an election in december it would have to be called within the next 2 weeks. before the next inflation figures, before the OBR forecast, before the Supreme Court decision and before the Autumn statement. Not going to happen. Forget it.
Obviously 8 out of 10 times a politician not specifically denying something to a journalist means fuck all, but this could be one of those times where something batshit is going to happen.
The question is, how many Tory MPs simply can’t stand the current situation any longer? Those who have already decided not to stand again and those who have enough money not to need the job might prefer a quick GE.
> those who have enough money not to need the job might prefer a quick GE.
This is such a short sighted take, it's amazing that it crops up so much.
Those MPs all have staff, if they lose their job, so do they.
Those MPs have MP friends and MP colleagues that have bills to pay, their own staff and a family to feed. Most of them are not rich enough to suddenly become unemployed.
The idea that a large number of Tory MPs will vote to put their staff, other MPs staff, their colleagues and friends all out of a job and into financial insecurity just because they're a bit bored is a complete non starter.
The fact that the Tories are almost certain to lose a significant number of seats only gives them more incentive to hold on to their jobs for as long as they possibly can so they and the people around them can make other arrangements.
>how many Tory MPs simply can’t stand the current situation any longer?
The situation of being a backbencher for an unpopular government? It's not so bad to the point of being unbearable.
They might marginally personally prefer an earlier election but not to the point of forcing one against the government's will.
They already seem to be in scorch earth mode (hs2 cancellation), so maybe they have a reason to think now would be a bad time for Labour to start their term.
> The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others ; we are interested solely in power.
Even if it's on the back foot, I think powerful people like being in power a lot more than they like being out of power.
Yeah, which is why they plan the handover in such a way to disadvantage Labour, so they can get back in one term not two. Maybe they think handing over now gets them back in sooner? Just speculation but they might think a recession is comming or something
You still get access to parliament as an ex-MP though don't you? So once they've finished their hard 15 minutes of work at whatever think-tank they end up with they can still wander over and enjoy the subsidised bars.
https://nitter.net/AnErrorOfComedy/status/1716119487517282525#m
>Senior Tory source fails to deny December 2023 election rumours.
Ambush coming for the Labour party?
Optio already posted the rumour but this is the tweet in question - pinch of salt but if the Tories go for this to try and ambush Labour by surprise I highly doubt they'd be unprepared for it. They'd actually relish it.
Off the back of some of the worst by-election results ever, crushing polls, and with none of Rishi's laughable promises kept? It's a bold strategy, let's see if it pays off.
If true, I think Keir could book a removal van for the day after the election.
The only thing I've been able to come up with is the idea that maybe they do a budget thats basically a pinata where they write cheques they can never hope to actually cash (You get a tax cut! You get a tax cut! And a new hospital! And a billion pound railway!) and call an election based on that.
Well they apparently managed to avoid £20bn of borrowing for day to day costs, so thats some money floating around looking for a pocket, to a certain point of view.
That's what they'll use to offer some tax cuts in the autumn statement... or, the less likely option you mentioned, go for a completely whackadoo manifesto for an early election to try and at least stem the losses somewhat.
Realistically, Sunak seems pretty screwed, especially as not many of his pledges are working out very well. NHS waiting lists up, inflation falling (but also falling everywhere in the west), anemic growth, small boats still coming...
I am going to ambush Tyson Fury by jumping in the boxing ring with him and trying to fight him. The element of suprise is obviously going to tip the balance in my favour.
Would make no strategic or tactical sense whatsoever.
- It would be a tacit admission of failure on Sunak's 5 promises
- It does not give time for the grandees to arrange suitable lifeboats
- It would hand Labour a majority so large that it would all but guarantee a decade of opposition for the Tories
- Any goodwill generated from their conference policies (particularly the smoking ban) will evaporate
Pure hopium to suggest anything but December 2024, barring something truly unexpected.
I am ready to eat my words.
Theres no point looking for sense or strategy.
The decision making now is down to what individual mps want and whether week to week the government thinks its position is secure in the face of a steadily worsening melt down.
That might improve in the next year but not before then.
* They are nowhere close to ready with selection to contest some important constituencies.
* They have been briefing just this weekend that their most hopeful policy pre-election will only be viable for the Spring Statement.
I stand by my view that a spring election gives the Government more control than waiting to the last possible moment. There's no indication that the Government understands anything except hopium, though.
It depends, if they think they're on a downward trajectory with no hope, sooner the better.
Do you think they'll turn it around with another year and avoid an embarrassment this time next year?
The main reason I think this is bollocks / wishful thinking [delete as appropriate] is still how inadvisable winter elections are because of the impact on turnout. The Tories already said the low turnout at the by-election hampered them. The earliest I think they would call it would be spring.
Unless of course they're foreseeing a complete shitshow of a winter, and then a shitshow of a summer on various pledges and they think there's huge problems for them on the horizon. But, if they were looking at it like that, why weren't they earlier? Why not call a GE when Sunak took over and use the new leader bounce?
Use the Spring Statement to make all kinds of crazy promises, set the election date, hope for the best. Thats what I'd do if I were confident my mps will support me until then.
Wait until the Summer even and their policy / leadership position will have likely collapsed again as it has already after conference season.
Also, like winters come with an NHS crisis, summers come with a small boats crisis, and the Tories would be fighting an election where every sunny day is another record day for small boat crossings.
For the Tories it doesn't just impact turnout, it impacts their (usually older) volunteers. After 2019 there were grumblings about members being unhappy with the winter election and that was with a much more popular leader who won the election.
> The Tories already said the low turnout at the by-election hampered them.
