Listening to BBC talking about Truss, it seems she's enamored...

[TreasonousBastard]

of ye olde trickle down theory, and it's very important that British businesses get their tax cut.

No word yet on Brexit.

[elleng]

1. I heard that she is/was a 'stay,' whatever that means now.

[Layzeebeaver]

3. Yes. Then she switched

When she found a way into power.

She has no values or platform. She is the perfect PM for the current incarnation of the Tory party.

It’s disgusts me.

[Bread and Circuses]

2. Could be worse than Boris

Liz Truss was a Labor Party member in her early years. Her dad is a retired professor who is a Labor party member and he is shocked by her positions.
She changed to Tory to get involved in politics. The UK is now out of the European Union, after a narrow vote and lies told by the Tories. She was a 'remainer' during the vote campaign, even though she was a Tory MP. She changed her tune to go along with the gang.

The country is a mess. Untreated sewage sent to the sea. Fresh market items are rotting because they can't make transport out of UK to European markets. The costs of everything is sky high. Of great concern is fuel costs to heat homes during the winter.

Liz Truss has a basket of problems from the past 12 years of Tory government rule. She'll be blamed for making it worse because she will hit hard on all the futile 'conservative' remedies.

[Layzeebeaver]

4. Spot on good chap!!

Perfectly written.

And you’re correct about the conservative remedies. They have no new tools in their shed.

[uponit7771]

5. "..She changed her tune to go along with the gang..." The opportunist are the worst

[Hugin]

10. I learned about the special form of corruption opportunist bring...

Many years ago when one of my parents was in politics. Fortunately, my parent was able to beat the one trying to unseat them by the narrowest margin.

Since then I have placed opportunist in a standing just below the worst of the GrOPpers. At least the those loafs have a consistent stand and you know they always have a knife aimed at you.

Really, TFG is a opportunist when all of the rhetoric and flip-floppery are stripped away.

[stopdiggin]

13. quite right. TFG has no core belief or values

other than "where's mine?"

[DFW]

14. That is the Republican Party in a nutshell

The Party of NO.

After all, "There's No Business like NO Business."

[malaise]

7. I heard that she switched while having an affair

She will make Thatcher and Boris look like Mother Teresa

[certainot]

11. if that happened here, no problem, 1500 coordinated radio stations would blame it on democrats

i wonder if russia also had the opportunity to use talk radio there to hype the anti immigration sentiment and boris brexit bullshit

when i heard her say lower taxes and energy prices, 'free market' trickle down and deregulation came to mind immediately

[Celerity]

17. Not Labour, she was a Lib Dem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Truss

Truss was active in the Liberal Democrats. She was president of Oxford University Liberal Democrats and a member of the national executive committee of Liberal Democrat Youth and Students (LDYS). During her time as a Liberal Democrat, Truss supported the legalisation of cannabis and the abolition of the monarchy, and campaigned against the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Truss joined the Conservative Party in 1996.

The rise and rise of Liz Truss: 10 key moments in her journey from Lib Dem to likely Tory PM

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/03/the-rise-and-rise-of-liz-truss-10-key-moments-in-her-journey-from-lib-dem-to-likely-tory-pm

[JonAndKatePlusABird]

18. What would Lib Dem roughly translate to in America?

I sort of follow UK politics and am familiar with the basics and makeup of their government, but am curious to hear your take as to what their American equivalents/approximations would be.

[Celerity]

19. I dislike them immensely, they propped up the Cameron government's austerity regime, put him in

power starting in 2010, in the Tory/Lib Dem coalition government. Cameron was the one who made the Brexit referendum happen (a position the Lib Dems themselves supported for years, see below).

Many Lib Dems are centre to centre right neoliberals, Blairite third-wayers, who are far too open to privatisation, free (not fair) trade, shrinking the welfare state, deregulation, anti-union, are for lower taxes for the wealthy, and basically corporatists in general far too often. Some are even outright RW ex Tories (again, see below).

