James O'Brien condemns the Tories' attempts to stoke fear of a Labour 'supermajority' | LBC
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- As the date of the General Election nears, James O'Brien feels the Tories have initiated a ‘political osmosis of worry' to stoke fear of a Labour 'supermajority'.
Home Secretary James Cleverly has warned that a Labour government would seek to 'distort' the UK political system, while Rishi Sunak said that Labour would use a landslide victory to shift politics to the left and 'stay in power for decades'.
But James rubbishes these claims, branding them 'embarrassing', and asks: 'How dishonest is it of Tories who celebrated Boris Johnson's majority, to treat supporters as if they are the second most stupid collection of voters in the country?'
Listen to the full show on Global Player: app.af.globalp...
#jamesobrien #tories #LBC #generalelection #rishisunak #keirstarmer
LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs in the UK.
Join in the conversation and listen at www.lbc.co.uk/
Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: l-bc.co/signup
I read the other day that Rees-Mogg can lose his seat. I haven't stopped smiling since, my face hurts. That's a supermajority I can get behind.
🤞🤞🤞🤞
him and fuhrage losing out would be a great result for britain
We need Sunak and Truss too to complete the set.
@@joeduffy3309 'Fuhrage' is excellent 😂
Lizz Truss could genuinley lose to an Independent which would truly be the cherry on top
I still don't get the hate for Jeremy Corbyn.
The MSM stoked the hatred because for sure their super rich owners would have had zero influence a position they are entirely unused to with centrist labour and far right tories.
Torys hated him, and thereby the rest of the press. Presumably would have cost the elites their massive wedge of cash the Tories have been handing them to stay in power. Reminds me of Putin
james is a wealthy centrist. they hate left wingers do not forget.
Billionaires hate paying tax, that’s the origin of it.
Yes, he has a negative blindspot there. I really wonder why? there is nothing in Corbyn's manifesto etc, that JOB would disagree with, and JOB also thinks zionism bad, without being anti-semitic.
We'll never know what a Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party might have done. Would they have got everything right? Of course not, nobody does. But I'm fairly sure that he would have handled Covid much better than Johnson and his cronies, and whatever you may think about him, does the actual damage done by 14 years of Tory rule in any way compare to the hypothetical things you think Corbyn might have done? What is it about investing in our infrastructure rather than the neglect and waste we have had that is so abhorrent?
The one thing I can think of is Ukraine, which is a big issue for me.
I didn't vote in 2019 because I was very ill, but I would've definitely voted Labour. I just hope in a different timeline where I did and they won, I didn't regret it.
I still think If John McDonnell was leader in the 2017 general election labour would have won by a slim majority
Let's look forward not backwards.
In many ways it would have possibly been better. However I still think Corbyn would have been the Liz Truss of the left and rampant inflation would have followed. He also would have left Ukraine to be consumed by Russia which I have huge objections to.
Exactly but the centrists like JOB who stabbed Corbyn and therefore enabled Bozo will never admit that.
The conservative party has no right to moan about the opposition having a huge majority after they used their huge majority to vote through the Liz Truss budget and the rediculous no deal Brexit they foisted upon us.
They are not conservative and haven't been for twenty years. They are a socials outlet that indulges in the same fascism as the Blairites, that are Labour.
Umm Lizz Truss budget wasn't voted through and it wasn't a no deal Brexit.
You can bet the Tories wouldn't be complaining if they'd had a "Super Majority" back in 2019.
They did. A majority of 1 is enough to do anything you like, but there's a risk if someone gets sick or retires. They had a majority of 80, which is as much of a "super majority" as 500 or ten million. They had it and squandered it through being utterly useless in every sense.
@@garypatterson2857 Yes indeed, thank you Gary. But y’know this notion of a “super-majority” is meaningless with our electoral system anyway.
And these Tories, they have the gall to winge about the former opposition winning a massive majority over them after their 2019 80 seats!? But if they were looking forward to winning a 100+ seats they wouldn’t be winging then for sure! I mean, the arrogance is just mind blowing.
They did have one, and they didn't complain. Not at all
They did have and just look how they abused that power.
Of course they didn't. But now because they can be potentially wiped out, they're hitting out and trying to appeal to daily mail readers.
Scaring the electorate into voting for you is the last gasp, the last resort of a party that knows it's in for a hiding come polling day....
"Oh no! If Labour gets too big of a majority, we won't be able to interfere with their ability to fix all the things we broke over 14 years!"
