Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "more on the damage done by suella braverman - and her ambition" video.
-
4
-
She is positioning herself for leadership after Sunak, and this issue is the hobby horse that she made for herself. And, as she will see it, migration is the issue that Reform are riding on and the main place where she will find future allies, if she gets to reshape the new, “conservative,” party. She can be the only, “conservative,” talking about the issue and stealing Farage’s oxygen.
The recent changes in migration laws were a blatant attempt to skirt international laws and protections for the most vulnerable people on Earth. They were cruel, sociopathic and they remain borderline illegal. Also, as we’ve seen, they are unworkable. But that hasn’t mattered much to the Braverman types, because they did give them what they sought, which was merely to look, “hard,” and to be unnecessarily cruel, probably killing people in the process, certainly causing a great deal of physical harm and suffering to desperate people who were entitled to care, sympathy and, if nothing else, the process of law.
I cannot see the old guard of the conservative movement following her over that cliff post election. Nor can I imagine any of the truly conservative, “conservatives,” wishing to join her in a headlong charge toward a system that cannot result in anything less than her own doom. After all, she is visibly the type of ethnic minority that Reform voters fear and loath so much. So she is building her own gallows in the long term, for the short term advantage she believes she can wangle now.
My guess is that the Conservative Party will fracture, outright, down this racist fault line, leaving the one nation, cooler headed, old fashioned conservatives to rely on their friends in the city and the press, their trust funds and the Royal Family to rebuild from a much diminished foundation.
But the new brand of Reform will also have friends in the press and money and backing from America, which is, after all, where they get all their, “ideology,” and their divisive tactics from.
Of course, there can be only one leader, and it is entirely possible that Farage and Braverman may pass each other, like ships in the night, to take charge of one another’s respective parties? But, I suspect it is more realistic that Braverman will find herself on the outside, ultimately. Either losing the whip and being rejected by reform, or being demoted by Farage from within the Tory party because he doesn’t want his own most likely successor hovering over him like the Angel of Death.
She won’t be enough of a puppet for the Reform party to control, being too, “driven,” by her own demons, so that would end badly for her, since the Reformers would only want her as a, “useful idiot,” and mascot that argues against them being racists, despite them now having erstwhile BNP candidates officially standing in their ranks right now.
All I am sure of is that the battle for both supremacy of the right, and to define what, “the right,” is, will be bloody and take no prisoners. And whilst we see many getting their well earned just desserts, it will be at the cost of other well known crooks, deadbeats and racists, climbing up on the ruins of their rival’s careers.
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dogglebird4430: That last comment is simply not true. Do you think that the Nazi Party had, “Exterminate 6,000,000 Jews,” in their campaign leaflets? Adolf never had the vast majority of his policies in the campaign literature at all. That always comes AFTER his election. But, as your dog will explain to you, you cannot get around the FACT that Reform is where the former BNP candidates are now! When the fascists are IN YOUR PARTY, that’s a pretty big giveaway.
And you don’t have to be a, “fascist,” to vote Reform, as you may just be less politically aware, manipulated, or simply less intelligent than your own politicised dog. But if you are a fascist, Reform is the only party you can vote for.
Are we learning yet, son?
1
-
@dogglebird4430 : A) A political ideology is not the same thing as the personal bigotry that people build parties around.
B) Hitler never put, “Start a world war and exterminate 6,000,000 Jews,” on his campaign leaflets. Why? Because he didn’t have to. Simply, “not,” admitting to being racist in your publicity doesn’t stop you from being a racist.
C) Most Labour members with, “former,” extremist ideologies I don’t trust either, but they aren’t racists.
D) Most Labour members with, “former,” extremist ideologies have since then disavowed their past and claimed to have grown out of it, making apologies for former statements or associations where necessary. Your racists have never even admitted being at fault, let alone apologised for anything.
E) You can check all of this with your politicised dog. Which I’d be willing to bet is one of those, “dangerous,” breeds on a government list?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dogglebird4430 : Where does it even suggest that people don’t change their political views in my comments? Pay attention. I was pointing out the disingenuous nature of your defence of people who have never accounted for their shady political pasts, never apologised far past offences, never addressed any, “change in political views,” or claimed any. You seem to think they have changed their views, with zero evidence. Unlike people in the Labour Party who have publicly accounted for their past views, associations and memberships and apologised if and when necessary. That is what we call, “hypocrisy,” due to the obvious double standard.
I didn’t read the rest of your comment, because, again, TLDR.
1
-
1
-
1