Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 7)

[bitchstewie]

stongle said:

Boris benefits from the "boy who cried wolf" / "anti-woke" effect (bit like taking the knee backlash). The more nonsense the "grrrrrs' or "messaging" the more Boris will profit.

It takes away scrutiny from poor policy decisions as Roger will point out.

Everytime UU posts, that's a few % points on Boris's approval. The country thanks him. The current government fks up daily, but the useful idiots distract attention.

And then they get on the BLM vibe, despite not owning a PE album or reading Clockers.

I think you're issuing a free pass there tbh Stongle.

The reason Johnson doesn't get the scrutiny he should is because people choose not to give him the scrutiny he should.

The idea that people ignore things like Cruddas because it's "boy who cried wolf" doesn't sit right with me though honestly I do wonder if it's simply because sleaze gets normalised so it actually does become "just another sleaze story".

I did hear something once along the lines that the British media system simply isn't geared up to call the Prime Minister a liar or challenge too much because there's almost a view that it's not quite on to make our Government look too bad on the world stage.

[stongle]

bhstewie said:

I think you're issuing a free pass there tbh Stongle.

The reason Johnson doesn't get the scrutiny he should is because people choose not to give him the scrutiny he should.

The idea that people ignore things like Cruddas because it's "boy who cried wolf" doesn't sit right with me though honestly I do wonder if it's simply because sleaze gets normalised so it actually does become "just another sleaze story".

I did hear something once along the lines that the British media system simply isn't geared up to call the Prime Minister a liar or challenge too much because there's almost a view that it's not quite on to make our Government look too bad on the world stage.

Well, I guess it depends if you think you are reading news / facts OR bias and editorial bent. Nearly every quote or article linked in here is in the later category. And its getting worse as the media chases clicks so they only publish sensationalist tosh. The more people consume this nonsense, the less they are questioning its legitimacy / accuracy.

[anonymous-user]

bhstewie said:

I think you're issuing a free pass there tbh Stongle.

The reason Johnson doesn't get the scrutiny he should is because people choose not to give him the scrutiny he should.

The idea that people ignore things like Cruddas because it's "boy who cried wolf" doesn't sit right with me though honestly I do wonder if it's simply because sleaze gets normalised so it actually does become "just another sleaze story".

I did hear something once along the lines that the British media system simply isn't geared up to call the Prime Minister a liar or challenge too much because there's almost a view that it's not quite on to make our Government look too bad on the world stage.

Apparently by pointing out the government fkups (on a car forum) you’re actually distracting attention from the government’s fkups.

[turbobloke]

bhstewie said:

stongle said:

Boris benefits from the "boy who cried wolf" / "anti-woke" effect (bit like taking the knee backlash). The more nonsense the "grrrrrs' or "messaging" the more Boris will profit.

It takes away scrutiny from poor policy decisions as Roger will point out.

Everytime UU posts, that's a few % points on Boris's approval. The country thanks him. The current government fks up daily, but the useful idiots distract attention.

And then they get on the BLM vibe, despite not owning a PE album or reading Clockers.

I think you're issuing a free pass there tbh Stongle.

The reason Johnson doesn't get the scrutiny he should is because people choose not to give him the scrutiny he should.
<snip>

That's inaccurate. From the BBC to PH, Johnson has his every move picked over and criticised ad nauseam. He's vilified personally and as PM.

The issue here is exactly as stongle indicated and the backdrop is outlined neatly by Lefty Labour Luvvy Lord Donoughue who is nothing if not frank in his diagnosis of many alongside him on the Left.

Lord Donoughue said:

With the collapse of Marxism, there was created a vacuum on the Left. Those seeking an ideological faith to cling on to for moral certainty, felt bereft. They also wanted a faith which again gave them a feeling of still pursuing the common good of society, especially the new global society, and even more a feeling of moral superiority, which is a characteristic of many middle and professional types on the left.

That feeling of moral superiority, baseless but strong, means that too often those on the Left think they're "with the angels" which not only means they think they should get a free pass for their own failings, but also that they can criticise with impunity those inferior types not occupying the same left field moral high ground - self-righteousness and condescension follow. It's clear enough on PH. Johnson has many failings but not the above which are far from likeable attributes, and he's benefiting from the attacks on him, so keep it up by all means.

[bitchstewie]

stongle said:

Well, I guess it depends if you think you are reading news / facts OR bias and editorial bent. Nearly every quote or article linked in here is in the later category. And its getting worse as the media chases clicks so they only publish sensationalist tosh. The more people consume this nonsense, the less they are questioning its legitimacy / accuracy.