@Sirius Nobody who isn't dumb believes that.
@chatham43 right but that's what the Tories are trying to pitch.
STARMER WONT HAVE TO FIX THE MINIMUM WAGE.
It's more they're worried that they won't even have enough mps to be the opposition.
@@morgan.williams76 exactly
It’s not about who is first but who gets to be second. Libdems for opposition tories for 3rd
🤞🤞🤞
Tories fourth behind LibDems and SNP.
YEAH! (although I would love the greens to be in that position!!)
So proroguing parliament and lying to the Queen wasn’t seeking to “distort parliament”
Sunak has lost all credibility with his lies. So anything he says is seen seen in that light.
So has Starmer!!
Please let us all know an MP that doesn't lie.
but the daily mail is still the country's favourite paper? Nothing makes sense in britain anymore. Voted to self harm the country with brexit, then elected Johnson to send it home, the elected Truss who bankrupted the country, and now singing the praises of the man that started it all, farage. The mind boggles.
@@steveknott5873 change of policy from 5 years ago is not telling lies.
@@steveknott5873 not even close captain whatabout.
Watching from a far away nation, Jacob Rees-Mogg is the one I truly want to see gone from Parliament. Snotty toff.
Objective must be zero seats for the Tories, they should deservedly become a superminority after all the damage they have inflicted.
No, they should become a myth, a cautionary tale to tell tour children.
@@johncarroll5178 Only if they are very, very naughty indeed.
One can only hope! 🤞
Hang on, hang on...our PM told us yesterday that things are now better than they were in 2010. (I'm sure he means for him.)
It's actually depressing that it's 50/50 if he's knowingly lying, or he truly believes it because he's so insulated by his money.
I seem to remember the Conservatives saying after the 2019 election with their 80+ seat majority which meant they could push anything through parliament 'The democratic will of the People for us to deliver' And yet now they are saying now an large overall majority for Labour is threatening the very core of democracy.
I don't get why in 2019 it was "vote conservative to get Brexit done" - the implication being that a large majority would mean less opposition.
Now a huge majority is a bad thing...🤷♂️
I don't think it is, as we need a bit less interference to undo the last 14 years. Objectively, we've gone too far down the wrong road.
The same debate happened when Thatcher held office, and Francis Pym said a large majority was a bad thing, and Thatcher swiftly contradicted him.
This is fascism 101: Say anything to get in to/retain power.
A huge majority in favour of turning Brtiain into a third world banana republic without the bananas is, indeed a bad thing.
got us done over
@@mobilephil244 we are already the banana republic? or trade and investment would be up, nobody wants anything to do with the uk. well apart from, putin or xi!
I think it's fair to say that Boris is a mahoosive liar.
Like Starmer
@@Dynasty1818 no, you!
@@-slashtHis dad is bigger than your dad.
@@Dynasty1818 that's okay though, Tories have been defending lying for over a decade, so its fine to do now. That's what the Government have taught me. MOVE ON. PROJECT FEAR. AMBUSHED BY CAKE.
' Supermajority ' is an American term, you can see who is pulling the propaganda strings.
maga tories and reform.
Russians
@blindpanda6211Americans are funding the right wing all over the world they don't care if it's right wing, far right or or a dictatorship as long as it's divisive and creates civil unrest. It makes them money from arms sales or creates cheaper deals to be had for the corporations.
Exactly so.
Tories can't even competently plagiarize
FOUR DAYS TO GO!! Before we see the back of these grifters - I will go to my grave happy to say goodbye to probably the worse government in living history.
You sound very bitter.
Do you work.
Let's just agree to call it a superb majority.
It’s not that the Tories are scared of a “supermajority”, they’re terrified of having a TINY minority of MPs on Friday morning, perhaps not even enough to form His Majesty’s Opposition. This would reduce them to irrelevance, perhaps forever.
🤞🤞🤞
Don't get our hopes up!
Would have happened decades ago but for a very lopsided national media.
Yeh😂
Forever is not long enough.
The Tories are really fearful of having a "superminority", something that a lot of people would welcome.
Anything under 450 seat Labour majority the Tories will claim that people aren't convinced about Labour,forgetting to mention the public are definitely convinced we don't want the Tories anymore.😂😂😂
The Tories are like that used cars salesman who's BS is just not working on you 😆 roll on the 4th of July 😁
Cleverly couldn't answer when GMB asked so it's ok for Thatcher to have 180 majority in 83 but not labour now.
