Whither the Tories?

[Nearly Sane]

The wacky race rolls on

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgq8gy5n8y7o

[Nearly Sane]

And as the excitement builds to near ankle height, Tugendhat is out.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd7x04vnng1o

[jeremyp]

For some reason, I have no interest whatsoever in who becomes the next Tory leader. This is concerning to me because they are the official opposition and it definitely does matter.

[Nearly Sane]

For some reason, I have no interest whatsoever in who becomes the next Tory leader. This is concerning to me because they are the official opposition and it definitely does matter.

I know what you mean. Looking at the votes there's been a big jump in Cleverly's vote to 39,, Jenrick dropped 2 to 31, possibly a loan of some votes to Cleverly to make it more likely that it's a Cleverly v Jenrick run off
 Badenoch on 30. Tugendhat 20 votes which I suspect will mainly go Cleverly.

Again looks like Cleverly v Jenrick.

I suppose of the 2 I'd rather have Cleverly, as Jenrick is a corrupt grifter but...

[ProfessorDavey]

I know what you mean. Looking at the votes there's been a big jump in Cleverly's vote to 39,, Jenrick dropped 2 to 31, possibly a loan of some votes to Cleverly to make it more likely that it's a Cleverly v Jenrick run off
 Badenoch on 30. Tugendhat 20 votes which I suspect will mainly go Cleverly.

Again looks like Cleverly v Jenrick.

I suppose of the 2 I'd rather have Cleverly, as Jenrick is a corrupt grifter but...

Wondering to what extent Jenrick has lent votes out to ensure that Badenoch is knocked out before the final two. He may have ended up playing a bit too cute a game as Cleverly, rather than Jenrick now looks like the front runner. Key question is whether the tory member selectorate (who are about as unrepresentative of the UK population as you can get) would prefer Cleverly to Jenrick if that is the final two.

From an unbiased outsider perspective Cleverly looks to be the only one of the last four with an ounce of leadership credentials necessary to reach out to the real electorate. From a biased outsider perspective (who wants the tories in opposition for a very, very long time) Badenoch or Jenrick winning would be a fantastic result.

[Nearly Sane]

Cleverly knocked out! I was completely wrong. This indicates a lot of shifting votes. 
Cleverly dropped votes, and all of Tugendhat votes seem to have gone to Jenrick and Badenoch.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cp8l58gp421t

[Aruntraveller]

That is a surprise. Still, I'd expect nothing less from a nest of vipers.

[Nearly Sane]

That is a surprise. Still, I'd expect nothing less from a nest of vipers.

Based on membership polls this moves Badenoch to favourite but I think Jenrick will be willing to say just about anything so it could be interesting.

I think the Labour Party will be pleased, Reform less so but I worry for whither politics goes in the UK with this.

[Aruntraveller]

This from Katy Balls:

As one Tory strategist puts it:

 ‘No amount of briefing, strategy or campaigning can account for the sheer duplicity and scheming of Conservative MPs.’

[Nearly Sane]

Current odds

[ProfessorDavey]

Current odds

I think this might be a closer and more interesting race than previous ones.

Typically the MPs have selected a sensible candidate and a right wing nutter and the members go for the nutter.

But here we have two right wing nutters - so which favour of nutter do the selectorate go for!

[Nearly Sane]

I think this might be a closer and more interesting race than previous ones.

Typically the MPs have selected a sensible candidate and a right wing nutter and the members go for the nutter.

But here we have two right wing nutters - so which favour of nutter do the selectorate go for!

I think Jenrick is playing the part of a right nutter and is just a grifter. Though I did think that of Truss as well but like Michael Bryant in Colditz, I think she played the part and then become the part.


I'm not convinced Badenoch is a nutter, just not very good.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not convinced Badenoch is a nutter, just not very good.

I think she's both. I genuinely think she really believes all this culture wars anti-woke stuff, which frankly impacts people's lives not one iota.

And on not being very good - yup. I've seen her in action at a major event organised jointly by her department and the Department for Education. She made Gillian Keegan seem the height of competence and professionalism.

[Nearly Sane]

I think she's both. I genuinely think she really believes all this culture wars anti-woke stuff, which frankly impacts people's lives not one iota.

And on not being very good - yup. I've seen her in action at a major event organised jointly by her department and the Department for Education. She made Gillian Keegan seem the height of competence and professionalism.

So I take it you regard JK Rowling as a right wing nutter?

ETA I have to admit to deciding to hang back on posting my initial reaction to this because it was  Friday night, and zi didn't want my anger at your vapid post to spoil it. My wife has a friend who attends various protests for women's single sex spaces. I know her reasonably well but zi won't describe her as a friend for reasons that will become cleat. She's been raped multiple times by multiple men. She is struggles with the presence of men generally because of the trauma. In a large group of women she can feel able to deal with some that she knows well but it's a strain.

