But where's the "Merkel"
Which IIRC should be about 140 Truss's
Clearly "Muti" was a solid long term investment.
She may have lost to an iceberg lettuce in the longevity stakes, but Liz Truss managed to win one thing yesterday: serving 44 days before resigning, she is now Shortest-lived Prime Minister in UK History. That's less than half the time Britain was led by its second shortest tenured PM, George Canning (who also penned the odd …
We need a Prime Minister who is concerned about fixing all of the issues affecting the UK that have appeared in recent years ... but we're only going to get a Prime Minister who's good at getting elected. This is pretty much like writing software and saying it works, but never checking it ... The current update with Liz Truss is just like installing Windows 11 and finding issues that will be "fixed next week" for the next few years.
>we're only going to get a Prime Minister who's good at getting elected
We haven't really had one of them in donkeys. All three of Truss, Johnson and May plumb the depths for least popular party leaders and PMs in recorded history.
Johnson didn't win in 2019 because he was popular or great at elections, he won because he was standing against a hate-filled antisemite who these days spends his time parroting Putin's talking points with his fellow quislings from the so-called stop the war coalition and "Novara Media"
Johnson won in 2019 with 1% more vote share than May had in 2017. That 1% would have led to a majority given that May was technically in a minority government (I don't know my NI parties as well as I should, but one of them (the DUP?) usually vote with the tories).
The 60 seat difference between 2017 and 2019 was all through whatever Nigel Farage's party of the day splitting the labour vote in heavy leave LAB seats.
"but we're only going to get a Prime Minister who's good at getting elected."
Welcome to 21st Century politics, you'll just love it here. [/s]
Take your pick: weak, ineffectual "progressive" or authoritarian rich-apologist "conservative".
Oh, and BTW, immediately remove any politician preaching that austerity and tax cuts for the top earners will work - just ask Kansas.
But that won't stop them from preaching the same tired, old, hoary beliefs.
>Take your pick: weak, ineffectual "progressive" or authoritarian rich-apologist "conservative".
Given the last UK election was between a "conservative" who raised taxes to their highest levels in history and a "progressive" mostly obsessed with how to help out his mates in Syria and Iran I think it's fairly safe to say this is complete nonsense. If anything we're more at risk of populist extremists engaging in elected tyranny than at any other time since the beginning of last century.
But after 1066, you've been French!
Err, No. The Normans were migratory Vikings who raided and settled the area of northern France now known as...Normandy! They intermingled with the local Frankish population, adopting their language and religion, but remained distinguishable from the surrounding pure Frankish populated areas. They went on rapidly to expand round parts of Europe, including southern Italy, North Africa, the Levant, and Northern Turkey, all by sea-borne invasion; and of course, famously, the British Isles (Great Britain and Ireland).
William the Conqueror was a descendent of Rollo, a Viking and the first ruler of Normandy.
You genuinely have no idea what the policies of Labour were at the last general election. Still, I heard enough people parroting the bullshit they've read online to not blame you for believing this bollocks.
Maybe do a little research next time?
'The current update with Liz Truss is just like installing Windows 11 and finding issues that will be "fixed next week" for the next few years.'
Speaking of fixes :-
'The current issue with any British politician is just like installing Windows 11 and finding issues that will be "fixed next week" for the next few years.' - FTFY.
Also, the fuckers seem to have forgotten that they are supposed to work for the benefit of the country as a whole, not slag each other off. Stop you internal back-biting and concentrate on getting Blighty out of the shit. We must be a laughing stock in the international community.
Dear international community, please tell us how shit you think we are.
Politicians working for the benefit of the country are extremely rare, proof is they are usually remembered for it, which shows how unusual it is.
Normal politicians are only there for the power and the money, so the pool of potential candidates is utterly tainted. The only hope is that some of them might be of at least average intelligence, and also less unscrupulous than others, and thus not balk at doing some work for the benefit of the country as a whole. From time to time.
"Dear international community, please tell us how shit you think we are."
Don't need to tell. Just need to look.
International trade? Shit. Exports anywhere? Shit. Strength of Sterling? Shit. Health system? Getting increasingly shittier. Government? Beyond shit. Basic state pension? Shit. Price of energy? Unbelievable shit.