The only reason Thatcher won in '83 was due to the Falklands Campaign, if Argentina had not invaded, Thatcher would have lost. The Tories, under Thatcher, swept to power in '79 on the back of the promise to reduce unemployment, which was 2 million, but instead, unemployment had reached 6 million by '82. Thatcher was magnificent during the Falklands war, but had to bribe the electorate in subsequent elections with the funds from the Great Sell-Off of the national assets, and the sales of council homes, which were never replaced, and we have been paying the price ever since.
@@wolfen210959 agree totally but as with Carter in the US truth comes out later Callaghan had already negotiated a deal with the strikers by early 79 but was not able to put it through to the electorate in time for the election. So Thatcher won on the media.
Wouldn’t Tory’s call this ‘A strong parliament’ if it was them?
strong and stable government I think
How at this point could yiu claim that voting for Jermey Corbyn would have been worse. His government is easiest to compare to New Zealand's government during covid, which was one of the best of any nation on planet earth at dealing with covid.
They are toddlers smashing up their toys in frustration.
tories out of touch and desperate sad tories
It takes over 8 seconds to forget something. Tories are relying on the common man, working class, middle class, if you will, at the very very last minute to forget the last 14 years & embrace the dead moggy on the table.
they rely on senile pensioners. their biggest voting base.
The crime minister and his band of thieves will soon be kicked out, and they are fearful of losing their lucrative corrupt opportunities, they're crying into their champagne, 😢😢
Reduced tax champagne...
52% percent gives you the right to ignore the 48%, so why fear a supermajority?
Quick correction. The Tories didn't bin Johnson because of any of his lies. They binned him because the public found out about one of the lies and were at last sufficiently outraged.
Tory 80 majority clearly NOT a problem
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Tories being Tories.
Apparently not, because if was about stopping 'scary' Jeremy Corbyn.
@@Silver-st2zq whats wrong with that? Labour being labour and taking nonsense is expected wih mr flipflop
@@keirmitchell5560 We need the Lib Dems in opposition.
The real clown show will begin after the election when the remaining few Tories turn on each other to become the new leader.
It's their circus and they'll cry if they want to...
Can we all agree that brexit was the start of the Tories eating themselves alive
Wipeout to Help out.
I hope labour get a massive majority 👊
Well said
they will thanks to all the "vote reform" bots online
I hope they have to go into coalition with the Lib Dems. We might even get PR then!
@@SusannaSaunders dream on sister
@@AnthonyWilliams-sh1gv I can only hope for political reform... We so desperately need it in this country!
The problem with the Tories is that they don't know how to negotiate. For years they said the EU were telling us what to do, yet in reality they were supposed to negotiate with them. Then, after telling lie after lie rather than truthfully negotiate with the electorate, we left the EU. Then, for year after year they failed to negotiate any meaningful trade deals, and those that they did were only detrimental to us. All the while they failed to negotiate amongst themselves which meant PM after PM. Finally, unable to negotiate anything meaningful with the electorate yet again, they lie and lie and try to frighten us into voting for them. Totally inept. I would not want them to be in a position to negotiate any further trade deals, especially with the US because they are simply not up to the job.
Yeah like the US is going to give us a trade deal, unless it means getting steroid injected cows, salmonella eggs, or the NHS run by American conglomerates. No thank you. Just have a trade deal with Europe, its a lot closer just have to accept the customs union.
From coalition of chaos to a dangerous super majority. These guys really run the dishonest gambit.
Rout the cons with reality of what we think. The bigger the majority then maybe they will realize being dishonest and corrupt is not acceptable.
They know they can't win, lets create some fear so we are not embarrassed by the numbers.
The truth is a small labour majority gives more influence to more fringe members of the labour party. A big majority gives more power to the main part of the which people actually voted for.
The worst Tory govs were always the ones running scared of right wing rebellions thanks to small majorities.
Speaking from 'across the pond' I truly hope you Brits get your politics figured out. Once you manage, we'll need to borrow your map.
Well I know This current government has borrowed your previous Governments playbook.
We've come a long way from Cameron's "stability and strong Government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband" and May's "strong and stable leadership". Now apparently a "strong and stable government" is a bad thing according to Tories.
If a conservative warns of the dangers of a labour supermajority, ask them the following question.
"If the tories were on the brink of a supermajority, would you discourage voters from voting for you?"
