Suella Braverman's time is up.

[PR1Berske]

 

[two sheds]

Nothing. It’s not an area I’m an expert in, perhaps the upper limit should be 60 or 50 then. I’ve never driven in Germany so don’t have any feelings about the autobahn.

I might not personally agree with every law in this country, but abiding to the speed limit is not one I can find any quarrel with.

And people are expecting people to be driving at or below the 70 speed limit and someone else is doing 140 that itself is going to be dangerous.

 

[PR1Berske]

 

[ruffneck23]

 

[PR1Berske]

 

[mwgdrwg]

Cunts.

 

[moochedit]

Gone in 24 hours then

 

[eatmorecheese]

Lol.

 

[Elpenor]

An open and shut case then

 

[PR1Berske]

The letter:

 

[andysays]

Gone in 24 hours then

Is that the new version of "Gone in 60 seconds" with Braverman playing the lead?

 

[magneze]

Let's hope this blows up in his face.

 

[steveo87]

He needs her to stick around.

The Tories, and Labour back in the day, have always had at least one MP, ina senior role, that either acts and as a sounding board, or as deflection, if they are trying to push through something controversial or unpopular through the HoC.
In the old days, it was Boris Johnson (the iddie he had was he was STILL the 'deflector'/'mouth piece' when he was PM).
Now it's Braverman.
On top of that, the on going Factional issues within Government, Sunak needs to have as much broad appeal as possible, and Braverman is popular on the Right (and far right - who are becoming increasingly vocal and powerful) of the Convlservative Party.
The problem is he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't -
Get rid of Braverman, piss off the right, and look even more weak than he did before.

Or


Keep Braverman, piss off everyone else, and look even weaker than he did before.




It's no wonder they're reluctant to even start thinking about the election.

 

[Pickman's model]

He needs her to stick around.

The Tories, and Labour back in the day, have always had at least one MP, ina senior role, that either acts and as a sounding board, or as deflection, if they are trying to push through something controversial or unpopular through the HoC.
In the old days, it was Boris Johnson (the iddie he had was he was STILL the 'deflector'/'mouth piece' when he was PM).
Now it's Braverman.
On top of that, the on going Factional issues within Government, Sunak needs to have as much broad appeal as possible, and Braverman is popular on the Right (and far right - who are becoming increasingly vocal and powerful) of the Convlservative Party.
The problem is he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't -
Get rid of Braverman, piss off the right, and look even more weak than he did before.

Or


Keep Braverman, piss off everyone else, and look even weaker than he did before.




It's no wonder they're reluctant to even start thinking about the election.

With the £5m donation they recently received I'm sure they're thinking very hard about the election. I really wouldn't be surprised if the tories won it as the Labour lead in the polls will largely evaporate as the public sees more of shammer

 

[skyscraper101]

Whenever these things blow up I always play fantasy counsel for the defence in my head to see if they'd actually go down the route I imagined. In this situation, I thought they'd just go with the 'security' line as justification for the private speed awareness course as Home Secretaries always get police protection as they're high profile and mixing with a bunch of randoms in a regular environment would be "potentially disruptive to the public" with police escorts etc.

As it happened, there was none of this. She seemed to offer no defence at all, just the usual 'getting on with the job' weak deflection.

 

[Rob Ray]

I do think it'll be a lot closer than some of the pundits seem to believe. The Tories have a solid ready-made attack line against Sir Charmless in both the stuff he said prior to taking over Labour, and the fact he's a notable and repeated turncoat. Plus his front bench is teeming with technocrat scandal fodder, which is a good "they're no more competent/principled than we are" line.

 

[Pickman's model]

I do think it'll be a lot closer than some of the pundits seem to believe. The Tories have a solid ready-made attack line against Sir Charmless in both the stuff he said prior to taking over Labour, and the fact he's a notable and repeated turncoat.

Frankly they don't need to do a thing as sir keithly will alienate voters while he tries to attract them

 

[Rob Ray]

It's certainly hard to see him pulling in the crowds like Blair did. Dead-eyed grinning ghoul that he was, Blair never gave the impression than he needed a disinfectant wipe after gladhanding with the masses.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

How the fuck has it come to this?

