Spain's PP will wait for a verdict before deciding on a no-confidence motion
Spain's Popular Party is making its no-confidence motion conditional on the verdict in the Ábalos case. A war-of-attrition strategy or fear of governing with Vox? Analysis from the forum.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The no-confidence motion the PP keeps in its drawer
Spain's Popular Party seems to have turned waiting for a court verdict into its definitive political strategy, making any move against the Government conditional on the outcome of the 'masks case' implicating Ábalos. As corruption scandals pile up, the debate in the forum is split between those who see a calculated war-of-attrition strategy and those who believe the opposition lacks the courage needed to take the reins.
War of attrition or inaction out of antiestéticar of Vox?
The prevailing view in the thread is that Feijóo is not seeking an immediate no-confidence motion because he antiestéticars the electoral cost of a deal with Vox. Some forum users argue that the PP would rather let the PSOE keep bleeding out on its own, hoping the attrition will be such that, in a future election, they win a large enough majority to govern without depending on the far right. It's ripe-fruit politics, although many users warn that this passivity could end up being political suicide if voters come to see the PP as a mere management firm with no principles.
The numbers trap and the Rajoy precedent
Some point out that parliamentary arithmetic is stubborn and that, without the necessary votes, any attempt is a shot in the dark. The comparison with the no-confidence motion Rajoy faced comes up constantly: while the 'M.Rajoy' case was enough to make his government wobble, today's PP seems paralysed by antiestéticar of failing to muster the numbers. The question left hanging is whether they are really waiting for a court verdict as a catalyst or have simply given up on playing their role as a real opposition while the country endures a constant drip of news about incivil networks and PSOE-owned flats used to coordinate corruption schemes.
Is Feijóo's prudence a masterstroke or proof that the two main parties are more comfortable sharing power than confronting each other directly? The debate remains open.
Related discussions in the forum
Spain's Popular Party seems to have turned waiting for a court verdict into its definitive political strategy, making any move against the Government conditional on the outcome of the 'masks case' implicating Ábalos. As corruption scandals pile up, the debate in the forum is split between those who see a calculated war-of-attrition strategy and those who believe the opposition lacks the courage needed to take the reins.
War of attrition or inaction out of antiestéticar of Vox?
The prevailing view in the thread is that Feijóo is not seeking an immediate no-confidence motion because he antiestéticars the electoral cost of a deal with Vox. Some forum users argue that the PP would rather let the PSOE keep bleeding out on its own, hoping the attrition will be such that, in a future election, they win a large enough majority to govern without depending on the far right. It's ripe-fruit politics, although many users warn that this passivity could end up being political suicide if voters come to see the PP as a mere management firm with no principles.
The numbers trap and the Rajoy precedent
Some point out that parliamentary arithmetic is stubborn and that, without the necessary votes, any attempt is a shot in the dark. The comparison with the no-confidence motion Rajoy faced comes up constantly: while the 'M.Rajoy' case was enough to make his government wobble, today's PP seems paralysed by antiestéticar of failing to muster the numbers. The question left hanging is whether they are really waiting for a court verdict as a catalyst or have simply given up on playing their role as a real opposition while the country endures a constant drip of news about incivil networks and PSOE-owned flats used to coordinate corruption schemes.
Is Feijóo's prudence a masterstroke or proof that the two main parties are more comfortable sharing power than confronting each other directly? The debate remains open.
Related discussions in the forum
- Results if only pensioners voted. BROOOOTALLL!!!!!! · 90 replies
- The left is dropping Zapatero · 22 replies
- NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION · 37 replies
- Rodríguez Zapatero formally charged · 464 replies
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (16 replies).
More summaries
-
No-confidence motion in Spain: real threat or political noise?
We analyse in the forum the viability of the instrumental no-confidence motion against Sánchez. Political reality or noise to block the legislature?
-
Julio Iglesias sues Yolanda Díaz and eldiario.es for €119,000
Julio Iglesias is suing Yolanda Díaz and eldiario.es over the publication of €119,000 in expenses and travel during COVID, following the threat of a ruling.
-
Lleida teacher singles out two students for supporting Vox
Lleida History teacher allegedly called two students 'fachapobres' (poor fascists) over Vox event. Case reopens public education debate.
-
Abascal takes on Sánchez: from Parliament seat to nationwide tour
VOX held events in Ponferrada, A Coruña, Burgos, Avilés and Ibiza, hit back at Sánchez in Congress and fought the euthanasia law in 2020
-
Alvise Pérez pauses wildfire duties and heads to Ceuta
Alvise Pérez temporarily suspends his wildfire-fighting duties and travels to Ceuta to address residents, according to an announcement from his team.
-
What would happen to ZP if he went to prison? Would he be exposed like any other inmate?
We discuss in the forum the real possibility of a former prime minister like ZP ending up in prison and whether he would be treated the same as any other inmate.