World News

It's almost as if the Tories don't actually think about their policies before they announce them.

But that couldn't be true, could it?

My counter offer would be: fuck right off. Don't care what you think you can do sanction or punish me.

I'd rather have a dynasty of lettuce.

You’re missing that they are just incompetent and awful at politics

Angry boomers will love it, also the masculinists who think boys are too weak these days.

It feels to me like the Tories (and their wealthy mates) have now got to the point where they don’t feel they can rinse the taxpayer for much more without everyone seeing them for the craven vampires they are, so they’re happily stepping back for one or two terms.

In that time Labour will struggle like fuck to get the country back to where it was 14 years ago when the Tories walked back into Number 10, the papers will blame Labour for everything being shit, and the door will be open for the Tories to come back in and carry on the pillaging with coffers that are worth the effort.

If you’re not doing great, wouldn’t it make more sense to try and weather the storm and work to make things sunnier before the next election rather than call for an election amidst the storm?

The latest possible date the election could have been is January 2025, but that was practically very unlikely as i) there is an extremely sharp generational divide in voting intentions (far sharper than in most Western democracies) and January would have meant the Tories having to get their elderly core voters to the polls in the middle of winter, and ii) a January vote would have meant a campaign running over Christmas, and everyone would have punished Sunak for that. The widespread expectation was for an autumn election.

It's unclear why Sunak jumped earlier but likely a combination of various factors:

• them being worried the economy will not get better by the autumn (so avoids going to the polls after a summer of bad economic news);

• going early means their main opponents on the right (Reform) don't have time to get their act together and select candidates in all seats (which they would have done by the autumn);

• their flagship immigration policy is controversial and expensive, yet likely to have an underwhelming impact on illegal immigration levels, and they'll look like complete idiots for centring an autumn election on a 'stop the boats' slogan if there's another summer of small boat arrivals in the meantime; and

• Sunak personally is fed up - he's very much a political child of the far-right (an avowed Brexiter long before Boris Johnson or Liz Truss converted to the cause) yet the far-right of the Tory Party don't see him as one of their own and have been constant thorns in his side throughout his leadership - he may just want out at this stage.

My guess on #2 is Europe is increasing posturing against Russia as they continue to escalate the situation in Ukraine, so this accomplishes:

• signaling to Russia that the UK is not a passive nation
• Will be popular with the mid to late life Midlands voters who don't really have anything to be proud of in their life other than "we used to be an empire", without having to actually shoulder the burden.
• Will be unpopular among the 18-35 year old voters, who are historically the lowest turnout demographic, and will actually have to shoulder the burden.

For what it's worth, I actually think forced conscription (with alternatives) is actually an idea that can work well and help build a better more cohesive society where all people despite their differences participate in their "citizenly duties", but it has to be done right: military service can be an option, as well as community service in things like fire departments, Emergency medical services, even working in government services like the NHS or community centers that have options for mentor programs, etc. Basically anything that teaches young adults to give back to their community which can hopefully turn into a lifelong habit. But you can't start the policy as some bullshit military posturing. It has to come from a place of "we're doing this to make our community better". Also, you can't make day 1 implementation only start with the current young adult generation and have everyone older than them grandfathered out. EVERYONE shoulders this. Anyone voting for it needs to know they're all going to be participating in this (pro-rated based on age up to 65 or 70, but still those above should be encouraged to participate despite no obligation). But that probably sounds like communism or something.

I was curious about the whole "calling elections" thing so I looked it up.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/calling-general-election

They have to call an election within five years of the last one, but the choice of when is up to the prime minister. Seems calling it early gets him and his party a bit of a bump.

Confusing thing #1 was actually a smart move.

Reform party, who has been a bunch of useful idiots and have been diluting the Tory vote significantly have not got enough members in place to stand in every location as this will be their first general election and they are a new party.

The SNP has only just picked a new leader after the previous one stepped down and they have fallen out of favour in recent times.

Labour (main competition) was not expecting anything until November time as the running theory is that the Tories would wait for a bit to see if something would "come up" and rescue their awful polling (as per your suggestion). So even they were caught off guard and now have to scramble to organise everything. This shit isn't easy, even for established parties.

Hell, even the Tories were caught off guard by their leader doing this.

Sunak has played an interesting card here. I doubt it will make any difference but at least he is being somewhat clever with the surprise timing of this.

The choice of policy ideas is weird but the strategy of snap elections can reinforce the party's power until the next election if it goes well. It's like squeezing your electorate for more power until the balance shifts in the other direction

It's a standard tactic in parliament style politics. He won't win if he waits till end of term for an election, but might eke out a victory now, and then had four or five years to go

#1. It’s not really a ‘snap’ election, it’s been called within the normal window of calling an election. While things could have got better if he’d held on they could have also got worse. With inflation down to more normal rates it looks like he thought ‘this is as good as it’ll get’

#2. Dunno.

Here, have mine.

i think they just long for the corveés of serfdom