Do you honestly think people approach events with a fair and open mind though?

Two things in the media this week.

Kevan Collins was appointed by the Prime Minister and resigned after having pretty much all of his recommendations ignored.

Cruddas was made a Lord in spite of (I believe from what I read) being the only one of the nominees that the appointment commission rejected as unsuitable.

Of course you're right that the way the events are covered will vary depending on the news outlet but I don't think it changes the base events does it?

Yet almost every single one seems to be immediately dismissed as "grrr Boris" or it's fine if it isn't illegal.

Seriously when was the bar for a Prime Minister ever set so low that it's fine if it isn't illegal?

There's a point where it isn't about sensationalist tosh it's simply about ignoring the evidence of your eyes and ears because you support the bloke doing it.

[stongle]

El stovey said:

Apparently by pointing out the government fkups (on a car forum) you’re actually distracting attention from the government’s fkups.

No ES, you actually have to point out the fk ups. Not the nonsense several posters treat us to.

[bitchstewie]

stongle said:

No ES, you actually have to point out the fk ups. Not the nonsense several posters treat us to.

And all people do is change their definition of a fk up so it's never a fk up.

[stongle]

bhstewie said:

Yet almost every single one seems to be immediately dismissed as "grrr Boris" or it's fine if it isn't illegal.

Seriously when was the bar for a Prime Minister ever set so low that it's fine if it isn't illegal?

There's a point where it isn't about sensationalist tosh it's simply about ignoring the evidence of your eyes and ears because you support the bloke doing it.

Who is supporting him? You and a few others seem to think that if "you are not with us, you are against us". It's tribal and partisan crap.

I can understand why some of you get all riled up, especially those who were back of the queue when God was handing out brains. Yesterday The Sun was reporting "Holiday Blow to Brits", when we red listed Sudan and Costa Rica. I'm pretty sure neither are up there on people's go to lists unless getting murdered is the plan. The media are sensationalist at best, but people are repeating it.

Boris's behaviour is largely par for the course of MPs. There are another 640+ of them, all being stes. Some appear to have made this personal about Boris in particular because of his bad hair, younger wife, Brexits, lockdowns or whatevers but don't post on actual policy failure.

I can think of several very large failures, objective ones; but his (and wider govt) biggest failing right now is inaction. Where is level up?

Edited by stongle on Sunday 6th June 08:36

[bitchstewie]

stongle said:

Who is supporting him? You and a few withers seem to think that if "you are not with us, you are against us". It's tribal and partisan crap.

Boris's behaviour is largely par for the course of MPs. There are another 640+ of them, all being stes. Some appear to have made this personal about Boris in particular because of his bad hair, younger wife, Brexits, lockdowns or whatevers but don't post on actual policy failure.

I can think of several very large failures, objective ones; but his (and wider govt) biggest failing right now is inaction. Where is level up?

Actually Stongle I don't think you do but the people who says they simply voted for the least worst option then spent two years and seven volumes chipping in at every rotten carry-on asking for "proof" or mumbling something about "context" or something about Labour or assuming anyone who criticises Johnson must be a leftie?

Personally I don't care about what other MPs do as much as I do the Prime Minister.

Same way that at work if the person in charge of H&S is caught smoking next to the gas cylinders it bothers me a bit more than if it's some random person.

He's literally the leader of the country and sets the tone for the others so what chance of them giving a st about the rules if the bloke who's supposed to set the example doesn't give a st about the rules?

Agree entirely on levelling up though I suspect we have different ideas on what that actually is.

[roger.mellie]

bhstewie said:

stongle said:

Who is supporting him? You and a few withers seem to think that if "you are not with us, you are against us". It's tribal and partisan crap.

Boris's behaviour is largely par for the course of MPs. There are another 640+ of them, all being stes. Some appear to have made this personal about Boris in particular because of his bad hair, younger wife, Brexits, lockdowns or whatevers but don't post on actual policy failure.

I can think of several very large failures, objective ones; but his (and wider govt) biggest failing right now is inaction. Where is level up?

Actually Stongle I don't think you do but the people who says they simply voted for the least worst option then spent two years and seven volumes chipping in at every rotten carry-on asking for "proof" or mumbling something about "context" or something about Labour or assuming anyone who criticises Johnson must be a leftie?

Personally I don't care about what other MPs do as much as I do the Prime Minister.

