The Lemon Fool

Listening to Liz Truss's local radio interviews this morning, I was strongly reminded of Theresa May's monotonous response to difficult questions about Brexit and surrounding issues, "Brexit means Brexit."

Liz's soundbite seems to be, "The main problem is Putin's war in Ukraine." or words to that effect. I lost count of the number of times she blamed Putin in isolation for our current financial disarray while totally ignoring some pretty basic issues which really need answers.

Any hopes I had for her and her Chancellor are evaporating at a rate of knots, even though some economists are saying they're on the right track.

WrenChasen wrote:Listening to Liz Truss's local radio interviews this morning, I was strongly reminded of Theresa May's monotonous response to difficult questions about Brexit and surrounding issues, "Brexit means Brexit."

Liz's soundbite seems to be, "The main problem is Putin's war in Ukraine." or words to that effect. I lost count of the number of times she blamed Putin in isolation for our current financial disarray while totally ignoring some pretty basic issues which really need answers.

Any hopes I had for her and her Chancellor are evaporating at a rate of knots, even though some economists are saying they're on the right track.

I have not heard her today, but what you say suggests what I have thought for a while that she needs some coaching on how to set out her stall and her general approach to public comments.

Yes, unless she is really tone-deaf, this morning's round should have cured her of any desire to do radio interviews.
As an inspirational leader, neither she nor Rishi is a patch on Boris.

V8

I felt like shouting at the radio - or the interviewer. Putin, Putin? Yes, we know the problems he caused but they were all in play before her disastrous "special fiscal operation" caused an instant reaction in the markets.
Why doesn't someone nail her on that one?

And people say the BBC is too left wing: sometimes their people are just slow, or too deferential.


Arb.

Arborbridge wrote:And people say the BBC is too left wing: sometimes their people are just slow, or too deferential.

Matt Chorley played highlights of all eight BBC local radio interviews this morning, and she was indeed called out on that by interviewers not at all deferential.
If one were into conspiracy theories, one would call the whole sequence an ambush.

She seemed unprepared for the frosty reception.

V8

Arborbridge wrote:I felt like shouting at the radio - or the interviewer. Putin, Putin? Yes, we know the problems he caused but they were all in play before her disastrous "special fiscal operation" caused an instant reaction in the markets.
Why doesn't someone nail her on that one?

It seemed to me they were trying to nail her, but she kept banging on, automaton-like, about Putin. She's definitely had a charisma by-pass when it comes to delivery, but I could live with that if I had faith in her ability to do the job to which she was elected...which I don't.

88V8 wrote:

Arborbridge wrote:And people say the BBC is too left wing: sometimes their people are just slow, or too deferential.

Matt Chorley played highlights of all eight BBC local radio interviews this morning, and she was indeed called out on that by interviewers not at all deferential.
If one were into conspiracy theories, one would call the whole sequence an ambush.

She seemed unprepared for the frosty reception.

V8

Yes I thought that too. It reminded me almost of the Prince Andrew interview. Whatever the question, and some of them were incisive and damning, there seemed to be a long, time wasting pause then the monotone response would ignore the question and begin with "Putin's war in Ukraine.... blah blah

88V8 wrote:

Arborbridge wrote:And people say the BBC is too left wing: sometimes their people are just slow, or too deferential.

Matt Chorley played highlights of all eight BBC local radio interviews this morning, and she was indeed called out on that by interviewers not at all deferential.
If one were into conspiracy theories, one would call the whole sequence an ambush.

She seemed unprepared for the frosty reception.

V8

On Radio 4, perhaps they only played the interviews which were easier on her.

She put herself out there seven or eight times and must have been briefed on what to expect. Hardly an ambush.

88V8 wrote: Matt Chorley played highlights of all eight BBC local radio interviews this morning, and she was indeed called out on that by interviewers not at all deferential.
If one were into conspiracy theories, one would call the whole sequence an ambush.

She seemed unprepared for the frosty reception.

Not sure if this is the bit 88V8 alludes to but its certainly eye opening

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0d3flmh

didds

WrenChasen wrote:
It seemed to me they were trying to nail her, but she kept banging on, automaton-like, about Putin. .

maybe in this regard they did "nail" her. She didn't have an answer to the questions - just the (indeed) automaton-like Putin stuff.