The "illegal immigrants" are the only people that seem to be heading in the direction of Britain, and that may be because where they are from is even more shit...for now.
Unfortunately, there is no consensus on how to get out of the shit. So they can't "work together", they have to resolve the disagreement about what is best to do.
That's... what politics is for. Criticising them for arguing is like criticising a test engineer for "breaking" the product, or criticising a BOFH for not letting you reformat a shared drive.
"We must be a laughing stock in the international community."
No. As 'international community' we can laugh at Truss and then we look at at domestic (or our own neighbours) situation and notice that it's as bad here. Pure idiots in power.
And it's worse than that: Every candidate to power, is also an idiot. These people are literally as dumb as my boots and I have to choose if I vote left boot or right boot.
They are different but still stupid as boots. And that's not fuc***ing funny at all.
The last bloke was in office for a longer than that and didn't make any decisions either, other than "let's party". So not sure that's a benchmark.
Private Eye helpfully noted that Goebbels was only in power for one day. Nice for the Tories still to have something to aim for.
You slightly forgot "let's leave the EU"
Which was an entirely self-political decision for Boris (as in "which of the options is more likely to get elected") and not made on any basis of personal belief whatsoever.
And let's not forget: Brexit "isn't done" - because of Boris' twaddling approach to policy, the only way he could get any sort of deal signed was to effectively cut off Northern Ireland - an utterly unworkable solution that everybody hated (especially the 'Loyalist' politicians. Hence the utter paralysis of Government in NI) and one that lead to trade paralysis in NI.
He was and is a fundamentally immoral, lazy, ineffectual and highly intelligent fool. It's takes more than being able to quote Plutarch or Tacitus to be an effective politician. At least (in the latest farce) he seems to have learnt a smidgeon of common sense and has withdrawn from the Conservative leader contest - I suspect that it's been pointed out to him that exactly the same thing would happen again if he won.
 Yes - I do happen to think that him being a serial adulterer is a reflection of his personal morals - if he can't keep a deeply personal promise he's made in marriage, what's the chance in him keeping *any* promise that he's made? I think Carrie needs to pay a stipend to a PI to have him followed 24/7
Johnson didn't eat any of the cake.
Or drink any of the champagne. In fact he wasn't even there. Wait, there are photos? Ok, he was there, but only for ten minutes. Well, twenty minutes. Plus the speech he gave. But he didn't realise that was a party. Or the other one. That was a work discussion. The cheese and wine were there by mistake. Why is no-one blaming the caterers for this? Really it's their fault that Boris kept accidentally finding himself at parties all through lockdown.
Actually on that last point, given as Johnsons view of home working is, and I quote "My experience of working from home is you spend an awful lot of time making another cup of coffee and then, you know, getting up, walking very slowly to the fridge, hacking off a small piece of cheese, then walking very slowly back to your laptop and then forgetting what it was you’re doing", then it's hardly surprising he thought a cheese and wine party was work.
Also, did no-one notice that he basically admits he can't be trusted to manage his own time?
Don't forget the Party Conference nonsense that took a few more days.
I think she might have been actually active as a Prime Minister for about three weeks.
A brief period of time that will go down in history as a shining example of how not to run a country; along with a party that should never be allowed to run a country ever again...
If you're going to do that, you should submit the two weeks of mourning following the death of the Queen. Otherwise Truss probably wouldn't have made it to the
Nasty Tory Party conferences.
Still, if current events are anything to go by, she might be back next year.
> Ah. Truss is still in office, and will be until Friday next week.
> So a Truss would be, what, 52 days?
1 Truss: 44 days
1 Long-Truss: 52 days
1 Imperial Truss: 34 days (due to monarchical mourning period)
1 Metric Truss: Precisely how long she lasted down to the picosecond. But nobody uses that one, because no bugger can be bothered to calculate it.
That would require self awareness, something that both Truss and Kwarteng lack according to those that have had to work for them. Both thought they were super smart, and that objections to their ideas were from people too dim to understand their genius. Even Truss's own father has called her out on her arrogance.
