• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

2022 Conservative Leadership Election - Liz Truss chosen as party leader (and subsequent reshuffle)

Who should be the next Conservative leader?

  • Kemi Badenoch - now eliminated

    Votes: 27 11.3%
  • Suella Braverman - now eliminated

    Votes: 2 0.8%
  • Jeremy Hunt - now eliminated

    Votes: 10 4.2%
  • Penny Mordaunt - now eliminated

    Votes: 44 18.3%
  • Rishi Sunak

    Votes: 62 25.8%
  • Liz Truss

    Votes: 39 16.3%
  • Tom Tugendhat - now eliminated

    Votes: 54 22.5%
  • Nadhim Zahawi - now eliminated

    Votes: 2 0.8%

  • Total voters
    240
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,543
Location
Elginshire
I realise that we've got the existing "Where did it go wrong for the Tories?" thread, but I'm interested to who the forum thinks should be the next leader, and therefore the next prime minister. It will come as no surprise that I'd rather there wasn't a Conservative PM at all, but we are where we are and one of them has to win.

I wouldn't trust Hunt and Truss to water my plants, and they carry too much baggage. Zahawi stumbled rather a lot when being interviewed about his personal finances, which was a big red flag; Sunak does seem credible to me, but similarly he's got the financial "burden". I'm watching Mordaunt on the telly just now and I'm not sure - she did make a bit of a blunder when making her campaign video, though, which she clearly didn't think through properly - do we want that quality in a PM? That leaves Badenoch and Braverman; I don't know a lot about the former but I dislike the latter having seen her on various political shows.

Looking through that list, there is only one of them who seems vaguely credible to me, and that's Tom Tugendhat. His campaign speech was quite militaristic, but he isn't carrying the baggage of being a former cabinet minister and I think that we probably need a clean break from previous governments.

Thoughts?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
5,751
Location
Wilmslow
I think that anyone who enabled Boris Johnson by being a member of his government is suspect, especially if they go on about "morality and integrity in government" (and I don't know which of the candidates are now doing this, although some of the resignation speeches which came a week or so ago did).

Personally, I don't think Rishi Sunak is up to the job, either. I don't see him as a leader of any sort, just as a reasonably competent bureaucrat.

I would probably go with Tugendhat also, with the same caveat about his baggage. Some of the rest of them are just plain nasty, Liz Truss in particular, so I probably want her least of all the candidates to get the job.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I'd actually go with Hunt. I remember listening to a podcast interview with him just after the start of COVID, and he seemed remarkably honest and competent (says a lot that those traits aren't available by default). Plus (light heartedly) you get the amusing mispronunciations of his name in the media.

I think Sunak is most likely, though. He seems competent but a bit John Major, so unlikely to win an election if Labour can come up with a decent leader.

I don't know much about Tugendhat, others seem to rate him highly, though.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
it is like asking what type of excrement you want to be drowned in! I will pick one that gives Labour the best chance of victory.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
it is like asking what type of excrement you want to be drowned in! I will pick one that gives Labour the best chance of victory.

It's a fairly reasonable point that Labour would probably have benefitted most from Boris staying.

However, Starmer is weak. Labour will only win again if they manage to get a charismatic centrist like Blair in the lead. The closest I can think of, while I know some hate him, is Burnham.
 

Wynd

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
741
Location
Aberdeenshire
Mordauant is the sane choice.

Sunak is beyond untrustworthy, a tax dodge and represents interests that are not in line with those of the UK public. He would be a terrible outcome, it tells you all you need to know that the press are fawning over him.

Truss is thick, and inept.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
Mordauant is the sane choice.

Hardly! Her campaign video was bonkers, breached copyright, led to people asking to be removed and resulted in a directors cut. Her launch speech today looked like it was filmed on a crap bargain hunt set.

There is not one clean or quality choice in the field. I need to go away, gird my loins, read what they each have to say, work out who is least mental and then bathe my body in bleach to remove the dirt and filth of Tory politics and ambition.
 
Last edited:

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,686
Location
Devon
Five votes for Tugendhat so far has to be a joke.

You’re pretty up on these things and I believe you have knowledge of the Forces (I think)?
Genuine question - Why do you say that? I’ve listened to him quite a few times on various things and he seems pretty switched on. Is it the lack of experience or is there something else you see that isn’t right about him?

I’ve never voted Conservative in my life but I do understand why people do. From what I’ve seen he’s the only one that I can slightly relate to, although I also understand that he’s never really been in a position of major influence so probably hasn’t had much in the way of scrutiny.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
However, Starmer is weak. Labour will only win again if they manage to get a charismatic centrist like Blair in the lead.
Starmer is competent, stolid, a bit dull and a mature, honest, sensible adult. He will do for me. He has made Labour more palatable to the electorate, started to clean out the cranks, made sensible statements about NATO etc.

I have always said his job is to right the ship and hand things on to someone else to win elections.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Starmer is competent, stolid, a bit dull and a mature, honest, sensible adult. He will do for me. He has made Labour more palatable to the electorate, started to clean out the cranks, made sensible statements about NATO etc.

I have always said his job is to right the ship and hand things on to someone else to win elections.

