Badenoch for PM?

That is a good article, thank you for the link.

I'm not sure if this is readable, but Julie Burchill has written a good article about this

www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-praise-of-kemi-badenoch/

It's not enough to say "voted against women's rights and services" or "against environmental measures."

The question is what are the measures being proposed? Will they be effective, and what are the costs and trade-offs?

I am very doubtful that KB is against protecting women's rights. But she might very well, for example, be against hate speech laws, and for very defensible reasons.

And frankly most things governments propose to address environmental issues are likely to be ineffective or have significant downsides that also need to be considered.

Too often I think there is a tendency to assess politicians by a kind of tick-box, where they have supported rules which are presented as being pro-some social justice issue. Whether they are effective, impinging on other rights, or will lead to other problems, seems to be ignored completely.**

I find the ongoing decline of "Moms for Liberty" in the US instructive. Propelled by their know "what a woman is" stance, they garnered a lot of support until people realised they were also fiercely anti-choice and indeed anti women. The hypocrisy goes without saying, naturally.

That's sort of relevant here, because cloaking yourself in one truth doesn't cover up the rest of the package.

Anyway, in political reality, Badenoch is doing her best to avoid being the next Tory leader before the election. To the extent that all the talk pushing her now is probably being pushed by a rival looking to eliminate her from the race.

It was me who said she's a horror. I stand by it. She absolutely doesn't give a shit about women and her stoking of culture wars is unforgivable. Just for the record, my opinion is that Liz Truss is even more of a horror.

Missed that.

No need to be said.

The earlier poster commented

"She's a horror"

Not her views. Wrong views = bad person? Particularly if you are from a minority.

Saying that her views are a "Horror" is not really an insult though is it?

No one as far as i can tell, say she is a horror.

Sunak gets called short, Cleverly not Clever and Truss stupid, Starmer gets called La Starmer, Keith, boring etc as for Boris, well he gets an awful lot of personal insults.

But yes it would be better if we all played the ball and not the politician but unfortunately we take our lead from the 'commons.

Lots of people disagree with Truss, but they tend to say why they disagree.

It the "a horror" that I find quite offensive.

Cleverley, Sunak and others don't get the same.

I don't disagree. It seems to be that if you don't agree with a woman of colour you insult them. A sort of how dare they have strong opinions.

Tell that to Diane Abbott.... who gets more hate than all other women in Parliament put together.

The thread is about Badenoch, i'd argue a thread about Liz Truss would get even more invective, as has Boris Johnson.
Its not about colour or being female, its about politics and hers are very divisive & she is also a fraud, hacking an opponents website???

This. And also everything @ThePenguinIsDrunk says.

Voting on a single issue is insanity. The Tories (how many rapes and sexual assaults this year?) party will promise the earth and change with the wind when it suits them. Their track record around women, children and those in poverty is beyond appalling. How anyone can't see this is beyond me.

I am not saying I agree with her.

I am just asking why she is described as "a horror". Personal insults where none is needed.

From outside it appears that left leaning women have a real problem with women of colour (Suella, Priti, Kemi) who don't do the right thing and vote Labour. These women get far more invective than other Conservative politicians. As if there is a hierarchy: white men; men of colour; white women; women of colour.

Like i said, look at her voting record? its against women's rights and services

The fact she can look at Brexit and not see it's a shitshow tells you that she is prepared to believe in anything to stay in power. Or rathe prepared to tell you she believes in anything to stay in power.

Like i said, look at her voting record? its against women's rights and services.

Also the "i ve written to the ECHR.." stuff, she knows that holds no weight, all talk.

Her Govt could get on and reform the GRA if they wanted too, she is just using excuses and blaming others for their own failings.

Strangely silent on a man the Tories gave asylum too, despite a known sex offender, who then threw acid at a woman and her children, some champion of women's rights.

No thanks, great she knows people can’t change sex, (we all know that) but if she gave a shit about that she would have started moves to dismantled the GRA. Has she? Has anyone in the Tory party? No. So I don’t think she gets any special credentials on that issue.

Plus she’s cheerleading the titanic economic failure that is Brexit with extremely selective/mendacious claims to try to make herself look leadership material.

Her recent claims on Brexit don’t stack up, as investigated by the Observer. So again no, she is not inspiring confidence. We need good quality leaders in all the main parties because that’s important for democracy so I’m not just carping because she’s a Tory. I think Starmer has been seriously underwhelming and really wish better options would hurry up and emerge within Labour.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/04/brexit-trade-perks-firms-business-department-leaving-eu-companies

Why the “a horror”. Dislike her views by all means. She is both Conservative and socially conservative. She is also clear and consistent.

I don’t know why women so often choose to disagree with other women by insulting. Most noticeable when commenting on female politicians of colour. You could try “I disagree with her because…”

Hopefully, worth joining the Conservative party to ensure that.

Would keep Labour in for a 2nd term (though they have to win the next GE fisrt, not a given by any means)

But it won't happen, i don't think people realise how racist the 'party membership is.... Sunak lost against Truss when the membership had the say & Truss was probably the most inept candidate the party could have managed to put up against him, yet still he lost.

It really is terribly bourgeois to judge people on their record of actions, rather than their aspirations. It's so last century.

Or so I have been told lately.

England isn't 'inherently conservative'.

1. Conservative/right wing parties get less than half the popular vote - they usually win because a) the non-Conservative parties have their vote split between Lab/Lib/Green/SNP etc and b) First past the post voting system.

2. It's the older vote that votes Tory. The Conservatives have a massive deficit under actual working age people. They rely on the retired vote and the massive baby boomer cohort.

3. People vote in self-interest, you're right. The Tories have pretty much failed on every metric in government and that's why they'll be voted out.

Not as PM (the Tories are not winning the next election) but would be better if she was leader of the opposition against Starmer.

Being a woman, in itself is immaterial, would you like someone like Marine Le Penn to be our PM ? tbf KB is probably to the right of even her.

What matters is policy and Badenoch blows with the wind, attaches herself to any cause in which she sees political opportunity.

Take 5 mins to look at her voting record since being an MP, same with Braverman.... very right wing and against women's rights as she wants less equality and lower funding for council services i.e Schools, Social Care, DV refuges etc.
Also doesn't give a shit about the environment, you know the things our children will have to deal with.

I think she let women down with regard to not protecting women who are discriminated against during the menopause, and was so dismissive.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64813207.amp

She's grossly anti-women. Absolutely not.