An issue around a speeding ticket and possible procedural and ethical impropriety has had multiple responses in the Commons and now a published letter from the PM, all of which have had a particular 3 word slogan foghorned into them.

"Stop the boats."

These cunts are utterly deranged and totally desperate.

 

[Rob Ray]

Nah, it's just a common or garden faction fight. The "centrists" want Braverman out because they think she's a liability/important scalp and have used their press connections to push it, while Labour are happy to amplify the whole thing.

 

[belboid]

I do think it'll be a lot closer than some of the pundits seem to believe. The Tories have a solid ready-made attack line against Sir Charmless in both the stuff he said prior to taking over Labour, and the fact he's a notable and repeated turncoat. Plus his front bench is teeming with technocrat scandal fodder, which is a good "they're no more competent/principled than we are" line.

Naah, it will probably be closer than it looks like now, but not for those reasons. The fact that Starmer is a lying twat won't bother most people, he's still much less of a lying twat than Johnson was or met of the front bench still is. And as for faceless technocrats, well, compared to this bunch of incompetent and idiotic ideologues, who would object to competent technocrats? All of that will lose Labour a few votes, but mostly in seats like mine where their majority is so big its makes no difference.

 

[Rob Ray]

Naah, it will probably be closer than it looks like now, but not for those reasons. The fact that Starmer is a lying twat won't bother most people, he's still much less of a lying twat than Johnson was or met of the front bench still is. And as for faceless technocrats, well, compared to this bunch of incompetent and idiotic ideologues, who would object to competent technocrats? All of that will lose Labour a few votes, but mostly in seats like mine where their majority is so big its makes no difference.

Labour's hinging an awful lot of its pitch as "more competent at being Tory than the Tories" in an effort to steal light blue votes, so easy attack lines pointing out "how can you trust that they're actually Tory" and "they're no better than us" are potentially fairly potent in that battleground.

 

[belboid]

I really don't think they are. Not when the official tories have shot both their feet off and Liz Truss still lives (and stands again!)

 

[Rob Ray]

I don't think Truss will matter at all by late 2024. She barely figures now.

 

[belboid]

She was all over the news last week with her little trip to Taiwan. And even a party as incompetent as Labour will make damn sure everyone is reminded of her when the time comes.

It'll be closer than it looks now because the tories will throw some pre-election bribes out in next years budget and will probably think up some eye catching bit of populism/racism to go with, but they are holed below the water line and are fucked. Kinnock only ever got 10% ahead of the tories in the run up to '92, it was neck and neck 18months before, so Starmers lead is way up. The SNP may well stop him getting a majority, but it won't be the tories.

 

[Rob Ray]

Look at it from a Tory perspective though. Moment of madness, but now a grown-up's in charge. They've got another year-and-a-half to sell it, and Truss pontificating doesn't mean a damn thing the longer she's out of power.

 

[belboid]

Is the grown up in charge tho? Or does Bravermans survival show he isn't? All guess work at the moment (tho Sunk is no longer well ahead on the tory vote in terms of popularity), we should probably look at it again in six months, see where we're at.

 

[gosub]

He needs her to stick around.

The Tories, and Labour back in the day, have always had at least one MP, ina senior role, that either acts and as a sounding board, or as deflection, if they are trying to push through something controversial or unpopular through the HoC.
In the old days, it was Boris Johnson (the iddie he had was he was STILL the 'deflector'/'mouth piece' when he was PM).
Now it's Braverman.
On top of that, the on going Factional issues within Government, Sunak needs to have as much broad appeal as possible, and Braverman is popular on the Right (and far right - who are becoming increasingly vocal and powerful) of the Convlservative Party.
The problem is he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't -
Get rid of Braverman, piss off the right, and look even more weak than he did before.

Or


Keep Braverman, piss off everyone else, and look even weaker than he did before.




It's no wonder they're reluctant to even start thinking about the election.

Except that's all politics is now. Actual policy that's shit nah that gets left alone cos don't rock the boat by having any difference. Stick with character assination instead keeps things as unpleasant as possible and ensures any actual talent finds better things to do than stand for election

 

[ruffneck23]

Hopefully these internal meeting include Sunak growing a spine.

 

[flypanam]

I see she’s done her speed awareness course judging by the car that was stopped by the Downing Street gates.