David Cameron and Nick Clegg lead coalition into power

Tory–Lib Dem coalition takes power after Labour talks fail
Conservative leader becomes PM after five days of negotiation
Clegg to be deputy PM with four more Lib Dems in cabinet

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/12/david-cameron-nick-clegg-coalition

here is a post I did in 2019


I vote in Kensington, I am voting Labour, I will NEVER vote for that ex Tory Gymiah, not a chance

The constituency is simply Kensington, not Kensington and Chelsea. Kensington and Chelsea was abolished for the 2010 election, when the 1974–1997 Kensington constituency was recreated and Chelsea formed a new constituency together with the southern part of the former Hammersmith and Fulham constituency, called the Chelsea and Fulham constituency.

Emma Dent Coad (Labour) won Kensington by 20 votes in 2017 (5 from me and my family), the first time we beat the Tories in the history of its modern iterations.

I do not trust the Lib Dems at all, they are Tory collaborators. They propped up that rotter Cameron for 5 years, 5 years of austerity, privatisation, and a general diminution of our welfare state and protections for workers and the less well-off.


Sam Gyimah’s voting in Parliament Vote for Lib Dems, you get more of this rot in many cases:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24789/sam_gyimah/east_surrey

Generally voted against UK membership of the EU
5 votes for, 17 votes against, 2 absences, between 2016–2019

Almost always voted for fewer MPs in the House of Commons
6 votes for, 1 vote against, 1 absence, between 2010–2016

Voted for raising England’s undergraduate tuition fee cap to £9,000 per year
1 vote for, 0 votes against, in 2010

Almost always voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
0 votes for, 11 votes against, 4 absences, between 2011–2016

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24789/sam_gyimah/east_surrey/votes

Voted against investigations into the Iraq war
0 votes for, 1 vote against, in 2016

Consistently voted for replacing Trident with a new nuclear weapons system
5 votes for, 0 votes against, in 2016

Generally voted against more EU integration
33 votes for, 58 votes against, 8 absences, between 2011–2019

Consistently voted against strengthening the Military Covenant
0 votes for, 3 votes against, between 2011–2012

Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
0 votes for, 15 votes against, 3 absences, between 2016–2019

Generally voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax"n)
12 votes for, 0 votes against, 6 absences, between 2011–2018

Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
0 votes for, 5 votes against, in 2013

Almost always voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
0 votes for, 11 votes against, 4 absences, between 2011–2016

Consistently voted for making local councils responsible for helping those in financial need afford their council tax and reducing the amount spent on such support
4 votes for, 0 votes against, in 2012

Almost always voted for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits
47 votes for, 0 votes against, 7 absences, between 2012–2016

Almost always voted against spending public money to create guaranteed jobs for young people who have spent a long time unemployed
0 votes for, 8 votes against, 1 absence, between 2011–2014

Generally voted for lower taxes on fuel for motor vehicles
6 votes for, 8 votes against, 2 absences, between 2010–2013

Consistently voted against increasing the tax rate applied to income over £150,000
0 votes for, 12 votes against, between 2012–2015

Generally voted against a banker’s bonus tax
1 vote for, 13 votes against, 4 absences, between 2011–2015

Voted a mixture of for and against higher taxes on banks
6 votes for, 9 votes against, between 2011–2018

Almost always voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
0 votes for, 3 votes against, 1 absence, in 2013

Consistently voted for allowing employees to exchange some employment rights for shares in the company they work for
5 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2012–2013

Almost always voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
9 votes for, 0 votes against, 2 absences, between 2010–2017

Almost always voted for reducing capital gains tax
8 votes for, 1 vote against, between 2010–2016

Consistently voted for reducing the rate of corporation tax
25 votes for, 1 vote against, between 2010–2016

Consistently voted against restricting the provision of services to private patients by the NHS
0 votes for, 7 votes against, between 2011–2012

Almost always voted for reforming the NHS so GPs buy services on behalf of their patients
7 votes for, 0 votes against, 1 absence, between 2011–2019

Consistently voted for ending financial support for some 16-19 year olds in training and further education
2 votes for, 0 votes against, in 2011

Consistently voted for university tuition fees
5 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2010–2017

Consistently voted for a stricter asylum system
8 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2015–2016

Consistently voted for stronger enforcement of immigration rules
9 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2015–2016