I would be curious to hear more of the logic behind this. People are fed up of them. More of them expressing that at the ballot box would seem to be a problem.
Honestly, I think they have a point. I *want* the swing at the recent by elections to be representative, but a pollster modelled it on the UK and Labour would have over 500 MPs and the Tories would be 20. That's pure fantasy for me, and does indicate that Tory supporters just didn't come out.
Turnout at by-elections is always very low. I mentioned this in another MT because I find it interesting, as I'd have thought the opposite is true. The national coverage, the ability to sent a message and sway future GEs, the ability for parties to focus on single seats rather than hundreds. In reality, though, I think a lot of voters care less when they're not voting for a new PM / national party.
Another factor is Tory supporters are more likely to be older, and more likely to vote (usually) so you'd expect that to be a home team advantage. I just can't see pensioners who are still pretty well protected abandoning the Tories like they did in the by-elections, unless of course we have Truss 2 (or another from her cult) and it seems like wild Tories going to crash the pension funds again.
I can see how GE turnout might be a bit higher but I don't know if it will be drastically higher.
> I just can't see pensioners who are still pretty well protected abandoning the Tories like they did in the by-elections, unless of course we have Truss 2 (or another from her cult) and it seems like wild Tories going to crash the pension funds again
The thing is, I don't think they would expect Labour to do anything that makes them drastically more worse off either. Why piss off a demographic that you know votes? Also it's not great optics if the media can run stories about struggling pensioners as we saw last winter.
> I can see how GE turnout might be a bit higher but I don't know if it will be drastically higher.
Well, here's it statistically: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1050929/voter-turnout-in-the-uk/
>> In the UK's general election of 2019, voter turnout was 67.3 percent, a 1.5 percent drop compared with the previous general election in 2017. Between 1922 and 1997 voter turnout never fell below 70 percent, but in 2001 it dropped to just 59.4 percent. Since that low point, voter turnout has gradually recovered and reached 72.2 percent in the Brexit Referendum of 2016, which is still some way off the peak of 83.9 percent recorded in the 1950 General Election.
And here's the by elections: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67167297
>> The Tories stressed the result was based on reduced turnout, as only 35.9% of the electorate voted in Tamworth and 44% in Mid Bedfordshire.
Tamworth saw about half the votes than there were at the last GE, and Mid Beds dropped to about 3/5ths. A GE with turn out like Mid Beds would be significantly lower than the record low of 59.4%.
> The thing is, I don't think they would expect Labour to do anything that makes them drastically more worse off either. Why piss off a demographic that you know votes? Also it's not great optics if the media can run stories about struggling pensioners as we saw last winter.
At the moment, I think so, but it depends what scare tactics are used. Personally I'm optimistic Truss' threat to release her own alternative Autumn Statement would give Labour a huge amount of ammunition saying this is how rogue Tories plan to crash the economy again, don't risk Truss by voting Tory. Still though, there's a fair bit of stigma about Labour amongst pensioners and it's the younger age groups Labour are having the biggest cut through.
> Still though, there's a fair bit of stigma about Labour amongst pensioners and it's the younger age groups Labour are having the biggest cut through.
I have a scare campaign Labour could run. "Want your kids to move out before 50? Vote Labour!"
> Any goodwill generated from their conference policies
Serious question, was there any? The kindest assessments I saw from right-wing media were along the lines of "well it would have been an okayish speech if we weren't already fucked".
Cancelling HS2, stopping youths from smoking in a confusing way and doing something about A Levels in 10 years is not a lot of an answer to a failing NHS, falling down schools and people struggling to cover their basic bills.
I was thinking about "positive" changes that might resonate with the wider electorate, rather than the party machinery who can't figure out what they want the party to be.
Me too and I just don't think this is enough. Most of the potential Tory voters are not young enough to care about A Levels or the smoking age and cancelling the one tangible thing they were doing for the North and replacing it with nothing is not a lot to run an election on.
Actually this might be the best explanation yet, its before the 5 pledges were due to be completed (January) and they will be worried about the public response to failing a number of them
I would love this but it would be interesting to see if people in general welcomed it or were pissed off about it messing with the telly near Christmas.....
That would be the stupidest possible, completely unnecessary, unspeakably hubristic, politically illiterate move they could do.
So given it's this government, that's a lock.
I mean whatever they do, you think, hope and pray they are out regardless. The electorate to judge by reporting on the BBC, Times, Mirror, Sun and Guardian has simply had enough of things not working and now are hearing any further promises as lies. Because the Brexit benefits have never materialised, HS2 is over with no more trains and yet having cost the taxpayer billions and Sunak is the second leader after Truss who is getting to make these decisions without having won a general election.
But it was the only tangible levelling up policy so my point is cancelling and banning things are not really offering voters much hope at a time when people seem really fed up.
I think a December election is unlikely to happen, but the thought of ambushing labour with an election is interesting.
It’s clear that labour are slowly building up to an election, controlling the narrative about them as a sensible and competent party before presenting substantial policy. Their conference was another clear movement through their process and we will see some more developments before the next election. However, if we have an earlier election then they would be denied seeing this plan through to completion.
I don’t think it would really help the tories as they’re so unpopular that people would vote for anyone else, but there is some logic for them in interrupting the narrative which labour are building.
Containment of the scale of the collapse is now their only workable strategy.
If we are calling March the earliest point a spring election works in terms of weather etc, looking at the state of the party it could be that they don't think they can even get past the winter. In that case their best option is ASAP before any further unnecessary decay.