I think he's a naysayer. He says the Tories are wrong (as he did throughout COVID, near enough) but does nothing to say what Labour will do and why their approach is better.

I have no time for that negative approach to politics and thus strongly dislike him. It's like he doesn't want to say anything for fear of upsetting someone. That's not Government.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
I think he's a naysayer. He says the Tories are wrong (as he did throughout COVID, near enough) but does nothing to say what Labour will do and why their approach is better.

I have no time for that negative approach to politics and thus strongly dislike him.
It isn't his job to set out a detailed policy agenda at this stage in the electoral cycle and to suggest it is seems, well, simplistic. You keep your powder dry for the manifesto. His recent speech was clearly setting out a broad brush stroke policy programme that will be fleshed out as time goes on/changed if feedback is negative.

People seem, quite naively, to expect the opposition parties to set out a detailed agenda now, giving the Tories something to shoot at and take attention away from thier vast incompetence and corruption. The opposition are there to say the government are useless/incompetent/corrupt/venal etc and not much else. That's the privilege of opposition!

The approach isn't negative. It is sensible. I don't think ( in fact I know) Blair didn't launch into detailed policy discussions until the time was right.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It isn't his job to set out a detailed policy agenda at this stage in the electoral cycle and to suggest it is seems, well, simplistic. You keep your powder dry for the manifesto. His recent speech was clearly setting out a broad brush stroke policy programme that will be fleshed out as time goes on/changed if feedback is negative.

People seem, quite naively, to expect the opposition parties to set out a detailed agenda now, giving the Tories something to shoot at and take attention away from thier vast incompetence and corruption. The opposition are there to say the government are useless/incompetent/corrupt/venal etc and not much else. That's the privilege of opposition!

The approach isn't negative. It is sensible. I don't think ( in fact I know) Blair didn't launch into detailed policy discussions until the time was right.

I'm not expecting a detailed agenda.

I'm expecting criticism of the Tories to come with a statement about how Labour will do that specific thing better.

Without it, he should withhold his criticism. Only constructive criticism has value in this context. Non-constructive criticism is just whining, and he does a lot of that. The purpose of the Opposition is not simply to naysay, it is to critically appraise Government policy and suggest what should be done differently and how.

He'd not put me off voting Labour as I tend to anyway, however he is weak.
 

Wynd

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
741
Location
Aberdeenshire
Hardly! Her campaign video was bonkers, breached copyright, led to people asking to be removed and resulted in a directors cut. Her launch speech today looked like it was filmed on a crap bargain hunt set.

There is not one clean or quality choice in the field. I need to go away, gird my loins, read what they each have to say, work out who is least mental and then bathe my body in bleach to remove the dirt and filth of Tory politics and ambition.

An under polished but sincere (yes, I appreciate the irony of using sincerity to describe a Tory) pitch is far less concerning, than a polished, over-produced PR exercise in my book.

One of the primary issues we as a state are in this mess, is that some of us keep electing people on superficiality and perception rather than genuine substance and credibility.

Mordaunt is by far and away the most sane of the bunch, and would be the right choice for a party that is on the brink of eating itself alive come the next election.

It is for that reason alone that I have total faith it wont be her, and instead some slimy, corrupted, shyster like sunak will be chosen by the money-men in the Tory party.

It is beyond credulity that anyone who has served in BJ's cabinet is even a serious candidate.

The corruption and mis-management at the heart of Westminster/Whitehall just goes on and on and on and on and on.

And folk wonder why so many Welsh/Irish/Scots are thinking of ending the union...
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,201
I think Sunak is most likely, though. He seems competent but a bit John Major, so unlikely to win an election if Labour can come up with a decent leader.
John Major of course won a general election and was firth longest serving PM of the 14 we have had since world war 2.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
It is beyond credulity that anyone who has served in BJ's cabinet is even a serious candidate.
That's Mourdant out - She has been a junior minister.

An under polished but sincere (yes, I appreciate the irony of using sincerity to describe a Tory) pitch is far less concerning, than a polished, over-produced PR exercise in my book.

One of the primary issues we as a state are in this mess, is that some of us keep electing people on superficiality and perception rather than genuine substance and credibility.
it isn't the style that is the issue ( although that is laughable!), it is the substance. She is just as crazy as the rest of them although able to present a moderately sensible front.

Without it, he should withhold his criticism. Only constructive criticism has value in this context. Non-constructive criticism is just whining, and he does a lot of that. The purpose of the Opposition is not simply to naysay, it is to critically appraise Government policy and suggest what should be done differently and how.
Frankly, I think that is naïve as it simply allows the focus to be on the opposition policy rather than the failure of the government. Your view would be fine in the perfect world where polices were judged fairly and equally and with accurate and honest press reporting, but they are not.
He'd not put me off voting Labour as I tend to anyway, however he is weak.
I disagree.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,025
Location
No longer here
You’re pretty up on these things and I believe you have knowledge of the Forces (I think)?
Genuine question - Why do you say that? I’ve listened to him quite a few times on various things and he seems pretty switched on. Is it the lack of experience or is there something else you see that isn’t right about him?
He’s very keen on overriding the parts of the NI Protocol which are simply inconvenient to him and the Tories politically.