Consistently voted for mass surveillance of people’s communications and activities
3 votes for, 0 votes against, in 2016

Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
3 votes for, 16 votes against, 1 absence, between 2011–2019

Generally voted for lower taxes on fuel for motor vehicles
6 votes for, 8 votes against, 2 absences, between 2010–2013

Consistently voted for selling England’s state owned forests
2 votes for, 0 votes against, in 2011

Generally voted against greater regulation of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to extract shale gas
1 vote for, 2 votes against, 1 absence, in 2015

Consistently voted for the privatisation of Royal Mail
3 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2010–2011

Consistently voted against restrictions on fees charged to tenants by letting agents
0 votes for, 5 votes against, between 2014–2018

Almost always voted for the policies included in the 2010 Conservative - Liberal Democrat Coalition Agreement
61 votes for, 8 votes against, 12 absences, between 2010–2015

As for Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems in General

hard pass



Here's more proof why it's hard to trust Jo Swinson on anything

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/09/16/heres-more-proof-why-its-hard-to-trust-jo-swinson-on-anything/

Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson has pledged “to stop Brexit altogether”. But here’s more evidence showing why it’s hard to trust her on anything.

“What?!?

At party conference, the Liberal Democrats agreed to cancel Brexit if they get into power. Swinson said:

We will do all we can to fight for our place in Europe, and to stop Brexit altogether.

But if her voting record and refusal to work with Jeremy Corbyn wasn’t bad enough, a new video has emerged showing that Swinson previously backed a referendum on UK EU membership.

In 2008, Swinson said:

Link to tweet

The Liberal Democrats would like to have a referendum on the major issue of in or out of Europe.

As her voting record shows, Swinson did indeed vote for a referendum in 2008. And indeed, despite blaming David Cameron for the 2016 referendum, the Lib Dems supported this option while Nick Clegg was at the helm, who led the party between 2007-2015:

Link to tweet

The Lib Dems are deeply stained by austerity. Don’t trust them

With a new leader the party is enjoying a resurgence, but its support for the Tories in coalition can’t be forgotten so easily

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/23/lib-dems-stained-austerity-trust-tories



The Liberal Democrats are back, or so we’re told, with Jo Swinson’s leadership victory being pitched as the rebirth of the party. The unique conditions of Brexit have given the Lib Dems not only a reason to exist but the opportunity to detoxify their brand after their fatal coalition with the Conservatives, and to cast themselves as a reforming, progressive party in troubled times.

And yet remarkably little has changed since the days when Nick Clegg stood laughing in the Downing Street rose garden next to David Cameron as he signed Britain up to years of sweeping public spending cuts. When asked throughout this summer’s leadership campaign, Swinson (and her opponent, Ed Davey) consistently defended her party’s role in austerity measures. In an interview with Channel 4 News, Swinson said she had no regrets about the coalition, stating it was the right move “to get our country back on track”. This is despite the fact it has been shown that austerity shrunk the British economy by £100bn, and has even been linked to 130,000 preventable deaths. Swinson acknowledged “there were policies we let through [in coalition] that we shouldn’t have done”, naming the bedroom tax, but remained unrepentant on a whole host of others.

Instead, Swinson repeatedly claims credit for the Lib Dems being a moderating influence on the Tories. They may well have helped to rein in the Conservatives on some things (the party is said to have forced George Osborne to temporarily shelve child tax credit cuts) but this fundamentally misses the point: the Lib Dems weren’t coerced into the partnership, they voluntarily chose it, and as such were a reason every Tory cut that was passed was possible.

This isn’t about holding grudges or some sort of ideological purity. Political parties naturally evolve depending on the political times, and progress in policy positions should be credited. It was four years ago this week that the Labour party adopted its abysmal abstention strategy for key “welfare reform”, but the party has since wrestled internally to have the strong anti-austerity message it holds today, winning back support in the process.