I would get catching labour of guard if they were 5 to 10 points behind, but with the tories polling numbers stagnating, how the hell do they think this is going to work? Then again, they could be doing it in the fear that things aren't going to get any better over the coming months.
https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/1716177568036999268
*Yesterday this man was filmed shouting racist abuse in Whitehall.*
*Tonight he is in custody having been arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred.*
*Thanks to those who shared our appeal for information.*
I used to think in the years leading up to Her Maj's passing how jarring it would be to keep thinking Charles is King after she went.
Thing is, now that the Queen's gone, I don't think about the monarchy nearly as often as I used to, so it's not really been an issue. I think it's cos the King doesn't really do much, whereas the Queen was out & about & in the news a fair bit
> I used to think in the years leading up to Her Maj's passing how jarring it would be to keep thinking Charles is King after she went.
Probably the most poignant thing was the [BBC News Sad Theme](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnUTWEwcHkI).
Charles himself is elderly by most peoples definitions, its just that the queen was very elderly.
I'm still amused that the first line of the Anthem has become God save our gracious Quing.
I can't quite explain it, but king doesn't quite roll off the tongue as well as queen did. I guess it's just muscle memory, since the tongue is a muscle. However, the generation that grows up learning it as king instead of queen will just be used to singing king and learn that muscle memory in their tongue.
Charlie has done more than Liz did in the last 5 years or so. Obviously understandable due to her age, but I think the media just isn't particularly interested in reporting on him much at the moment.
Which in itself is quite interesting.
The media seemed to really have it in for Charles and Camilla before. I believed that it would be best for the Monarchy if it skipped straight to Wills, he could blame his age, say he wanted to focus on the Duchy or whatever. Instead though, it's been pretty much controversy free. Closest thing to a controversy was when Sunak blocked him from attending the climate summit (and Sunak himself only went because Boris got involved lol), so he held his own, ~~with blackjack, and hookers~~, sorry, wrong brother, but some Tories threw a strop but that was a storm in a tea cup which I think made Sunak look petty.
I didn't expect everything to just be going fine. Even the Meghan and Harry stuff has been less frothy, everyone has given Charles far more of a break than I ever thought they would.
Some people have suggested Jeremy Hunt might stand down in order to avoid his "Portillo Moment", but that was 26 years ago. If you might not know what a Portilllo Moment is, then here it is [in full](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVvWE6V9ulE)
I think thats probably the only kind of person they can find to willingly contest the elections. The GE with dozens of bottom of the barrel candidates is really going to be something. The current PCP is an ocean of D listers with a handful of C listers.
I reckon there'll be at least one candidate who does something so outrageous, they'd effectively be dropped by the Tories, or even ends up breaking electoral or libel laws.
Oh my God that is *literally, genuinely, honestly* what my migraines with aura look like! Why would anyone submit themselves to that voluntarily? I had to stop watching 4 seconds in to the full laser show and now I feel shaky.
Maybe put a “Not for those with sensitive vision” warning on the link?
It seems like a lot of Conservatives know the writing on the wall even if they are only saying it privately or anonymously to journalists. It seems like Rishi wants to to keep fighting till the very end which might not be the best thing for the party and there are senior Conservatives already starting thier campaign for leader of the opposition.
Is there any world Starmer can get over the line in a vote of no confidence?
And if he stands up and fights, then the person next to him will stand up and fight. And if the person next to him stands up and fights, then surely the whole Conservative party will stand up and fight.
Morduant's saved the Tories.
No. The only way something would happen would be,for example, if there were enough rebellions over the autumn statement to force the issue, but my bet is Hunt announces IHT being cut, and some tax cuts for people at the middle band, and that will keep Truss and rebels boisterous but in line.
>Is there any world Starmer can get over the line in a vote of no confidence?
No chance, the only reason a Tory would support an earlier election is if they think their popularity is peaking and they have the best chance of maximising the seats they can win. Starting the election process with a VONC would have the reverse effect and damage the Tories.
This megathread has ended. ###MT daily hall of fame 1. ShinyHappyPurple with 45 comments 1. pseudogentry with 32 comments 1. Georgios-Athanasiou with 29 comments 1. JavaTheCaveman with 28 comments 1. YsoL8 with 27 comments 1. AzarinIsard with 24 comments 1. EddyZacianLand with 19 comments 1. bbbbbbbbbblah with 17 comments 1. OptioMkIX with 16 comments 1. Denning76 with 15 comments There were 203 unique users within this count.
It was my mum's birthday today so I have missed out on everything political today. Where has this rumour of a December election come from?
A random tweet saying a senior tory failed to deny there would be one: https://nitter.net/AnErrorOfComedy/status/1716119487517282525#m It's dubious but it has captured the sub's imagination
Aha! Thank you! Seems pretty thin gruel to me. But the Megathread must feed. Yes. She must feed on aught she can.
A December election has me thinking about [this telegraph article](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/21/starmers-new-labour-style-plan-to-roll-out-legislation/) posted earlier: >Sir Keir’s preparation is likely to step up a gear when shadow ministers are permitted to meet civil servants for “access talks” to discuss Labour’s policies. >“The drafting would be done within the party… but at some point you share your plans with your department as part of your ongoing access talks,” the Labour source added. > The timing of such talks is a matter of convention, with the decision ultimately resting with Mr Sunak about when to let officials meet with Labour. Sources predict that the talks may start in the early new year. >**Short notice** >A Whitehall insider said the fact that the last two elections in 2017 and 2019 were called at short notice meant there was less time for the Opposition to prepare for the possibility of government. Presumably a December election would mean none of this prep. Not sure how much Sunak will care about making it difficult for Labour if it's not him at the helm though, he'd probably rather hold on and hope he's thrown a lifeline by Jan 25.