Tories
1834 - 2024
Tamworth Manifesto to the Transwoman Fiasco.
It's actually Tories
1834 - 2016
It's just that the funeral took ages because the undead zombie corpse wouldn't lay still in the coffin with many even believing it wasn't really dead. But we're almost done dealing with it now.
Conservative Party 1834 - 2016, Party calling itself the Conservative Party but is a Nationalist Populist Party masquerading as the Conservatives 2016-2024
Project Fear. They know their voters.
Supermajority is Schrödinger's BS (meaningful and meaningless).
Erm how does Schroeder apply?
Sure before the box is opened it's a super position but when the box is opened it's one or the other.
I do not understand your apology
Fear that their views are going to prove out of touch with a majority of Brits for at least 5 years. Fear of losing their influence. Fear that Labour might actually do something to help this country.
Nah, it's loosing access to the trough they feed from that really gripes them... They are used to easy tax payers money given to them hand over fist...
There is no such thing - I also feel like most people are prepared for a Labour government. There was polling done on this which said it made people more likely to support Labour as well.
Just a note.. ginormous is in the Oxford dictionary and is a word first coined by the RAF in the ‘40s…
The ever more hysterical headlines in the Daily Mail amuse me - and we all thought The Sun was a comic - Thursdays headline will probably be “Starmer drinks human blood” - I kid you not 🤣
I’ve received a Tory party leaflet this morning and it states that if you vote Labour or Reform then you are handing Starmer a huge majority which implies that they are going to lose badly and my current Tory MP has a 20 thousand plus majority 😮
I had something similar the other day from the Tories. I put it straight in the bin.
@@uniquerebeljaney3639That's where mine went.
Got a tory leaflet too: all green, hugging farmers etc etc...(Semi rural and rural constituency with lots of smallish farms).
But it would be their fault if Labour got a super majority. Now they complain about it? Its their fault if that happens ffs
The Tories are going to scream for pr when labour get 450 seats
Nah, they are as wedded to the two party state system as Labour are!
If too many fear a supermajority, it becomes a super minority , and the Tories win again!
That's the Tory 'Plan' that Rishi keeps banging on about!
Pretty sure that's the plan. Remember the Oakshot "poll"...
VOTE REFORM
@@bobenglish5084 That's worse than voting tory.
I’m from Western Australia and in our current state government the Labor Party holds 53 of 59 seats in the Lower House. Now that is a supermajority which has allowed them to pass any legislation or laws without interference. I saw a poll last week that is projecting the conservative opposition will only get four of those seats back when the next election is held next year.
I hope the majority is huge, ginormous, humungous and all the other epithets all rolled into one!
You see, I have absolute faith in Starmer's intelligence and honesty to pull us out of the fourteen year shitshow that we have all suffered!
Whod have thought collective hatred of the Tories could actually drive them to the more reasonable position of espousing the advantages of PR.
This govt in third place would be a beautiful thing. It's a real threat to them.
Indeed, but we don't want reform to get seats, they plan on demolishing the NHS.
The best thing about a large majority is that Parliament can be kept running for more of the year and the changes that are needed can be put through at greater pace, because it's viable for MPs to take holidays while it's sitting. Give them two weeks at Christmas, two weeks in the summer and two weeks when they choose, just like the rest of us.
Who gets 6 weeks holiday a year?
They are seriously counting on those trees to keep voting for them - the axe.
Isn't the idea that we want the majority of people to support an idea. Isn't that what democracy is about? The more the merrier..... The bigger the 'super-majority' the better.... It simply means more of us agree...... No bad thing these days.
Absolutely Brilliant.👏
So in review, it's ok for the Conservative's win big but not Labour 😂
Really the most funny part of all this was Michael Gove saying its not fair that the labour party will have a majority to get things done even though he was part of a large Majority.
The problem is that these inconsistencies spouted by the tory client media, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express are never picked up by the readers who simply believe the bs from one daft headline to the next.
I am sitting in a new constituency our former MP was Jeremy Hunt. This place could not be more Conservative if you tried. No poster or signs for them any where. Only one for Labour and many for the Liberal Democrats. Me thinks the Liberals could be winning here.
Commonwealth citizens(India..) can vote in all elections, including general elections.
Qualifying Commonwealth citizens must be resident in the UK and either have leave to remain in the UK or not require leave. Your leave to remain can be indefinite, or time limited (international students, HongKong BN(O) visa...).