She used to be able to go to her local rape crisis centre but they started allowing men who said they were women to attend the meetings. This was 5 years ago. There is no accessible rape crisis centre for her where men who say they are women are not allowed in the meetings. For this reason she has had to self exclude and the lack of support, and indeed the attitude from some that she is a bigot for wanting a single sex space at a rape crisis centre has been an enormous strain and set back her recovery hugely.

For me to them read from some middle class middlebrow misogynist, that people's lives have mot been affected one iota by such issues is frankly sickening. It appears that in order to cling on to the 'I am so progressive' badge you're happy to ignore the trauma of such women.

[Christine]

all this culture wars anti-woke stuff, which frankly impacts people's lives not one iota.

Apart from the people, like me, who've lost their jobs; women questioned by police for stating the simple truth that men aren't women; the women locked up in prison with men; women and girls losing out to men who pretend to think they're women so they can win prizes at sport; children being told at primary school that they might have been born in the wrong body; female nurses being ogled by a pervert while they change into their uniforms; disabled women unable to insist on same-sex initimate care. This list is not exhaustive.

Oh yeah, and the gay, lesbian and bisexual people who had their meeting disrupted by young idiots who've swallowed a load of irrational nonsense releasing thousands of insects in the venue to try to prevent them from speaking. Happily, they didn't succeed.

By "people's lives" you presumably mean your life?

[Gordon]

Apart from the people, like me, who've lost their jobs; women questioned by police for stating the simple truth that men aren't women; the women locked up in prison with men; women and girls losing out to men who pretend to think they're women so they can win prizes at sport; children being told at primary school that they might have been born in the wrong body; female nurses being ogled by a pervert while they change into their uniforms; disabled women unable to insist on same-sex initimate care. This list is not exhaustive.

Oh yeah, and the gay, lesbian and bisexual people who had their meeting disrupted by young idiots who've swallowed a load of irrational nonsense releasing thousands of insects in the venue to try to prevent them from speaking. Happily, they didn't succeed.

By "people's lives" you presumably mean your life?

Applause

[Aruntraveller]

Not to mention gay teenagers who feel pressured into transitioning because of their shame at being gay. I hate quoting from the Daily Mail (I did have another article from a gay organisation but have lost that so the Mail will have to do for now):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13040507/transgender-children-gay-teenagers-surgery-hormones-detransition.html

This is not something that doesn't impact people's lives one iota. It really matters.

[Gordon]

So I take it you regard JK Rowling as a right wing nutter?

ETA I have to admit to deciding to hang back on posting my initial reaction to this because it was  Friday night, and zi didn't want my anger at your vapid post to spoil it. My wife has a friend who attends various protests for women's single sex spaces. I know her reasonably well but zi won't describe her as a friend for reasons that will become cleat. She's been raped multiple times by multiple men. She is struggles with the presence of men generally because of the trauma. In a large group of women she can feel able to deal with some that she knows well but it's a strain.

She used to be able to go to her local rape crisis centre but they started allowing men who said they were women to attend the meetings. This was 5 years ago. There is no accessible rape crisis centre for her where men who say they are women are not allowed in the meetings. For this reason she has had to self exclude and the lack of support, and indeed the attitude from some that she is a bigot for wanting a single sex space at a rape crisis centre has been an enormous strain and set back her recovery hugely.

For me to them read from some middle class middlebrow misogynist, that people's lives have mot been affected one iota by such issues is frankly sickening. It appears that in order to cling on to the 'I am so progressive' badge you're happy to ignore the trauma of such women.

That is a harrowing story, and anyone who followed the recent goings on at the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre will have seen how quickly the 'transwomen are women' nonsense can unravel and where it is women, such as in your example, who pay the price for so-called 'progressive' gender ideas that fly in the face of reality and experience.

If she is a bigot for maintaining that men are not women then so am I - and an unapologetic one at that.

[Nearly Sane]

I've covered the treatment of Jenny Lindsay on the trans thread but just another person whose life was affected by more than 1 iota.

https://youtu.be/DL53RW1imVw?si=QDLJgPt1Txp3LCbC

[Nearly Sane]

Apart from the people, like me, who've lost their jobs; women questioned by police for stating the simple truth that men aren't women; the women locked up in prison with men; women and girls losing out to men who pretend to think they're women so they can win prizes at sport; children being told at primary school that they might have been born in the wrong body; female nurses being ogled by a pervert while they change into their uniforms; disabled women unable to insist on same-sex initimate care. This list is not exhaustive.