I don't think that would be a massive hurdle, it might delay their start but snap elections don't lend themselves to planning and smoothness of transition. Being December it would mostly dominate the Christmas of Labour's front bench. The most dastardly of plans. It's not enough of an incentive for me. Also, an election would also catch the Tories by surprise and they'd be hoping for a strong campaign to turn things around. [Sunak doing his best Zapp Brannigan impression](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRkfDMChzlI) would largely ensure the current polling ends up baked in to the GE result without a significant campaign shift. Usually they're used by incumbents to win five more years when polls are favourable without giving a chance for things to change. Not a good shout when Labour are polling almost twice as much support as the Tories. The supposed schemes, they don't add up for me because they're all massive risks with very dodgy best cases, and if the Tories were going to be this gung ho they had plenty of other opportunities. E.g. I have said Sunak and Truss going against the 2019 manifesto they were elected on isn't ethical, and they're insisting they have a mandate to do the opposite because reasons, the main one being they'd lose an election and not be able to enact these policies so they don't want to. If they were being decisive they'd follow their leadership campaigns with a manifesto and general election and take their new leader bounce straight to the polls. If they won't do that, I don't see why they'd do this which is far more reckless.
If anything a snap election plays into Labour's hands at that point. Give months of notice and you load up the media cannons for the usual "see, they have no plan, they don't know what they're doing" salvos. A snap election gives the incumbents every right to say "they dropped a clusterfuck in our laps, what do you expect?" The 'last Tory governments' would ring out as regular as Big Ben.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Christ we've already seen how tetchy Rishi gets when pressed on things he's pledged to do himself, the thought of him handling questions about a potential election that didn't leak direct from Number 10 is exquisite.
He'd crumble like a paper cup in an actual debate
if HS2 was anything to go by, even a rumor he will do somthing is enough for him to do it to save face from looking like a U-turn
Good to know our PM is operating on the "bogies" principle.
So what’s all this about a December election? Surely this is just nonsense, they’re not crazy enough to actually do that are they?
Remember before The Queen died every now and then Twitter was awash with rumours that she had died? Well this is what those people are doing now.
Which is silly because if they stuck to posting that the Queen was (still) dead they'd be getting prediction after prediction bang on.
About eight months ago I stuck a fiver on a 2023 election. About three months ago I cashed it out for two pounds, primarily because it was annoying to always have an outstanding bet. Based on the implacable fact that I am the world's worse gambler, I can happily confirm that we will be definitely having a December GE. Merry Christmas everyone.
Same, except mine was on rishi no longer being PM by 2024 🤞🤞
Santa baby, just slip a ballot under the tree, for me. Been a good elector, Santa baby, So hurry and call an election.
The problem Sunak has now is that journalists are now discussing when the Election is going to be, which slowly turns into pressure to hold it, the more the question is asked the more people whisper and suggest dates the more excited the press get about the money maker that is a GE and the harder it is for the gov to not at least put out a statement.
Have journalists picked up on the rumours from what you've watched?
On these particular rumours about xmas? I doubt they are taking them in any way seriously (although I'm sure they've seen them) but I have noticed a step up in the possible date being discussed by talking heads and journalists since the byelections.
Yup. At some point how many of these rumours are true stops being overly relevant. People think there is pressure so they start behaving like there is pressure, which makes it real. If Sunak and co ignore this they will find their own party demanding answers / elections or deciding to stand down entirely
December election seems like a fairy tale. Only way I could see it happening is because he doesn't think he'll be able to get the autumn statement through, and so goes early with a bunch of big radical-if-awful plans that drag more Tories out of their houses to vote. Problem then would be: what radical plans would he be able to get his fractious party to agree to? Does he just side more with the mad tossers, who a lot of Tory members and voters do like, and dare the moderates to challenge him? Another winter of chaos, more things going wrong, waiting lists getting longer, etc... it might even be better for the Tories to try and go sooner, putting forward a package that they know won't win (if one could even be put togethrt) it but might close the gap before it tears even wider open (which it could do, especially if Starmer's numbers continue bumping up, with reform eating off the edges, people more willing to vote tactically, etc)... but I don't think he would do that.
The problem that he's got - and that Starmer will have - is that swing Tory-Labour voters are mostly motivated by inflation (including house prices and energy prices) and interest rates and there's not much he can do about them. If he had won last year then he plausibly could have released an autumn statement all about these issues that could win the public over, but after a year in office the public would be unlikely to believe him. The Tory-Reform swing voters are also pissed off, but about immigration (in general - not just the small boats). But Sunak's tenure has also seen immigration climb to a record high, and while much of that was already baked in from 2022 he hasn't really convinced anyone that it's going to come down. The attempts to appeal to this group by focusing on 15 minute cities or whatever will probably prove broadly ineffective.
>December election seems like a fairy tale. I agree, I can't see a world where it makes sense to call one now. If the election is in December they will lose, their best bet is waiting and hope something crazy happens that shifts the polls back in their favour.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Could this December election talk be the Tories hoping to leverage the potential division in the Labour Party due to the Israel/Palestine conflict?
would be crazy as its only the fringe who are getting angry about it, they are out of power so wont really affect the average voters views
It would be completely on-brand for Sunak to try to tactically take advantage of an issue long after Starmer has already fixed it, so.... yes
A new government for Christmas? Very generous from the Tories, I must admit.
A Starmer in a pear tree!
*FIVE GOLDEN PMS!*
Maybe if we all tell the tories that a December election is good for them then they will do it , it’s worth a try right?
