Is this a relatively new thing? I was under the impression that the UK conservative party was fairly different than US conservatives. I had heard that Johnson was a bit of a johnson himself, but assumed things went back to “normal” with his ousting.

I really don’t know when it infiltrated the Tories. Thatcher from the 80’s for all she was hated because of the way she attacked unions was certainly not of that ilk. Part of Thatcher’s persona was honesty and integrity.

Major who followed her did not seem that way. I listened to him giving an interview on TRIP, he seemed extremely genuine. He was also a major feature of Thatcher’s government.

I think the rot started when the Tories took a major arse kicking in 2005. I have no real evidence or insider information to back that up.

There was a lot of talk within the party regarding reform so they could get back on track. There was a very disturbing report written up from a group within the party. It was based around manipulation and where the party should aim for. One particular notable part pointed out that educating the poor was not good for Tory votes. People from poorer back grounds who gained degrees were less likely to vote Tory than any other group. DIRECT DEMOCRACY: An Agenda for a New Model Party. Page 12

The decline in Conservative support has been particularly marked among the most educated. This is not always obvious since more education is associated with higher income, and higher income is still (just) associated with stronger Conservative support. However, other factors being held constant, the more educationally qualified someone is, the less likely he or she is to support the Conservatives. This is a problem to the extent that the more educated are likelier to vote, and are often influential in leading the opinion of others. It is also, of course, a problem in a country where nearly half of young people are now going to university.

There is a conspiracy theory thrown around from time to time that defunding education in poor areas is done by design to increase the vote share. Something that is hard for a Tory to argue against in the UK, especially when you show the stats on funding.

If you read the report in entirety you will see republicans are mentioned many times over.

The first Tory PM in power after this was Cameron with Osborne as chancellor. I listened to Osborne on TRIP and was not impressed. I am going to say imo here, I CBA to dig up more details, it really annoyed me to listen to him. He told lies on his figures, he ducked and dodged with inuendo. It just felt massively different to Major talking. I have seen people quote stats on things that were wrong under Cameron and Osborne. This was not the view I had on them at the time, but that has since changed in hindsight.

Teressa May who followed them seemed genuine to me. She also did an interview on TRIP. I felt at the time she got a bad deal from the Tory MPs and the infighting. That view has not changed.

The rest is as they say history. Johnson, Truss and Sunak, all I can say is shithouses. And that is unkind to the toilet.

Both parties are known for gerrymandering now, the Tories are changing the boundaries across the UK. Both are recognised for hiding information through obfuscation. Both have shown designs to bully influential depts (judicial system, elections control, police etc). Both have shown a prevalence for gaslighting and talking nonsense to fog over issues. Both are reputed to have Russian influence running through them. I would guess the Republicans are known for selling government contracts to donors, something the Tories are going to loose the next election over.