There's the "Monarch Demise Correction Factor" as well -- takes a good two weeks off her already short term.
(Although its a sad/horrible thought I think Truss accidentally finished E2R off. When E2R ascended the throne her PM was Winston Churchill. Its been mostly circling the drain since them and the sight of Truss as the new PM may well have been just too much.)
... delighted to know may have actually thrown his hat into the ring again, according to a report in The Times.
Delighted indeed ...
Those of the sado-masochistic persuasion or downright brain-dead idiots among Tory MPs and/or voters could be drooling at the idea.
But who knows what the Tories will come up with?
After all, they did come up with Truss.
Fortunately, Truss' 44 days in office may have finally put an end to the political and economic policies that have brought the UK to its present situation.
Quite a sad state of affairs.
One which I fear it will take the UK decades to recover from, if at all.
Tory MPs wanted Sunak from day one. That's why they gave members the choice of either him or the Queen of Turnips. Unfortunately he was in charge of the economy going to shit and people weren't going to forgive him for that so Liz got it instead.
Now it looks for all the world like it will be him and Boris as the final two, which would be a literal "vote Rishi or the party gets it.". I'd expect that Boris will step down at the last minute Leadsom-style allowing Rishi to be appointed by the party elites instead,
As for the plan beyond that, Britain has a surfeit of gas and Europe is expected to run out this winter. I'm guessing someone behind the scenes thinks they can gain some post-Brexit concessions if they have that as a bargaining chip. Not saying it'll work but I can't see anything else that might save the party.
Or maybe they just want to add the first non-white PM to the party's portfolio before they crash out of politics for another decade. Wouldn't bet either way.
Good catch, I don't have a citation, it was claimed by I think an MEP during discussions on how Europe was going to handle the energy crisis. Could be wrong though, you're correct.
The idea that the tories plan to use it to blackmail ... I mean influence the EU is entirely my own guesswork.
I suspect the real reason sunak failed last time (oh god someone make it stop) is because he has a strange sounding name and a non british wife(although she maybe british now by marriage and living here 5 years)
That how truss got the job...
And now bozo the clown is back................... >>> icon
US already has a surplus of bloated bloviating con-man political wannabe kingmaker with crazy bad hair.
I suppose a case could be made that adding bojo to the trump mix wouldn't be a particularly notable increase in the appalling quotient, and therefore the US could afford to take one for the proverbial team. Maybe they would somehow nullify each other.
>Tory MPs wanted Sunak from day one. Unfortunately he was in charge of the economy going to shit and people weren't going to forgive him for that so Liz got it instead.
So Buffers Buffington at the golf club looked at the 10 year gilts yeild curve against GDP and decided to make the white choice
Actually a lot of both MP's and the party members blamed his resignation that lit the fuse on the mass resignation of Ministers (did it really reach 60 senior and junior ministers combined within days? It hardly seems believable) and "We'd still have Boris if only he'd sucked it up and got on with his job" or some such line of thinking. :-( .
I think you'll find this is quite common among the 40+ "Red wall" newbies, who reckon only love of the Johnson got their constituents voting Conservative, often for the first time. IOW they reckon without the return of the Boris their chances of being reelected in 26 are FA. No shot at flipping their Westminster mortaged new London home. No 1st class rail tickets or govt cars. No very reasonable expense allowance.
TL;DR Haters gotta hate.
Britain has no gas.
Companies some of whom are British (for tax purposes) have gas wells in British sectors of the North Sea.
Which they sell gas out of at prices set by the world market in $ to whoever they can legally trade with.
And the UK has been (IIRC) a net importer of gas since IIRC (can't be arsed to google it) 2011.
While I'm delivering a little economics lesson Sunaks "Windfall" tax was FA like a real windfall tax, which is a retrospective tax on profits companies have already (and unexpectedly) made.
Now, you were saying....?
"And the UK has been (IIRC) a net importer of gas since IIRC (can't be arsed to google it) 2011."
The Uk has been a net importer of natural gas since 2004.
The Uk has been a net importer of crude oil and gas liquids since 2005
The Uk has been a net importer of coal since 1984 (I wonder what happened then...?)