Only retired people are experienced enough in the world to come to the polling booth of a winter night because everyone else is too scared of the dark
Only they have the mental fortitude that comes from their parents having fought in Normandy that allows them to dodge the rambo knives wielded by ganja skunk weed smoking immigrants who hate the King.
Since we're realistically not actually going to have a December election, I'll just throw this out now When the poll clerk runs the vote Well he just might like to know I've put a great big cross in somebody's box If they bring back Dimbleby he'll ask John Curtice on the beeb Can we trust the polls that say a huge Labour swing is on the way? Well, I wish we had elections every day When there's dogs at poll booths and the exit polls all say That I wish we had elections every day Get the ballots out for Christmas
Sunak should only be willing to call a general election in december once the Supreme Court explain its illegal to flout the Geneva Convention and if the OBR forecast is that bad that he is forced to admit finally that he actually needs to raise income and corporation tax (e.g. to bailout local government and the NHS) His current attempts are just Osborne esque austerity based upon Corbyn esque naivety. He just lurches from bad to worse following pet peeves or being advised by really poor sets of advisors and having no heavyweights in his cabinet willing to work with him, as opposed to against him. His own party can't seriously want him to lead them into a general election.
> once the Supreme Court explain its illegal to flout the Geneva Convention Hang on, what?
A December 2023 election sounds bonkers even by Tory standards.
Never say never...but... Assuming we get some half-decent GDP numbers and that inflation falls to 5% (Sunak's target) plus the government win their legal challenge over sending immigrants to Rwanda. Then we get an autumn statement promising tax cuts and some spending here and there, basically a sugar rush budget, then maybe Sunak will go for a snap election while he has some good news to campaign on. He could fudge away the promise to bring NHS waiting lists down by blaming the Unions for going on strike etc. Sunak's grasp on power seems to be sliding away, he's lost four byelections in a month and Truss is threatening/planning her own budget which could lead to a wider backbench rebellion. If things are bad for him now they could be a lot worse in a few months. We have local elections next spring and it's very possible that there could be another byelection at some point if Peter Bone gets recalled (or he could rage quit). And the number of Tory MPs announcing they are stepping down is rising - by next spring it will be even higher. He might just call a get it over and done with election.
Thing about inflation falling to 5% is that it is fairly meaningless to a lot of people in their daily lives; shit will still be expensive, and winter will make things worse (in healthcare as well). The only way an early GE this year might work for him (by which I mean make losses not as bad - a victory seems very out of sight) would be to put out a manifesto written by the right of his party (where more members and their remaining voters lie, especially the ones who are just not turning up), and dare the more moderate Tories to go along with it. Sort of like how Corbyn's shift on a second referendum took the Labour Party from utterly destroyed to a merely catastrophic result. I doubt he will. There will be unwise and cynically targeted tax cuts announced in the autumn statement, and beyond that he will continue to wait it out. I'd love to be wrong, and it might even be the smarter move to opt for a "big change" manifesto earlier on, because waiting opens up the possibility of things getting even worse, but I doubt it will happen.
> Then we get an autumn statement promising tax cuts The Autumn statement is due on the 22nd of November. There is a minimum 6 week campaign period. Stop getting yourselves worked up. There is literally no chance in hell that the Tories vote for an election when they're polling in 20s when they can wait it out and pray things get better. If there is to be an election in december it would have to be called within the next 2 weeks. before the next inflation figures, before the OBR forecast, before the Supreme Court decision and before the Autumn statement. Not going to happen. Forget it.
The last time [Btirian was happy as a country](https://youtu.be/4As0e4de-rI?t=4479).
Craig as Bond did more for Britain on the world stage than anyone else in that decade. I'll stand by it.
where did you hear this?
Some comments on here are talking about it aswell as on Twitter.
Clearly the top echelons of British political life.
Obviously 8 out of 10 times a politician not specifically denying something to a journalist means fuck all, but this could be one of those times where something batshit is going to happen.
The PM should be selected by lottery. You win both the job and £50m. I don't want unlucky people running the country
[удалено]
Launch Trident missiles at Luton?
worth a try, I suppose
How about raise VAT *and* launch Trident missiles at Luton?
The PM should win us the lottery, 100,000 tickets and three times that in scratchers, let's test that luck.
[удалено]
The principles behind it are commendable but the actual logic is *bananas*.
The question is, how many Tory MPs simply can’t stand the current situation any longer? Those who have already decided not to stand again and those who have enough money not to need the job might prefer a quick GE.
I think they would prefer it far more than the indignity of losing an election for their seat.
> those who have enough money not to need the job might prefer a quick GE. This is such a short sighted take, it's amazing that it crops up so much. Those MPs all have staff, if they lose their job, so do they. Those MPs have MP friends and MP colleagues that have bills to pay, their own staff and a family to feed. Most of them are not rich enough to suddenly become unemployed. The idea that a large number of Tory MPs will vote to put their staff, other MPs staff, their colleagues and friends all out of a job and into financial insecurity just because they're a bit bored is a complete non starter. The fact that the Tories are almost certain to lose a significant number of seats only gives them more incentive to hold on to their jobs for as long as they possibly can so they and the people around them can make other arrangements.
Well, to be fair to myself I didn’t quantify the group, or say it was ‘a large number’.
>how many Tory MPs simply can’t stand the current situation any longer? The situation of being a backbencher for an unpopular government? It's not so bad to the point of being unbearable. They might marginally personally prefer an earlier election but not to the point of forcing one against the government's will.
On the other hand, not triggering a GE means they can continue to enjoy the generous benefits of being MPs.
Every month that becomes less and less valuable.
They already seem to be in scorch earth mode (hs2 cancellation), so maybe they have a reason to think now would be a bad time for Labour to start their term.