Same way that at work if the person in charge of H&S is caught smoking next to the gas cylinders it bothers me a bit more than if it's some random person.

He's literally the leader of the country and sets the tone for the others so what chance of them giving a st about the rules if the bloke who's supposed to set the example doesn't give a st about the rules?

Agree entirely on levelling up though I suspect we have different ideas on what that actually is.

Least worst option never made sense as an argument as the reality was Corbyn never had the votes so it was Tories vs a coalition government. I know plenty here are idealogically opposed to the latter regardless of who’s in it, I personally think they’re wrong but that’s by the by when evaluating people’s rationale. Many were and continue to be fooled into thinking it’s blue vs red and are you a blue nose or a red nose (one of the first questions I got asked on my first visit to Liverpool maybe 25 years ago ).

There’s definitely an element that brook no criticism of their decisions here, and that’s part of the problem in any democracy. People vote for who they think will win and then get riled up into defending that position. But there are plenty here who aren’t in that category.

Tabloid level criticism of Boris is fun and games and you should ignore the attempts to shout it down but in the grand scheme of things the only ones that can take Boris down right now have blue rosettes on their lapels and it’ll be interesting to see what makes them rebel. e.g. the foreign aid tack on won’t but will make them stand up and think, there are many internal party objections to the sums involved in “levelling up” that are potentially more likely as he’ll be forced to make a stand either way.

[stongle]

roger.mellie said:

Tabloid level criticism of Boris is fun and games and you should ignore the attempts to shout it down but in the grand scheme of things the only ones that can take Boris down right now have blue rosettes on their lapels and it’ll be interesting to see what makes them rebel. e.g. the foreign aid tack on won’t but will make them stand up and think, there are many internal party objections to the sums involved in “levelling up” that are potentially more likely as he’ll be forced to make a stand either way.

Aha! The foreign aid one, was wondering when that might hit in here.

I'm in 2 minds on this one. The Charity letter saying that there is no basis for cutting aid is a bit of a weird one, we did go an additional 300bn "into the hole" last year, chipping off even a bit is helpful (we are paying interest on it after all). The trader in me though says a deal could be done. I'd give em the money back if they promised to remove the "chuggers" from the streets (but that might leave PH's primary woke activist unemployed).

Since May is one of those threatening to rebel on Aid, he's safe as houses right now. Yes, I'd also agree that level up is going to be the big challenge for him. The reality is the traditional conservatives have a new faction in town and they are expecting it. This is the bit where all politicians are scumbags, Its their personal pride / opinion in front of necessity. The out is an an SWF or National Investment Bank (sounds a bit Corbyn so that one probably won't fly), Govt guarantee, borrow in the market, but asset back the debt with whatever level up projects we get into like spaceports or something. Oh, an have the whole thing managed away from the Civil Service; bit like Norges; which is the massive whanger of SWFs (if they had willies).

[roger.mellie]

stongle said:

Aha! The foreign aid one, was wondering when that might hit in here.

I'm in 2 minds on this one. The Charity letter saying that there is no basis for cutting aid is a bit of a weird one, we did go an additional 300bn "into the hole" last year, chipping off even a bit is helpful (we are paying interest on it after all). The trader in me though says a deal could be done. I'd give em the money back if they promised to remove the "chuggers" from the streets (but that might leave PH's primary woke activist unemployed).

Since May is one of those threatening to rebel on Aid, he's safe as houses right now. Yes, I'd also agree that level up is going to be the big challenge for him. The reality is the traditional conservatives have a new faction in town and they are expecting it. This is the bit where all politicians are scumbags, Its their personal pride / opinion in front of necessity. The out is an an SWF or National Investment Bank (sounds a bit Corbyn so that one probably won't fly), Govt guarantee, borrow in the market, but asset back the debt with whatever level up projects we get into like spaceports or something. Oh, an have the whole thing managed away from the Civil Service; bit like Norges; which is the massive whanger of SWFs (if they had willies).

Wasn’t sure if it had or hadn’t but happy to oblige

I think the budget argument on foreign aid is a pittance compared to many other things but as a point of principle it’s interesting to see where people fall and the arguments they make for doing so. There are valid arguments for reducing it but they partly rely on the government being incompetent on where it’s spent.

I know you’re a big proponent of the need for the government to get serious on levelling up. I agree, not out of any affection for any party but out of the simple reality that the regional division in the uk is eventually going to become unsustainable. Going all dramatic here but if nothing’s done brexit will look like a minor blip when that event horizon happens.