The same cannot be said for the Lib Dems. This is a party that as recently as last year spoke of sacrificing some of the poorest people in society to benefit sanctions in exchange for a 5p tax on plastic bags while in coalition. Nor are their MPs against forming a pact with the Tories again, with Swinson simply ruling out joining forces with Boris Johnson or any Brexiteer.

snip


By dismissing Corbyn's overtures, the Lib Dems are showing their true colours

It’s telling that Jo Swinson was happier propping up David Cameron for five years than the Labour leader for five weeks

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/16/dismissing-corbyn-lib-dem-true-colours-jo-swinson-labour

If your signature policy – indeed, only visible political position – is to stop Brexit, and you claim that you will do absolutely everything within your power to prevent no deal, then it’s something of an error to suddenly introduce an exception. And yet this is the fatal mistake the Liberal Democrats have made.

When Jeremy Corbyn wrote a letter putting himself forward as a transitional prime minister purely to block no deal, extend article 50 and call an election, Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson could have welcomed the move as constructive, as the SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru have done, with several Tory backbenchers prepared to talk, too. Instead, Swinson revealed that while the Lib Dems had been willing to prop David Cameron up for five years, implementing massive cuts and trebling tuition fees, she’s not prepared to countenance supporting Corbyn for five weeks solely to stop a disorderly exit from the EU. Her plan to do a backroom deal to put Harriet Harman or Ken Clarke in No 10 smacks not only of establishment stitch-up – it is also a constitutional nonsense, given it falls to the leader of the opposition, who has twice won a democratic mandate from his party membership and whose party won 40% of the vote just two years ago, to construct an alternative government. But constitutional nonsense, otherwise known as the Fixed-term Parliaments Act – which is itself another Lib Dem gift to the nation – is why we’re in this mess in the first place.

Labour’s plan has achieved a number of things. Corbyn’s supporters have long been compared to a cult, but the cult-like qualities of his opponents are rarely discussed. We can now see who is primarily motivated by stopping Brexit, and who is mostly driven by stopping Corbyn. In the coming weeks, pressure can be put on MPs as to whether their vendetta against the Labour leader is worth throwing Britain off a no-deal cliff for.

It has also put Labour on the front foot over Brexit, underlined by various positive newspaper front-page splashes. Brexit is an instrument of torture for Labour: its leading figures fret about maintaining and extending the coalition of remain and leave voters that deprived the Tories of their majority two years ago, and they differ on strategy going forward. Morale has been poor at the top, partly because of a weak response to Boris Johnson’s ascent to power. There has been some fatalism, too: a sense that Labour can only cut through during party conference or an election campaign. That’s been turned around: a route map for winning back disillusioned remainers from the Lib Dems has appeared – which is important, given Tory strategist Dominic Cummings is counting on a divided anti-Tory vote to secure a Johnson majority. During an election campaign, Labour will be offering a referendum with remain on the ballot paper, alongside transformative popular domestic policies such as taxing the rich to end austerity, scrapping tuition fees, and public ownership. The Lib Dems will be stuck as a single-issue party, any potential radicalism stymied by the fact that nearly all their target seats can only be won by winning over Tory voters.

snip


If Jo Swinson is serious about stopping a no-deal Brexit, she must support Corbyn

The Labour leader’s solution may not be perfect, but for the Lib Dems it could be the most viable

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/15/jo-swinson-brexit-jeremy-corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn has always been more of a politician than either his most fervent supporters or detractors have wanted to admit. Last night he again demonstrated why. In a move unprecedented in modern times, the leader of the opposition has offered to form a government with the express proviso of not implementing any of his party’s policies. Corbyn’s offer, in a letter to other party leaders and moderate Tories, involves setting up a “strictly time-limited temporary government” with the sole intention of extending article 50 and holding a general election. In that election, Corbyn will commit to a new referendum with the option of remaining in the EU.

There might be debate about why he’s done this, but ultimately his motives don’t matter. Corbyn is the leader of the opposition and, in accordance with our unwritten constitution, the first alternative prime minister. He is also offering a concrete proposal to do exactly the thing remainers say they want – to stop no deal and then offer voters the chance to stop Brexit altogether.

Of course, if Corbyn was attempting to trap the Lib Dems, they have walked right into it. Jo Swinson, the party’s leader, has dismissed outright the prospect of Corbyn leading such a government, and has not even signalled a willingness to enter discussions with him. Instead, she has declared she could support a Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman government. All well and good, but neither of these MPs is leader of the opposition (or any political party), and Swinson does not have the parliamentary numbers or time to pick and choose who she is prepared to work with.

