General Election 2024

I'm assuming they are all jostling to be the next leader now and looking to impress the members.

Bad Enoch didn't put her papers in in time, the soppy nelly.

John Redwood is one of the best reasons for term limits.

Braverman...as thick as mince and massively promoted beyond her competence and capability in the way that can only occur when you have a ridiculous populist clown show in charge

Am I the outlier here for wanting highly skilled people, with experience of running large complex businesses/entities to be at the higher end of government? Parachuting in and no connection to local area probably means, yes might be a shite local mp. But when it comes to ministers I don’t really want people making it up as a they go along, with no clue what they’re doing or how to do it (although aware that ministers aren’t running things day to day).

No idea regarding the competency of Andrew Griffith, but if a CXO of some major business/company wants to take a massive pay cut and attempt to make things better for the country (rather than use it to further line their own pockets) is that that terrible?

I think that is the issue you've got tons of folk just making it up as they go along and getting 5 years big money when in reality they wouldnt get close to that as they are a diddy.

Yes, 100% agree. Equally as much an issue that particularly for last 10 years, nobody spends more than 9 months in a position and quite frequently ministers are not matched to their (often quite limited) expertise, or are promoted solely on the basis of loyalty.

But to willingly discount MPs on the basis they’re rich, due to a previous successful career outside of politics (as opposed to a massive family wealth etc) seems against our collective interest and short sighted at best.

Bad Enoch didn't put her papers in in time, the soppy nelly.

What is this about?

Didn't johnson also have a policy of intentionally appointing people to Cabinet positions they didn't have skills in?

But to willingly discount MPs on the basis they’re rich, due to a previous successful career outside of politics

I'm not seeing anyone doing this. But it isn't wrong to raise a concern if your success in a previous career was predicated on greed, venality, exploitation and generally looting/fucking the country.

but if a CXO of some major business/company wants to take a massive pay cut and attempt to make things better for the country (rather than use it to further line their own pockets) is that that terrible?

Yes, in fairness I think you're right, and I think the same but didn't notice I was being hypocritical in pointing out his wealth / credentials whilst knowing absolutely nothing about Griffith, who I merely assume is awful because he's a tory.

I suppose it matters where they made their wealth, but it's true without delving into his past / non exec directorships etc, being the head accountant of a huge company probably shouldn't automatically disqualify one from standing. On the face of it, Media also probably isn't the worst background to come from (compared to oil majors / arms / other things)

The motives should be heavily questioned though - I've no idea if Griffith has been, Sunak certainly wasn't before being made chancellor then PM.

I could well have misinterpreted what was meant. But to take the earlier example, being CFO of Sky I don’t believe means you shouldn’t be considered as an MP (although again no idea on Andrew Griffith)

Didn't johnson also have a policy of intentionally appointing people to Cabinet positions they didn't have skills in?

I don't think he's alone in this. And it is also some of the politicking behind constant reshuffles in various governments. It helps keep the power in number 10.

Yep, in agreement here! Feel it rarely actually comes up where people interrogate why politicians are in politics, or you just get some inane bullshit. Except to say perhaps their dad was a toolmaker.

I think it's a mis-read of a story that Kemi could be prevented from entering a Tory leadership ballot after the election if Labour asks for a re-run as postal ballots in her constituency haven't been delivered.
As minister responsible for the Post Office this would be awkward, but it's all hypothetical.

Hmmm, Sky?
Surely just another craven over exploiter of a monopoly? Taking most sports away from free-to-air transmission, EPL being the most obvious, then overcharging for access.
Also wantonly poor customer service, exploiting passive customers with above inflation annual increases.

Re sports, it was the EPL’s choice who to sell the rights to. And terrestrial channels still require tv license, which in combo with ad revenues I guess ultimately forces there hands in terms of where they spend their money. Not sure you can blame Sky, a for profit entity, for wanting to obtain content that enables them to make a profit. Agree that you don’t have to like it.

Could the incoming government make future election campaigns three weeks. It's been dragging for a while. Cheers.

I've started a thread of predictions here:
https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/397583/
If anyone wants to put up their guesses for numbers of seats.

I am a human, see how I consume the meal called sandwiches

1 Attachment

My children enjoy sandwiches, my father used to make sandwiches. Trust me I know sandwiches.

"My father was a toolsandwich-maker."

How gauche though.

His favourite meal is sandwiches. Plural. We could only afford a single sandwich growing up.

.

2 Attachments