The Uk has been a net importer of petroleum products since 2013
The noble "For the greater good (of the party)" routine?
Are you f**king kidding me?
There is one thing and one person that the Johnson loves, admires and deeply respects. He looks at it every morning in the mirror.
Like any conman who knows he's bang to rights will opt for a jury trial to play the jury if he makes the final 2 he'll force it to go to the party for exactly the same reason. It will work and the UK will get another portion of the supposed wit and wisdom of the Johnson.
Ukraine elected a comedian and got a statesman.
UK elected a clown and got a Joker (in the sense of the character in the modern Batman).
I suspect it became clear that Boris would struggle to get the 100 nominations and despite his public clowning around, not getting the 100 nominations would be too much for his ego. I was more concerned that Penny held on the bitter end despite it appearing she had even less chance of getting the 100 nominations. It looked like the Boris supporters switched to Rishi and Penny was hoping they'd swing her way. She claimed, on bowing out at the last minute, that is was for the good of party unity. If that was the case, why didn't she concede early Monday morning?
Then there slimy Rees-Mogg, Minister for Workhouses. Strongly supporting Boris then immediately switching his full support to Rishi. That comes across very much as supporting whoever wins, even if it's not his first choice. He doesn't come across as someone who will support "the leader" whoever it is for the good of the party and the country. He demonstrated that during both this and the previous leadership campaigns with his public statements. He's not the only one, but he's the most obvious and notable one.
I just hope Rishi Sunak has the balls to put people into jobs because of what they can do, not who they supported. Truss was notable for sacking pretty much every Sunak supporter and putting in place nobodies who she probably promised top jobs to for their support.
Those of the sado-masochistic persuasion or downright brain-dead idiots among Tory MPs ...
Here they are, the lists of who backs who just came in today.
Unsurprisingly, it includes (up to now) 48 brain-dead idiots.
Remember to keep a copy for the next (upcoming) election.
Certainly. I'd suggest we round off a Truss to 4 Scaramouches.
We can then brag that, like gallons, our Scaramouches are bigger than American Scaramuccis. And we have Queen, if not a proper Queen any more, on our side.
Furthermore, henceforth there will be 33 1/3 Trusses in every four years, which of course includes one leap year. That works out at 100 Trusses every 12 years, just to prove that we are not biased against decimal so shut up. God Save the King!
I was hoping to calculate my daily energy use in approved Reg units but the lowest £ value that receives a non-zero conversion in any other unit is £10,000 and even now, my energy cost is not that high.
We need a currency unit which is comparable or significantly lower than the pound, or the converter needs to have a better resolution such as nanoPogbas.
The actual period between election and resignation was 44 days (just), even though it technically covered a span of 45 days.
It's like counting how many stairs there are, which can actually provide three different values. The smallest is literally "the stairs". The middle is if you also count the upper floor. And the biggest is if you also count the lower floor (in other words, the different levels).
"She was appointed PM early afternoon on 6th September, and resigned at lunch time 20th October."
So she's actually PM when appointed by the monarch? In that case, despite announcing her intent to resign as PM, she's still the PM until her boss accepts it, which will be sometime in the morning of Tuesday, 25th.
It's relatively rare for a resignation to be immediate. It almost always comes with a "notice period", during which work carries on to some extent.
1 Truss ~= 4.89 Schwartzenberg.. The latter was a minister for 9 days, having to resign because he proposed a mandatory AIDS test for pregnant women and the legalization of cannabis.
During the French 4th Republic (1945-1958), some "Présidents du Conseil" lasted only a couple of days.
== Bring us Dabbsy back as Prime Minister! ==
1 Truss = 44 x 24 = 1056 hours
Therefore 1 Millitruss = about 1 hour
Therefore 1 Truss = 1 Kilohour
Or am I just getting my metric and imperial measures hopelessly confused here?
This is a site with a high concentration of IT nerds (I am one, I recognize those of my ilk), so for greater accuracy, one Truss is just over a Mibihour (1024 hours); or precisely 210 hours + 25 hours, or 32(32+1) hours.
For Imperial, one Truss is exactly 7⅓ gross hours
I'll get my coat with the pocket protector.