Explain to an american how lizz truss resigning can happen

[IdleRich]

Thats part of it yes. Im also confused as to how a member can get to so high a position while being unpopular, and how a pm can have the power to pass a law that her party would hate? Wasnt it approved by the party itself?

The party is split into factions.

 

[linebaugh]

And by liberty I do not mean why are laws written that way, I mean how can they do that and not worry about the optics for the party as a whole?

 

[Leo]

how a member can get to so high a position while being unpopular, and how a pm can have the power to pass a law that her party would hate? Wasnt it approved by the party itself?

yeah, this is the puzzling part to me. of course scapegoats are needed in situations like this, but how was someone with those plans supported and voted in by party members in the first place if those plans were so obviously bad?

 

[linebaugh]

The party is split into factions.

There were seemingly factions in the republucan party with trump but this didnt happen. Everyone fell in line because they had to

 

[IdleRich]

I would say that brexit split the party, you had Teresa May trying in a reasonably grown-up way to deliver the impossible, but she couldn't so she was booted out and replaced by Boris who tried in a childish way and then announced he'd done it, he destroyed the party by surrounding himself by moronic sycophants until his behaviour drove even them away and he was booted out, at that point no real talent remained.

 

[linebaugh]

Part of the reason theres no inner party mutiny in america is because said party would be worried about looking in dissaray and lose votes come time for midterms and the next election

 

[shakahislop]

Basically constitutionally-speaking there's a way for MPs to replace the PM if enough of them want to.

Its also not unusual. It happened to Thatcher, Theresa May and Boris Johnson. Both Cameron and Blair stepped down and passed power over to another leader in the same party without an election. It's just how the system works here.

I don't think anything comparable has hapened in the US, I don't even know if it's constitutionally possible, short of impeachment (as in, I genuinely don't know).

 

[IdleRich]

yeah, this is the puzzling part to me. of course scapegoats are needed in situations like this, but how was someone with those plans supported and voted in by party members in the first place if those plans were so obviously bad?

They - the members - wanted low tax and low interest, just like they wanted brexit and more trade, it doesn't matter if it's impossible, they voted for the one who promised it. The party, at least the Sunak part, was still just about with it enough to oppose this.

 

[linebaugh]

I would say that brexit split the party, you had Teresa May trying in a reasonably grown-up way to deliver the impossible, but she couldn't so she was booted out and replaced by Boris who tried in a childish way and then announced he'd done it, he destroyed the party by surrounding himself by moronic sycophants until his behaviour drove even them away and he was booted out, at that point no real talent remained.

This is all normal politician behavior though. This is my point. In america this wouldnt matter. Or at least it wouldnt matter in a way that makes a president resign

 

[IdleRich]

And by liberty I do not mean why are laws written that way, I mean how can they do that and not worry about the optics for the party as a whole?

Some do, others just worry about their own seat.

 

[IdleRich]

There were seemingly factions in the republucan party with trump but this didnt happen. Everyone fell in line because they had to

Here they didn't have to.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Im also confused as to how a member can get to so high a position while being unpopular, and how a pm can have the power to pass a law that her party would hate? Wasnt it approved by the party itself?

This is harder to understand than the structural differences between US/UK which are straightforward

But: she didn't actually pass a law, she unveiled a disastrous budget everyone hated. I believe tho I'm not sure that Parliament would still have to pass such a budget to actually enact it. And idk the degree to which it was improved by the party before it was announced.

And afaik as her personal unpopularity, as Rich said post-Boris Tory leadership seems like a wasteland, both in the sense of lack of talent and toxicity

 

[linebaugh]

Here they didn't have to.

Why is that?

 

[WashYourHands]

Wonderful times here, lads

This is harder to understand than the structural differences between US/UK which are straightforward

But: she didn't actually pass a law, she unveiled a disastrous budget everyone hated. I believe tho I'm not sure that Parliament would still have to pass such a budget to actually enact it. And idk the degree to which it was improved by the party before it was announced.

And afaik as her personal unpopularity, as Rich said post-Boris Tory leadership seems like a wasteland, both in the sense of lack of talent and toxicity

this

 

[shakahislop]

Thats part of it yes. Im also confused as to how a member can get to so high a position while being unpopular, and how a pm can have the power to pass a law that her party would hate? Wasnt it approved by the party itself?

Because of the rules and process the Tory party sets to elect thier leader. She was nominated by the MPs, then elected by the party membership. So she was only a bit popular with some MPs, but popular with the membership.

 

[IdleRich]

Short answer is brexit broke Britain and especially British politics.

 

[linebaugh]

This is harder to understand than the structural differences between US/UK which are straightforward

But: she didn't actually pass a law, she unveiled a disastrous budget everyone hated. I believe tho I'm not sure that Parliament would still have to pass such a budget to actually enact it. And idk the degree to which it was improved by the party before it was announced.

And afaik as her personal unpopularity, as Rich said post-Boris Tory leadership seems like a wasteland, both in the sense of lack of talent and toxicity

Even still, its not like lizz truss personally wrote the plan no? It was written collectively by the party right? Thats how i understand it in america. When a president unveils his plan its more a showing to the other party 'hey heres what we all decided were gonna do'

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Her party still controls Parliament, she's just wildly unpopular, so they can try again with someone else. It's different from a vote of no confidence, which (I believe) would trigger a new snap general election

 

[Leo]

They - the members - wanted low tax and low interest, just like they wanted brexit and more trade, it doesn't matter if it's impossible, they voted for the one who promised it. The party, at least the Sunak part, was still just about with it enough to oppose this.

that's pretty fucked: have unrealistic views/policies, support the person who proposes those unrealistic policies, and then want to oust that person when their unrealistic policies fail.

 

[IdleRich]

Why is that?

Let me ask, why did they have to get into line in the US?