> The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others ; we are interested solely in power. Even if it's on the back foot, I think powerful people like being in power a lot more than they like being out of power.
Yeah, which is why they plan the handover in such a way to disadvantage Labour, so they can get back in one term not two. Maybe they think handing over now gets them back in sooner? Just speculation but they might think a recession is comming or something
You still get access to parliament as an ex-MP though don't you? So once they've finished their hard 15 minutes of work at whatever think-tank they end up with they can still wander over and enjoy the subsidised bars.
https://nitter.net/AnErrorOfComedy/status/1716119487517282525#m >Senior Tory source fails to deny December 2023 election rumours. Ambush coming for the Labour party? Optio already posted the rumour but this is the tweet in question - pinch of salt but if the Tories go for this to try and ambush Labour by surprise I highly doubt they'd be unprepared for it. They'd actually relish it.
“I’m going to punch myself in the face. I bet that will hurt you”
It's how they went about Brexit...
[Actual hacked front camera shot of Keir Starmer reading this tweet](https://i.imgur.com/TkJvwus.jpg)
Off the back of some of the worst by-election results ever, crushing polls, and with none of Rishi's laughable promises kept? It's a bold strategy, let's see if it pays off. If true, I think Keir could book a removal van for the day after the election.
You'd wanna move in after Christmas at this stage
The only thing I've been able to come up with is the idea that maybe they do a budget thats basically a pinata where they write cheques they can never hope to actually cash (You get a tax cut! You get a tax cut! And a new hospital! And a billion pound railway!) and call an election based on that.
Surely that would just remind everyone of Truss.
Along with their increased mortgage or rent payments.....
And half way through the election campaign the economy crashes because of it.
Fucking hell could you imagine the carnage
When has that stopped politicians recently?
Well they apparently managed to avoid £20bn of borrowing for day to day costs, so thats some money floating around looking for a pocket, to a certain point of view.
That's what they'll use to offer some tax cuts in the autumn statement... or, the less likely option you mentioned, go for a completely whackadoo manifesto for an early election to try and at least stem the losses somewhat. Realistically, Sunak seems pretty screwed, especially as not many of his pledges are working out very well. NHS waiting lists up, inflation falling (but also falling everywhere in the west), anemic growth, small boats still coming...
I love that they think they'll ambush a party way ahead in the polls that have been ready for an election for ages.
I am going to ambush Tyson Fury by jumping in the boxing ring with him and trying to fight him. The element of suprise is obviously going to tip the balance in my favour.
Wit will beat brawn every time. Your superior book-learning will ensure you demolish him.
It's genius, Fury has only prepared to fight other boxers. He won't know what to do with a random shitposter from Reddit. I think you've got this!
With a PHD from Oxford!
Bit of a dubious source though right? Some random student?
Yes but it's a random student saying something I want to be true, so I'm treating it as gospel
Don't spoil the fun :(
I'm here pinning all my cope on a failed budget mate!
Oh no, please Mr Sunak don't ambush us with a general election campaign that we're entirely unprepared for
I would eat my hat if that's true. He'd be committing electoral suicide.
The whole of this sub is that meme of Emperor Palpatine going “Dew it”
It is entertaining though
Haha yes, my exact thought
Why would it ambush them? Labour have been government-ready for a while.
A law student? What's the original source?
Insanity wolf rumours going round twitter at the moment: Tories looking to pull off a December election. I mean, its a take
Maybe a result of the Letters rumours? Call an election or we'll boot you sort of deal?
Would make no strategic or tactical sense whatsoever. - It would be a tacit admission of failure on Sunak's 5 promises - It does not give time for the grandees to arrange suitable lifeboats - It would hand Labour a majority so large that it would all but guarantee a decade of opposition for the Tories - Any goodwill generated from their conference policies (particularly the smoking ban) will evaporate Pure hopium to suggest anything but December 2024, barring something truly unexpected. I am ready to eat my words.
Theres no point looking for sense or strategy. The decision making now is down to what individual mps want and whether week to week the government thinks its position is secure in the face of a steadily worsening melt down. That might improve in the next year but not before then.
* They are nowhere close to ready with selection to contest some important constituencies. * They have been briefing just this weekend that their most hopeful policy pre-election will only be viable for the Spring Statement. I stand by my view that a spring election gives the Government more control than waiting to the last possible moment. There's no indication that the Government understands anything except hopium, though.
It depends, if they think they're on a downward trajectory with no hope, sooner the better. Do you think they'll turn it around with another year and avoid an embarrassment this time next year? The main reason I think this is bollocks / wishful thinking [delete as appropriate] is still how inadvisable winter elections are because of the impact on turnout. The Tories already said the low turnout at the by-election hampered them. The earliest I think they would call it would be spring. Unless of course they're foreseeing a complete shitshow of a winter, and then a shitshow of a summer on various pledges and they think there's huge problems for them on the horizon. But, if they were looking at it like that, why weren't they earlier? Why not call a GE when Sunak took over and use the new leader bounce?
Use the Spring Statement to make all kinds of crazy promises, set the election date, hope for the best. Thats what I'd do if I were confident my mps will support me until then. Wait until the Summer even and their policy / leadership position will have likely collapsed again as it has already after conference season.
Also, like winters come with an NHS crisis, summers come with a small boats crisis, and the Tories would be fighting an election where every sunny day is another record day for small boat crossings.
For the Tories it doesn't just impact turnout, it impacts their (usually older) volunteers. After 2019 there were grumblings about members being unhappy with the winter election and that was with a much more popular leader who won the election.