Sunak should become the PM of India.
The word we're looking for is "stonking" majority. That's how Johnson and the Tory media described the 2019 result. There were no reservations about unchecked power, just celebrating.
The labour party here in Australia has ensured a tax cut for lower income earners from yesterday, saving me $160 a month.
Look at what politicians actually achieve, don't listen to their scare tactics.
Honestly the way the Tories panic over this, they make a Super Majority sound like a really cool thing we should try, rather than something to be avoided. It's truly astonishing how bad messaging has been for the Tories in this election.
The Tories seem to have woken up all of a sudden in recent days after their terrible disastrous 14 years, talk about clutching straws they need to get a grip stop taking us for fools.
Epic Lul as kier starmer is a compulsive liar - public ownership, tuition fees, section 28 to name a few u-turns
Will the Tories dispute the results of the GE if they lose biggly?
They've been tinkering with the idea--seen some headlines and spam on the lines that illegal; immigrants are going to vote. Right out of the Trump playbook.
I want a gigantic Labout majority because that's the only way they will be able to get things done.
Fear, they are more worried about losing 2nd party status that is massive for the tories.
A majority is a majority. Can still do things
I hope & PRAY for a Labour SUPER SUPER SUPER-MAJORITY of OVER 550 SEATS!!! AMEN
Your part of the problem
they’ll have been running focus groups behind the scenes and this “super majority” line was likely what pushed people’s buttons the most. Whether its true or not doesn't matter.
Their American political consultants and advisers probably introduced the topic. The same people who gave us culture wars to help right-wingers divide and rule.
If anything, big majorities are better than small majorities as the party is less controlled by its extreme fringes.
You just need to look at the US Congress to see how true this is.
James! You could've got away with calling Johnson a mahoosive liar! 😃
Many MP’s actually got in trouble for it. Hoyle, worst speaker in history, actually punished MP’s for calling him a liar in parliament but not for Johnson when he was known to have lied.
In UK a supermajority is when the ruling party has about.. say 30-40 more MPs than the combined opposition. In that case they can ignore the loonies in their own party. If they have a majority of say 10.. then they cannot.
But even with 80 majority the tories still catered to their fringe.
I had to look up 'mahoosive', to see if it was a real word.
and?
Corbyn is still living rent-free in James's head.
Probably trying to escape the abeit low chance of ending as the 3rd largest party. They are simultaneously talking about the need for a strong opposition (themselves) rather than what would in fact be a far more constructive LibDem opposition.
From the Oxford dictionary.... The earliest known use of the noun supermajority is in the 1910s.
OED's earliest evidence for supermajority is from 1915, in the Manitoba Free Press (Winnipeg, Manitoba).... So JOB is wrong again on where the word comes from and its not America.... Tony cuenca
HI JAMES - I am Dr Philip Merry a 74 year old global team consultant from Huddersfield living in Singapore since 1990 - who began my political career fighting against Enoch Powell. I have to say i absolutely love your wide-ranging stream of consciousness comments - your comments tonight on supermajorty and Keir's Friday night with his family - just brilliant. You are the best thing on talk shows. THANKYOU.
It's not a nonsense. The size of the majority clearly is important. Firstly, a government can claim a strong electoral mandate. Secondly, it means that a government has more maneuverability. A government with a majority of one is in a much more precarious position than one with a supermajority - supposing an MP dies or retires, and the government loses a byelection, etc. If Starmer has a majority of > 200, his government could better withstand a rebel group of Labour MPs crossing the floor and/or defying the Whip on legislation, etc. These scenarios pose less threat to the ability of a government with supermajority to carry out its mandate and have the confidence of parliament. A government with an overwhelming majority is clearly in a strong position and with a constitutionally weak House of Lords (which he will likely move to abolish) this is problematic. Westminster since the Parliament Acts (1910) & (1949) suffers from what Lord Hailsham dubbed "elective dictatorship."
Speaking as a Scot, I switched from voting Labour to voting SNP because of Labour's support for Brexit in 2016 under that idiot Corbyn. Labour then got almost wiped out from Scottish seats by a ginormous super-majority of SNP representatives, though they had to govern Scotland from Edinburgh in coalition with the Greens. That coalition has fallen apart now, and I expect that Labour will replace the SNP as Scotland's largest Westminster party as well, and maybe even form part of the next Scottish government. Of course, the Scottish parliament is elected by a combination of first past the post and proportional representation. I won't be voting Labour again in what little remains of my lifetime, but I'm not in the least bit worried by a supermajority - they've done the only damage they could have already under Corbyn. While I don't trust Starmer any more than I trust any Tory, at least his party members aren't Tories as well.