The new Lib Dem leader risks making a grave mistake. Even in purely party political terms, a Corbyn-led caretaker government does not necessarily strengthen Labour in the long term. But more importantly, Swinson has always emphasised, rightly, that her party’s priority is to stop no deal. This could prove the only way to do so. If the Lib Dems really believe that a few months of a limited Corbyn government is worse than medicine shortages, it is their duty to say why.

snip

[Just A Box Of Rain]

24. The Liberal Democrats in the UK are (as the name suggests) liberal democrats.

They are very equivalent to mainstream Democrats here. Team Normal.

They did make a serious mistake in joining a Tory coalition, which they have come to regret.

They were also the only party that strongly supported remaining in the EU (anti-Brexit).

The Lib Dems remained an island of sanity as Jeremy Corbyn drove the Labour Party off the rails with extremism and anti-Semitism. It remains to be seen whether Labour will every recover from the disastrous "leadership" of their disgraced former leader, Corbyn, who has been ousted.

If not for Corbyn, it is unlikely that the Tories would have held power for so long in the UK.

What a blunder!

[regnaD kciN]

6. She's a Tory. What did you expect?

[hlthe2b]

8. My understanding is that she was not in favor of Brexit INITIALLY (at least for a hot minute) BUT

once the vote occurred became a VERY STRONG BREXITER. Likewise, it appears she is enamored by comparisons to Margaret Thatcher. So I think the Brits are right to be holding their breath.

[modrepub]

9. The Correct Term Is

tinkle (as in piss) down.

[allegorical oracle]

12. Katty Kay on Morning Joe this a.m. noted comparisons of Truss to Thatcher -- The Iron Lady --

and how Truss is being called The Iron Weathercock -- she swings whichever way the wind's blowing.

[OnDoutside]

15. Truss bigged up comparisons to Thatcher but there the story ends.

Even her own father is embarrassed by her move to the right.

[brooklynite]

16. I'll note that Thatcher was extremely popular, and served as PM for 11 years...

...winning three elections.

I'm not convinced that Labour is prepared to take them on in 2025.

[BannonsLiver]

20. Well I guess the terrible opinions aren't limited to American politics.

[brooklynite]

21. From the Party that gave us Jeremy Corbyn?

Perhaps you could offer an actual counter-opinion.

[BannonsLiver]

22. Corbyn's long gone.

Keep up.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

25. Jeremy Corbyn destroyed the Labour Party and handed No 10 to the Tories by default.

That's how not to be a majority party.

Can Labour ever recover from the disastrous embrace of Jeremy Corbyn? Remains to be seen.

He was quite a gift to Conservatives.

[Wounded Bear]

23. So the Brits have gone from a trump mini-me to a Reagan wannabe?

Good luck with that guys.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. Truss is pretty awful on the current topic of Brexit - the Northern Ireland Protocol

She had already been given additional Brexit responsibility in December last year, and it's been getting worse. Recently reported:

Liz Truss may trigger article 16 days after becoming PM, amid Brexit row

Liz Truss may trigger article 16 proceedings against the European Union within days of becoming prime minister, as a legal war with Brussels looms over the Northern Ireland protocol.

The foreign secretary and Tory leadership frontrunner is understood to have received fresh advice from trade and legal experts about invoking the emergency clause contained in the post-Brexit deal.

It has long been threatened by Truss, but there is renewed interest as the deadline approaches for the UK to respond to legal proceedings launched against it by the EU for failing to implement proper Irish Sea border checks.

The deadline for doing so is 15 September – 10 days after the next prime minister will be announced.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/26/liz-truss-may-trigger-article-16-days-after-becoming-pm-amid-brexit-row

Article 16 is meant to be for when unforeseen circumstances cause real problems from something in the Brexit Northern Ireland Protocol. Everything happening now was predicted, and the Tories just pretended what they agreed to wouldn't have its obvious effects. So now they want a dispute, to make it look like it's not their fault. Truss has been leading that, and it'll just be worse with her as PM.

[OnDoutside]

27. James O'Brien had another epic takedown of Johnson