Taking government out of the decisions and just supplying funding may be the way to do it. For a comparison I think that’s the only way to take the parish pump out of NI’s rapidly growing health care crisis.

ETA, I left that last point a bit too cryptic, you need someone who doesn’t care about a few hundred votes swinging their electoral chances making the decisions that affect a multitude of constituencies. “Just” make sure there are accountability mechanisms.

Edited by roger.mellie on Sunday 6th June 10:23

[stongle]

roger.mellie said:

Wasn’t sure if it had or hadn’t but happy to oblige

I think the budget argument on foreign aid is a pittance compared to many other things but as a point of principle it’s interesting to see where people fall and the arguments they make for doing so. There are valid arguments for reducing it but they partly rely on the government being incompetent on where it’s spent.

I know you’re a big proponent of the need for the government to get serious on levelling up. I agree, not out of any affection for any party but out of the simple reality that the regional division in the uk is eventually going to become unsustainable. Going all dramatic here but if nothing’s done brexit will look like a minor blip when that event horizon happens.

Taking government out of the decisions and just supplying funding may be the way to do it. For a comparison I think that’s the only way to take the parish pump out of NI’s rapidly growing health care crisis.

Its the regional division that delivered Brexit in the first place, if Boris is basing part of his legacy on that - he needs to be paying back. We are waaaay past the point of unsustainable. The 2016 vote, should have been a remain banker. It was peak EU, the fact the country decided to vote OUT shows how far Govt, Parliament and their cosy metro / liberal echo chamber were out of touch with half the country. Rather than introspection, we've had 5 years of blame game and people trying to prove (via graphs) that half the country is stupid because no drinkers degrees or something. Likewise, the EU and their nut nuts, flaky economics, trois ecoles and bendy banana's didn't deliver Brexit; we did it to ourselves because we did'nt balance opportunity. We had a fk ton of it being in the EU, but squandered it. A lot of those most whingy about Brexit, gouged themselves on membership and give no consideration towards access to opportunity. Boris and the conservatives "ought" to be self interested and smart enough to know they have to bin off traditional thinking and double down on debt/funding. Why they are not is a massive concern. And for a man as concerned about his image and desire to be the "bestest PM evah", the inaction is a BIG cause for concern.

[bitchstewie]

roger.mellie said:

Wasn’t sure if it had or hadn’t but happy to oblige

I think the budget argument on foreign aid is a pittance compared to many other things but as a point of principle it’s interesting to see where people fall and the arguments they make for doing so. There are valid arguments for reducing it but they partly rely on the government being incompetent on where it’s spent.

I know you’re a big proponent of the need for the government to get serious on levelling up. I agree, not out of any affection for any party but out of the simple reality that the regional division in the uk is eventually going to become unsustainable. Going all dramatic here but if nothing’s done brexit will look like a minor blip when that event horizon happens.

Taking government out of the decisions and just supplying funding may be the way to do it. For a comparison I think that’s the only way to take the parish pump out of NI’s rapidly growing health care crisis.

ETA, I left that last point a bit too cryptic, you need someone who doesn’t care about a few hundred votes swinging their electoral chances making the decisions that affect a multitude of constituencies. “Just” make sure there are accountability mechanisms.

What does levelling up even mean?

It was a big slogan at the General Election and I'm not seeing much sign of it.

The foreign aid thing is an interesting one for sure.

I said at the time I actually don't have a massive problem with cutting it temporarily given the situation we find ourselves in.

But as the Government has shown with so many things there's a printing press when they want to get behind something and complete indifference and excuses when they don't for reasons that totally defy common sense (see Kevan Collins resignation letter to use a fresh example).

"We're reducing the foreign aid budget temporarily and directing that money towards education and children's mental health" sends a very clear message that they get it and it and I also expect it's a lot harder to vote against.

[roger.mellie]

bhstewie said:

What does levelling up even mean?

It was a big slogan at the General Election and I'm not seeing much sign of it.

The foreign aid thing is an interesting one for sure.

I said at the time I actually don't have a massive problem with cutting it temporarily given the situation we find ourselves in.

But as the Government has shown with so many things there's a printing press when they want to get behind something and complete indifference and excuses when they don't for reasons that totally defy common sense (see Kevan Collins resignation letter to use a fresh example).

"We're reducing the foreign aid budget temporarily and directing that money towards education and children's mental health" sends a very clear message that they get it and it and I also expect it's a lot harder to vote against.