Labour will have a massive majority.
Labour will implement more left-wing policies.
Labour will increase your taxes.
Labour will spend that money on public services and the environment.
They're just pointing at things and saying 'look!'. Yes, those things will (maybe) happen - they're the will of the people. Trying to demonise it all just makes the Tories look even more out of touch, if such a thing could even be possible.
Why are they using "supermajority" with a false meaning? I'd suggest it's word association. All Tories know the meaning of "superprofit". It's what drives them but they know superprofiteering works against general economic well-being. So they're trying to project the bad connotation of superprofit motive onto Labour's intentions in governement, as if having more MPs will make them more greedily malign.
Supermajority is a situation where, as a result of organised and persistent gerrymandering, the majority of seats held by one party (in the US normally the Republicans), can almost never NEVER be overturned. That couldnt happen in the UK under our particular system. As usual, the Tories are, like their counterparts in America, scaremongering when they look like they're going to lose.
Sadly, I had this debate with my mum this morning; I actually think she's become radicalized in the last 10 years. Voted for Brexit to keep everyone from Eritrea etc out. Is voting for Reform this week. She repeats all the same BS about super majority, the increase in barbershops... It's all word for word from the Farage playbook. So sad. So frustrating. So tiring.
I'm sorry, but are the Tories not even allowed to campaign any more?
They've clearly accepted they're going to lose, so are now trying to limit the damage.
Seems both sensible and realistic to me.
And a majority of 80 is a world away from one of 250.
With one of those, the UK will become a one party state for at least the next 5 years.
Most sentient human beings believe those to be a bad thing.
As an interesting aside it's instructive that O'Brien describes Johnson's lies (who isn't standing) as venal, yet describes Starmer's lies (who definitely is standing) as "that's politics".
I think someone needs to ask how these people crying about a "Labour Supermajority" are defining "supermajority". Because a "supermajority" isn't a party having a larger than expected majority, in fact it has nothing to do with parties. It's a threshold set for specific policies which have consequences that could fundamentally change a country's constitution, bill of rights, or its very future - you know, the threshold we should have set for the referendum, rather than passing it on the flimsiest of majorities, and ending up making a complete mess, or the threshold for bills affecting the rights of vulnerable minorities or our right to protest, which some sleasy and seditious MPs push through without a vote.
Keir Starmer is indeed a proven, consummate liar. I haven't even bothered to read his manifesto as I'm sure that, like the 'pledges' he offered us before his election to leadership of the Labour party, they'll all be history within six weeks.
But the prospect of yet another Tory government is even more hideous. I'll hold my nose and vote for a Labour which is very little different - but just enough. (Then I'll go home and cry.)
Ten years ago these MAHOOSIVE fauxes pas would have been sufficiently few and far between that we’d never have been unable to determine which one caused a certain scandal.
I don’t know if ‘Fauxes pas’ is a phrase, but I said it anyway 😊
And ‘Mahoosive’ * is * a word 😁
Spell 'mahousive' (sp?) for me James. I'm trying to look it up in my thesaurus and Shorter OED. Can't find it!! Have tried many spellings.....🤣🤣🤣🤣
Seems to me that they're trying to play some weird variant of the prisoner dilemma with the electorate. As James notes, it's quite sensible to be worried about an overwhelming majority and reluctantly vote the other way to prevent it, but we can't know for sure how everyone else will vote. I think they're banking on enough people taking this stance who, if each knew how everyone else is voting would probably strategise in such a way as to ensure the "best" outcome (Labour winning a "reasonable" majority), but, since they don't, will all reluctantly vote Tory.
The current Conservative Party is Conservative Party in name only. When the likes of William Hague says that the party has left him behind it shows how far they have moved. A party which used to call itself the party of law and order not only illegally prorogued parliament in order to bypass Parliament, also passed an Act of Parliament which tells a Department of State to ignore the law. A party which always knew that sometimes you have to increase taxes (as it did under John Major) when prudence demand but then you have Liz Truss announcing increased borrowing to offer tax cuts. The best thing that could happen is for the Conservatives to lose and then rebuild itself as what it used to be, a Right of Centre Party that is financially prudent, reforms but does not destroy institutions and is a party of law and order.