He also wants Britain at least partially out of the ECHR, a bonkers and retrograde idea, having already moaned several years ago that British soldiers should not be subject to its provisions. This is all huffing the fumes of the Troubles in order to protect, for example, the 50+ ahem, “questionable SAS killings” which came to light in the past couple of days, among others. Tugendhat actually wrote several years ago about how great human rights are - a conservative idea apparently - but naturally your human rights will not apply if you come into contact with Her Majesty’s Forces. (See also the appalling Bill of Rights tabled by Raab which attempts to make similar provisions)

He’s very happy to protect murderers and is an appalling securocrat. Military officers do not belong in the political sphere in 2022 and I view being a serving commissioned officer as an immediately disqualifying attribute to anyone who wants to be the Prime Minister.

Apart from all this, Tugendhat is bland, lacks electoral appeal, is too policy-heavy (leave that to a faceless cabinet!), and frankly not an on-your-feet thinker. He will fall fairly quickly I think.
 

Wynd

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
741
Location
Aberdeenshire
That's Mourdant out - She has been a junior minister.


it isn't the style that is the issue ( although that is laughable!), it is the substance. She is just as crazy as the rest of them although able to present a moderately sensible front.
It seems one of us has our finger on the pulse... but I cant say its filling me with pride. Primarily because, I agree. Its the least mad one in the asylum we are trying to flush out here.

1657715862599.png
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,521
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Frankly, I think that is naïve as it simply allows the focus to be on the opposition policy rather than the failure of the government.

Absolutely it should be. Always. It should always be about policy (and its implementation), not person. That's how you get a progressive, productive debate in the House rather than the childish arguing you get a lot now.

(Well, except if highlighting corruption, but that should be alleged specifically, not just by naysaying all policy)
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
Absolutely it should be. Always. It should always be about policy (and its implementation), not person. That's how you get a progressive, productive debate in the House rather than the childish arguing you get a lot now.

(Well, except if highlighting corruption, but that should be alleged specifically, not just by naysaying all policy)
I don't disagree but it isn't like that. I am happy to think about what could be but we can only work with what we have.
 

TheBigD

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2008
Messages
1,991
I didn't think that anyone would vote Badenoch on this forum!
Why?
She's a decent commons performer, decent orator and has some decent ideas. Granted there are downsides such as her support for the disastrous lockdowns (not alone in that respect) but of those standing she'd be my choice.

Whilst I highly doubt she'll make it on to the ballet to members, that will be Rishi plus 1, she is the one I would happily vote for.

As for Rishi, a big no from me. Close your eyes and he could be Ed Milliband speaking.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,178
Location
Fenny Stratford
I think it's incumbent on any credible opposition to make it like that to attract my vote. Call it taking the moral high ground. Be the honest, forthright party which comes down hard on any forms of corruption, cronyism and self-serving.
Corruption wise certainly. Policy wise i think you make a hostage to fortune in this environment
 

TheBigD

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2008
Messages
1,991
Hardly! Her campaign video was bonkers, breached copyright, led to people asking to be removed and resulted in a directors cut. Her launch speech today looked like it was filmed on a crap bargain hunt set.
Her launch was as bad as Angela Eagle's when she was going to stand against Jeremy Corbyn. And that was seriously bad!
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,486
Location
Kent
Five votes for Tugendhat so far has to be a joke.
It is 11 at the moment.
I’ve listened to him quite a few times on various things and he seems pretty switched on. Is it the lack of experience or is there something else you see that isn’t right about him?

I’ve never voted Conservative in my life but I do understand why people do. From what I’ve seen he’s the only one that I can slightly relate to, although I also understand that he’s never really been in a position of major influence so probably hasn’t had much in the way of scrutiny.
I agree. Plus he doesn't wrap himself in the flag (even though, it could be argued, he may have reason to do so). If anyone does that, as far as I am concerned, they need to show that they've actually done something of note that justifies it, otherwise just acknowledge it and get on with the job like the rest of us. Also I've looked at his list of backers, and there MPs there who I have time for and they will know him better than me.

I read that Zahawi and Braverman would offer Johnson a place in their cabinet, that excludes them as far as I am concerned as their judgement is clearly flawed, the man you said at PMQs "I'll leave with my head held high. (Fortunately, it is unlikely he would accept - books to write, speeches to give, and goodness knows what else if past form is anything to go by.)
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
I think all this contest goes to show is that the most credible (or, rather, least incredible!) of the possible challengers never dipped a toe in the water i.e. Ben Wallace. I would be genuinely interested to know who he's backing. or just voting for.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Latest from the money markets is that Morduant is now odds on favourite (17/20), with Sunak at 7/2, Truss at 4/1 and the rest nowhere. This must be a reflection of the poll of Conservative ‘grass roots’ published earlier.
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,486
Location
Kent
I think all this contest goes to show is that the most credible (or, rather, least incredible!) of the possible challengers never dipped a toe in the water i.e. Ben Wallace. I would be genuinely interested to know who he's backing. or just voting for.
Like a good many of the saner Conservatives, he'll probably keep very quiet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top