To think 'rebel' backbench Tory MPs are the biggest bunch of idiotic and disloyal wankstains going?

[ComposHat]

First the Europe debate and now attempts to block equal marriage.

They are part of a coalition government that is in a vulnerable position, that is languishing in the polls with high unemployment and a stagnant economy.

So they decide this would be an ideal moment to rock the boat over their old favourite topic; the EU, a topic quite a way down most voter's priorities.

Not only that, but now they are attempting to derail, the equal marriages act, a piece of legislation that commands majority support from the public and parliament.

Did they learn nothing from the landslide that wiped them out in 1997? Plotting, disloyalty and sabre rattling over Europe made them unelectable for over a decade, Have they got such a taste for Hari Kari that they are prepared to do all that again over their own personal prejudices?

As a Labour party supporter I should be beside myself with glee, but curiously I am not. Obviously I want Labour government, but I also want a coherent opposition party of the centre-right to hold them to account, rather than a ragbag of extreme right wing malcontents and provincial bigots.

Winston Churchill defected from conservative to liberal back to conservative.

Was he an idiotic wankstain too?

Hard to tell what's disloyalty and what's conviction. When a very few Labour MPs protested against the Iraqi war I did not denounce them as idiotic wankstains.

Though I'm with you on both wanting a Labour government and a coherent opposition.

Holly the conservatives in the 30's 40's and 50's were very different both in attitude and policy than today's lot. It's hardly comparable. If you have to go back 60 years to name the last decent tory, it sort of proves the op's point.

I agree that they are idiotic, but I also agree with their principle. Democracy cannot work properly if those in power completely ignore the issues they were elected on and bring up issues that they have had hardly any debate on with their party.

The thing that really boggles my mind is the equal marriage rebellion. I really, really find it difficult to see why someone would feel so strongly against it. I really have listened to people who are against to try to understand, but just don't get it. At least with Europe you can see there is something of substsnce worth debating about, whatever side of the fence you are on.

I think they're getting twitchy about their supporters being lured away by UKIP and are trying to have it both ways at once.

I'm with Binky though, there's an argument to be had over the EU but I can't for the life of me see what there is to row about with gay marriage!

They're not the biggest wankstains on the planet, really. They are petulant, ignorant, out of touch, outdated, selfish, arrogant knobbers though so I'm with you on that score.

Did I miss anything?

I'm with Clouds, you can't have a democratic party that doesn't do what the people who vote for it want, no matter what sort of swivel eyed Loons they may be.

Fwiw I do think there is a debate and vote on on both EU membership and gay marriage worth having, simply because a large no. of people in the UK don't want them, and sweeping it under the carpet is worse

How can you assert that a majority of the public DON'T want these things?

All they're asking for a fucking referendum on it.

What are you afraid of?

I get the impression that the equal marriage rebellion is just another stick to beat Cameron with, having seen they can bully him over Europe.

They seem largely unconcerned that they are drifting to electoral suicide (it is nearly exactly a decade since Major's bastards commenth) and that in the Labour landslide of 1997, their eurosceptic posturing didn't save their skins. (in fact 'rebel' Tory MPs were slightly more likely to lose their seats than those who'd followed the party line)

I think a previous poster mentioned Churchill (a figure who I have mixed feelings about, but that's another story) but when he found himself with disagreement with the Tory party, he left and joined the liberals, preferring to 'choose a party that matches his convictions, rather than change his convictions to match his party.' (or something similar.

If these 'rebel' Tory MPs are so dead set on pursuing a UKIP agenda, why not at least have the courage of their convictions and sit as UKIP MPs?

I completely agree OP - Europe is important but it's not top of my priority list and I think a lot of people feel the same way. It's kind of like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic, imo.
The gay marriage rebellion is making me very cross though, I really don't see what the fuss is about. Society discriminates against a group of people - so fix it and move on. If people really, really have objections (can't for the life of me see why) then it's a free vote, but most of the people voting against aren't doing it for conscious reasons.

ComposHat - you are making the same mistake a lot of people do, you think that the priority of a sitting MP at the next election is to ensure their party wins power, it's not, while that's nice, the priority for backbenchers is to keep their seat. Great if there's a few more of their side sitting along side them after the next election, but that's not what matters.

UKIP has been a game changer because it's woken up a lot of back benchers to realise that their competition in their own consituency isn't Labour, it's UKIP (where I live, there are now more UKIP councellors than Labour ones). Therefore a charge to the right was to be expected, they need to get those voters back more than they need to worry about the national effect of doing that.

while to the majority of the country, Europe isn't that important and gay marriage is either approved of or not bothered about either way, in the sort of consituency where UKIP are winning support, this is a way to get those voters back.

also it's a calculated risk, they might not stop gay marriage and they might not get what they want about Europe, but if they've publicly come out against gay marriage or Europe, on the doorstep they can say they have and hopefully sway back UKIP supporters.

Once you accept that all the majority of politicians care about is winning or losing, then a lot more makes sense.

you are making the same mistake a lot of people do, you think that the priority of a sitting MP at the next election is to ensure their party wins power, it's not, while that's nice, the priority for backbenchers is to keep their seat. Great if there's a few more of their side sitting along side them after the next election, but that's not what matters

I agree, but by almost wilfully making your party look like an incoherent rabble, pulled in every direction, you make the loss of seats (potentially your own) nearly inevitable.

Anyway, why try and out UKIP, UKIP? It doesn't work In the Eastleigh by-election the Tories put up a right wing popularist candidate who was UKIP in all but name and they still came third, losing to the (pro-europe) Lib Dems.