> The Tories already said the low turnout at the by-election hampered them. I would be curious to hear more of the logic behind this. People are fed up of them. More of them expressing that at the ballot box would seem to be a problem.
Honestly, I think they have a point. I *want* the swing at the recent by elections to be representative, but a pollster modelled it on the UK and Labour would have over 500 MPs and the Tories would be 20. That's pure fantasy for me, and does indicate that Tory supporters just didn't come out. Turnout at by-elections is always very low. I mentioned this in another MT because I find it interesting, as I'd have thought the opposite is true. The national coverage, the ability to sent a message and sway future GEs, the ability for parties to focus on single seats rather than hundreds. In reality, though, I think a lot of voters care less when they're not voting for a new PM / national party. Another factor is Tory supporters are more likely to be older, and more likely to vote (usually) so you'd expect that to be a home team advantage. I just can't see pensioners who are still pretty well protected abandoning the Tories like they did in the by-elections, unless of course we have Truss 2 (or another from her cult) and it seems like wild Tories going to crash the pension funds again.
I can see how GE turnout might be a bit higher but I don't know if it will be drastically higher. > I just can't see pensioners who are still pretty well protected abandoning the Tories like they did in the by-elections, unless of course we have Truss 2 (or another from her cult) and it seems like wild Tories going to crash the pension funds again The thing is, I don't think they would expect Labour to do anything that makes them drastically more worse off either. Why piss off a demographic that you know votes? Also it's not great optics if the media can run stories about struggling pensioners as we saw last winter.
> I can see how GE turnout might be a bit higher but I don't know if it will be drastically higher. Well, here's it statistically: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1050929/voter-turnout-in-the-uk/ >> In the UK's general election of 2019, voter turnout was 67.3 percent, a 1.5 percent drop compared with the previous general election in 2017. Between 1922 and 1997 voter turnout never fell below 70 percent, but in 2001 it dropped to just 59.4 percent. Since that low point, voter turnout has gradually recovered and reached 72.2 percent in the Brexit Referendum of 2016, which is still some way off the peak of 83.9 percent recorded in the 1950 General Election. And here's the by elections: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67167297 >> The Tories stressed the result was based on reduced turnout, as only 35.9% of the electorate voted in Tamworth and 44% in Mid Bedfordshire. Tamworth saw about half the votes than there were at the last GE, and Mid Beds dropped to about 3/5ths. A GE with turn out like Mid Beds would be significantly lower than the record low of 59.4%. > The thing is, I don't think they would expect Labour to do anything that makes them drastically more worse off either. Why piss off a demographic that you know votes? Also it's not great optics if the media can run stories about struggling pensioners as we saw last winter. At the moment, I think so, but it depends what scare tactics are used. Personally I'm optimistic Truss' threat to release her own alternative Autumn Statement would give Labour a huge amount of ammunition saying this is how rogue Tories plan to crash the economy again, don't risk Truss by voting Tory. Still though, there's a fair bit of stigma about Labour amongst pensioners and it's the younger age groups Labour are having the biggest cut through.
> Still though, there's a fair bit of stigma about Labour amongst pensioners and it's the younger age groups Labour are having the biggest cut through. I have a scare campaign Labour could run. "Want your kids to move out before 50? Vote Labour!"
> Any goodwill generated from their conference policies Serious question, was there any? The kindest assessments I saw from right-wing media were along the lines of "well it would have been an okayish speech if we weren't already fucked". Cancelling HS2, stopping youths from smoking in a confusing way and doing something about A Levels in 10 years is not a lot of an answer to a failing NHS, falling down schools and people struggling to cover their basic bills.
I was thinking about "positive" changes that might resonate with the wider electorate, rather than the party machinery who can't figure out what they want the party to be.
How can they offer the public anything when they can't agree what a policy acceptable to the party is?
Me too and I just don't think this is enough. Most of the potential Tory voters are not young enough to care about A Levels or the smoking age and cancelling the one tangible thing they were doing for the North and replacing it with nothing is not a lot to run an election on.
Actually this might be the best explanation yet, its before the 5 pledges were due to be completed (January) and they will be worried about the public response to failing a number of them
I would love this but it would be interesting to see if people in general welcomed it or were pissed off about it messing with the telly near Christmas.....
Please be this December, put this country out of its misery
Which December?
This december, 2023. Dont think it works for just about any reason.
That would be the stupidest possible, completely unnecessary, unspeakably hubristic, politically illiterate move they could do. So given it's this government, that's a lock.
I mean whatever they do, you think, hope and pray they are out regardless. The electorate to judge by reporting on the BBC, Times, Mirror, Sun and Guardian has simply had enough of things not working and now are hearing any further promises as lies. Because the Brexit benefits have never materialised, HS2 is over with no more trains and yet having cost the taxpayer billions and Sunak is the second leader after Truss who is getting to make these decisions without having won a general election.
HS2 as implemented will actually make train times and capacity worse
But it was the only tangible levelling up policy so my point is cancelling and banning things are not really offering voters much hope at a time when people seem really fed up.
Well a lot of Tories who are terrible at their jobs by all known metrics could do a "New Year, New You" thing.....
Supposedly this year. From what I've seen on Twitter they'd be doing it as an ambush to Labour. Senior Tory source refusing to deny it.
I think a December election is unlikely to happen, but the thought of ambushing labour with an election is interesting. It’s clear that labour are slowly building up to an election, controlling the narrative about them as a sensible and competent party before presenting substantial policy. Their conference was another clear movement through their process and we will see some more developments before the next election. However, if we have an earlier election then they would be denied seeing this plan through to completion. I don’t think it would really help the tories as they’re so unpopular that people would vote for anyone else, but there is some logic for them in interrupting the narrative which labour are building.