And she was either gas lighting in the extreme, or doesn't understand how the "energy cap" works. It is NOT a maximum figure for any household - but she claimed it on air, definitively. Im not sure whether ignorance or mendaciousness is worse, whichever it is.

didds wrote:

WrenChasen wrote:
It seemed to me they were trying to nail her, but she kept banging on, automaton-like, about Putin. .

maybe in this regard they did "nail" her. She didn't have an answer to the questions - just the (indeed) automaton-like Putin stuff.

And she was either gas lighting in the extreme, or doesn't understand how the "energy cap" works. It is NOT a maximum figure for any household - but she claimed it on air, definitively. Im not sure whether ignorance or mendaciousness is worse, whichever it is.

They are both utterly unforgivable, on a subject so central to the politics of the day. Or so she would have it. Whenever questioned about the city reaction to the not-a-budget, she resorted to claiming she'd fixed the world energy crisis caused by that nasty Mr Putin, so everything was lovely thanks to her and her trusty government. Never mind about base rates set to rocket. Or the unfolding collapse of the housing market. Or the spaffing of several quid propping up the pension funds. Or the sinking Pound. Or anything really!

Yeah, she's not great.
It was a choice between two second-raters where presentation is concerned.
Her Dalek and Rishi's squeaky arm-waving.

Come back Boris....

V8

88V8 wrote:Yeah, she's not great.
It was a choice between two second-raters where presentation is concerned.
Her Dalek and Rishi's squeaky arm-waving.

Come back Boris....

V8

No it wasn't. There were half a dozen candidates the MPs were offered to choose from. The MPs themselves selected the two no-hopers for the party membership to choose between.

Edit to add I forgot to make my point! The resulting demise of the Conservative party is a self-inflicted death. The party only has itself to blame for first electing the disaster area called Boris as its leader, then after finally admitting its mistake, compounding it by choosing Ms Blundertruss as a successor.

Mike4 wrote:Yes I thought that too. It reminded me almost of the Prince Andrew interview. Whatever the question, and some of them were incisive and damning, there seemed to be a long, time wasting pause then the monotone response would ignore the question

Apparently her comms advisor Jason Stein worked briefly for Prince Andrew and advised against doing the Newsnight interview.

I don't have a problem with people pausing to think before they speak - in general public life would be better with more pauses to think before you speak - it's just when the pause is followed by nonsense/evasion that I have a problem.

Hallucigenia wrote: I don't have a problem with people pausing to think before they speak - in general public life would be better with more pauses to think before you speak - it's just when the pause is followed by nonsense/evasion that I have a problem.

... and when the nonsense is the same nonsenscial answewr to every question.

"Who won the FA cup in 1957?
Putin.

What is the key ingredient in hollandaise sauce?
Putin

What is the square root of 169?
Putin.

didds wrote:

Hallucigenia wrote: I don't have a problem with people pausing to think before they speak - in general public life would be better with more pauses to think before you speak - it's just when the pause is followed by nonsense/evasion that I have a problem.

... and when the nonsense is the same nonsenscial answewr to every question.

"Who won the FA cup in 1957?
Putin.

What is the key ingredient in hollandaise sauce?
Putin

What is the square root of 169?
Putin.

Where would a bear of very little brain keep his biscuits?

WrenChasen wrote:Listening to Liz Truss's local radio interviews this morning, I was strongly reminded of Theresa May's monotonous response to difficult questions about Brexit and surrounding issues, "Brexit means Brexit."

Liz's soundbite seems to be, "The main problem is Putin's war in Ukraine." or words to that effect. I lost count of the number of times she blamed Putin in isolation for our current financial disarray while totally ignoring some pretty basic issues which really need answers.

Any hopes I had for her and her Chancellor are evaporating at a rate of knots, even though some economists are saying they're on the right track.

Please name these economists (apart from Patrick Minford).

T7

88V8 wrote:Yes, unless she is really tone-deaf, this morning's round should have cured her of any desire to do radio interviews.
As an inspirational leader, neither she nor Rishi is a patch on Boris.

V8

Johnson inspired me to never vote for him.