Oh yeah, and the gay, lesbian and bisexual people who had their meeting disrupted by young idiots who've swallowed a load of irrational nonsense releasing thousands of insects in the venue to try to prevent them from speaking. Happily, they didn't succeed.

By "people's lives" you presumably mean your life?

The sad attempt at shutting up the LGB Alliance,but of course,  the Prof will be able to say why he thinks Rhona Hotchkiss and Kate Barker know no iota about how their lives have been affected.


https://archive.vn/77Ktk

[ProfessorDavey]

Wow - that was quite a pile on.

Particularly seeing that I never even mentioned trans issues in my post. Why would you assume that my comments exclusively, or even predominantly, related to trans rights. By the way they didn't.

[Nearly Sane]

Wow - that was quite a pile on.

Particularly seeing that I never even mentioned trans issues in my post. Why would you assume that my comments exclusively, or even predominantly, related to trans rights. By the way they didn't.

Doesn't matter. You said people' lives weren't affected one iota. You were wrong. Maybe you should consider  that rather than playing the 'poor me, people disagree with me' card. My wife's friend who has had to self exclude from rape crisis support has gone though a bit more than that.

[ProfessorDavey]

Doesn't matter. You said people' lives weren't affected one iota. You were wrong. Maybe you should consider  that rather than playing the 'poor me, people disagree with me' card. My wife's friend who has had to self exclude from rape crisis support has gone though a bit more than that.

Of course it matters, precisely because I wan't talking about trans issues, so they are completely irrelevant to my comment.

I was talking about Badenoch regularly stoking division on matters which as far as I can see simply do not negatively affect people's lives. Examples:

Banging on about footballers and opposition politicians taking the knee - how many people's lives were negatively affected by this?

Inferring that children were being forced to take the knee in school, despite their being no evidence for this (despite Daily Mail style hysteria). How many people are negatively impacted by not being forced to take the knee.

Her bizarre spat with the National Trust over their decisions to update some information in their properties to provide greater historical context. How many people consider their lives now ruined due to a new sign in Snoddington Manor up the road.

Banging on about statues and named buildings. If an organisation chooses to change the name of a building as the previous name didn't reflect their current values how many people are negatively affected.

And just recently there are her bonkers comments on maternity pay and civil service.

These are the kinds of examples I was thinking about - specifically loads of issues she has been continually banging on about when what she is railing against seems not really to negatively affect people at all.

Oh and by the way (just to be absolutely clear) I do consider that some people are negatively affected by the ongoing debates over trans issues and in a small number of cases significantly negatively affected. And that, of course, includes trans people.

You and I have different views on this matter and I have rarely, if ever, dipped my toe into this discussion as I have seen how one sided it is on this MB and how any comments that aren't aligned with your view attract vitriol (as seen in the last few comments on this thread when I wasn't even discussing trans issues at all). As such this will be my last comment on this matter.

Given that I have now clearly indicated that my comment (reply 87) was NOT about trans issues, then I suggest that replies 88-94 are a derail of the topic (as they do not relate to my comment) and should either be removed or moved to the trans rights thread.

[Nearly Sane]

Of course it matters, precisely because I wan't talking about trans issues, so they are completely irrelevant to my comment.

I was talking about Badenoch regularly stoking division on matters which as far as I can see simply do not negatively affect people's lives. Examples:

Banging on about footballers and opposition politicians taking the knee - how many people's lives were negatively affected by this?

Inferring that children were being forced to take the knee in school, despite their being no evidence for this (despite Daily Mail style hysteria). How many people are negatively impacted by not being forced to take the knee.

Her bizarre spat with the National Trust over their decisions to update some information in their properties to provide greater historical context. How many people consider their lives now ruined due to a new sign in Snoddington Manor up the road.

Banging on about statues and named buildings. If an organisation chooses to change the name of a building as the previous name didn't reflect their current values how many people are negatively affected.

And just recently there are her bonkers comments on maternity pay and civil service.

These are the kinds of examples I was thinking about - specifically loads of issues she has been continually banging on about when what she is railing against seems not really to negatively affect people at all.

Oh and by the way (just to be absolutely clear) I do consider that some people are negatively affected by the ongoing debates over trans issues and in a small number of cases significantly negatively affected. And that, of course, includes trans people.

You and I have different views on this matter and I have rarely, if ever, dipped my toe into this discussion as I have seen how one sided it is on this MB and how any comments that aren't aligned with your view attract vitriol (as seen on this thread when I wasn't even discussing trans issues at all). As such this will be my last comment on this matter.

Given that I have now clearly indicated that my comment (reply 87) was NOT about trans issues, then I suggest that replies 88-94 are a derail of the topic (as they do not relate to my comment) and should either be removed or moved to the trans rights thread.

Stop lying.

[ProfessorDavey]

Stop lying.

About what? I am not lying.