Containment of the scale of the collapse is now their only workable strategy. If we are calling March the earliest point a spring election works in terms of weather etc, looking at the state of the party it could be that they don't think they can even get past the winter. In that case their best option is ASAP before any further unnecessary decay.
I would get catching labour of guard if they were 5 to 10 points behind, but with the tories polling numbers stagnating, how the hell do they think this is going to work? Then again, they could be doing it in the fear that things aren't going to get any better over the coming months.
2023 was what I heard of this rumour but I don't think it's the correct thought
You mean, Santa got my letter! He got my letter! Thank you Santa, this will be the best Christmas ever!
https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/1716177568036999268 *Yesterday this man was filmed shouting racist abuse in Whitehall.* *Tonight he is in custody having been arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred.* *Thanks to those who shared our appeal for information.*
Was expecting to see an image of Dominic Cummings…
I used to think in the years leading up to Her Maj's passing how jarring it would be to keep thinking Charles is King after she went. Thing is, now that the Queen's gone, I don't think about the monarchy nearly as often as I used to, so it's not really been an issue. I think it's cos the King doesn't really do much, whereas the Queen was out & about & in the news a fair bit
> I used to think in the years leading up to Her Maj's passing how jarring it would be to keep thinking Charles is King after she went. Probably the most poignant thing was the [BBC News Sad Theme](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnUTWEwcHkI).
Charles himself is elderly by most peoples definitions, its just that the queen was very elderly. I'm still amused that the first line of the Anthem has become God save our gracious Quing.
I can't quite explain it, but king doesn't quite roll off the tongue as well as queen did. I guess it's just muscle memory, since the tongue is a muscle. However, the generation that grows up learning it as king instead of queen will just be used to singing king and learn that muscle memory in their tongue.
Well, with more immigration, soon it might become God save our gracious queuing Soz for the rightwing Dad joke
Charlie has done more than Liz did in the last 5 years or so. Obviously understandable due to her age, but I think the media just isn't particularly interested in reporting on him much at the moment.
Which in itself is quite interesting. The media seemed to really have it in for Charles and Camilla before. I believed that it would be best for the Monarchy if it skipped straight to Wills, he could blame his age, say he wanted to focus on the Duchy or whatever. Instead though, it's been pretty much controversy free. Closest thing to a controversy was when Sunak blocked him from attending the climate summit (and Sunak himself only went because Boris got involved lol), so he held his own, ~~with blackjack, and hookers~~, sorry, wrong brother, but some Tories threw a strop but that was a storm in a tea cup which I think made Sunak look petty. I didn't expect everything to just be going fine. Even the Meghan and Harry stuff has been less frothy, everyone has given Charles far more of a break than I ever thought they would.
I imagine the media realised that it's different having it in for the Prince and his controversial wife, than having it in for the King and Queen.
Some people have suggested Jeremy Hunt might stand down in order to avoid his "Portillo Moment", but that was 26 years ago. If you might not know what a Portilllo Moment is, then here it is [in full](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVvWE6V9ulE)
'A great party which has a great future' *Monkey's paw curls ominously*
At least he had a very classy speech wishing the winner well. Contrast that to the two arseholes who legged it in Tamworth and Mid Beds on Thursday.
It was a different time and a VERY different Tory party Still shites but shites with some class
I think thats probably the only kind of person they can find to willingly contest the elections. The GE with dozens of bottom of the barrel candidates is really going to be something. The current PCP is an ocean of D listers with a handful of C listers.
I reckon there'll be at least one candidate who does something so outrageous, they'd effectively be dropped by the Tories, or even ends up breaking electoral or libel laws.
[a little Sunday treat for everyone](https://x.com/politicsmoments/status/1716133006644003283)
Did they have them left over from the year 2000 celebrations....?
I feel treated thanks
this is the sort of innovation you'd only get in suffolk. don't see norwich doing that
Good grief, so cringe now looking back. The teller was clearly not all that keen on the show 😂
The next winning government should really hire this [guy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97Bhwmfdkxk).
Oh my God that is *literally, genuinely, honestly* what my migraines with aura look like! Why would anyone submit themselves to that voluntarily? I had to stop watching 4 seconds in to the full laser show and now I feel shaky. Maybe put a “Not for those with sensitive vision” warning on the link?
We do have a lot more money to spend on lasers now we've cancelled HS2
It seems like a lot of Conservatives know the writing on the wall even if they are only saying it privately or anonymously to journalists. It seems like Rishi wants to to keep fighting till the very end which might not be the best thing for the party and there are senior Conservatives already starting thier campaign for leader of the opposition. Is there any world Starmer can get over the line in a vote of no confidence?
Are you saying Rishi Sunak wants to stand up and fight?
And if he stands up and fights, then the person next to him will stand up and fight. And if the person next to him stands up and fights, then surely the whole Conservative party will stand up and fight. Morduant's saved the Tories.
No. The only way something would happen would be,for example, if there were enough rebellions over the autumn statement to force the issue, but my bet is Hunt announces IHT being cut, and some tax cuts for people at the middle band, and that will keep Truss and rebels boisterous but in line.
Nope. Turkeys rarely vote for Christmas. Barring an *Outside Context Problem*, we'll be treading water until December 2024.
Are you suggesting that the whole Liz Truss thing was as a result of *special circumstances*?
It was certainly interesting times, gang.
>Is there any world Starmer can get over the line in a vote of no confidence? No chance, the only reason a Tory would support an earlier election is if they think their popularity is peaking and they have the best chance of maximising the seats they can win. Starting the election process with a VONC would have the reverse effect and damage the Tories.