To me personally, levelling up means addressing the imbalance in the UK economy. It is a sloganeering and marketing phrase but the underlying reason remains. The UK economy is built on the SE being the driver of profit for the rest of the country, they just forgot to share it about .

Sarcasm off. It’s not only a uk problem, it’s in Ireland too and I’m sure many other countries that I don’t pay as much attention to. Globalisation and the divide between those who are “economically valuable” and those who aren’t is only going in one direction. I think levelling up is a crap solution unless it brings a real economy with real jobs and real outcomes, spending a few quid on roads is not levelling up. I can’t see how the uk (or Ireland) can do that without a major restructuring that they’re not prepared to do.

[bitchstewie]

roger.mellie said:

To me personally, levelling up means addressing the imbalance in the UK economy. It is a sloganeering and marketing phrase but the underlying reason remains. The UK economy is built on the SE being the driver of profit for the rest of the country, they just forgot to share it about .

I get that the focus will be on money and infrastructure as they can be seen and pointed at but is it just economical?

"It should be our fundamental moral purpose as a government to bridge not just the wealth gap, not just the productivity gap, but the opportunity gap between one part of the UK and another."

You can probably guess who said that and who ignored their own education advisor this week.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

bhstewie said:

I get that the focus will be on money and infrastructure as they can be seen and pointed at but is it just economical?

"It should be our fundamental moral purpose as a government to bridge not just the wealth gap, not just the productivity gap, but the opportunity gap between one part of the UK and another."

You can probably guess who said that and who ignored their own education advisor this week.

Talk is cheap.

[roger.mellie]

bhstewie said:

I get that the focus will be on money and infrastructure as they can be seen and pointed at but is it just economical?

"It should be our fundamental moral purpose as a government to bridge not just the wealth gap, not just the productivity gap, but the opportunity gap between one part of the UK and another."

You can probably guess who said that and who ignored their own education advisor this week.

What’s the alternative analysis? E.g I don’t think he was trying to undermine the Catholic Church, he accepted the Catholic Church undermining its own values to accommodate him. I’ll not shed a tear on that but consider it typical of the way others tie themselves in constitutional knots to accommodate someone who doesn’t give a.

Expecting to stand over a previous statement is a slightly different matter. He’s under no pressure to do so. Queue flappy seal pic. If Boris was held to his own stated opinions he’d be long gone. Thing is he’s not. Why? I can think of several answers, but assholes who vote for him because they feared a labour alternative whilst knowing he’s st deserve a special place in hell .

[stongle]

roger.mellie said:

What’s the alternative analysis? E.g I don’t think he was trying to undermine the Catholic Church, he accepted the Catholic Church undermining its own values to accommodate him. I’ll not shed a tear on that but consider it typical of the way others tie themselves in constitutional knots to accommodate someone who doesn’t give a.

Expecting to stand over a previous statement is a slightly different matter. He’s under no pressure to do so. Queue flappy seal pic. If Boris was held to his own stated opinions he’d be long gone. Thing is he’s not. Why? I can think of several answers, but assholes who vote for him because they feared a labour alternative whilst knowing he’s st deserve a special place in hell .

Tad harsh.....

The UK system offered two polar choices. PR might have stopped that, but we don't have it; so?

The choice for voters was a "known economy" which recognised aspiration (or made platitudes towards it); or something quite the opposite. The hyperbole would say Venezuela, but potential leaders of G7 States can't start banging on about capital flight restrictions and shareholder appropriation - even IF they were unlikely to do it. For some reason, the leadership of the Labour Party lost its mind and started talking up policies that only drunk students think are good ideas. They went off the reservation.

I still come back to my view (as stated here), most secretly want yo be governed and delegate difficult decisions to govt. The post Brexit car crash in Parliament possibly drive people towards a strong govt offering (or one with a feasible plan).

In theory, least worst option is a daft voting reason; but parliamentarians were doing a good job of fking the country.

Someone said "talk is cheap", and for ALL politicians it is. What Boris offered with "level up", was 1) fking expensive 2) broader than roads and digital infrastructure. The thing is the massive majority and switch to "blue" is a bit if a paradigm shift. They need to be listening to the electorate. There is a pattern with Brexit, Trump and Boris's 2019 win. And its not because electorates are stupid.

I know that a lot of posters doubt that Boris can pull off Level Up, but he's got to confront the nuts on the right and the Murdoch's etc. It won't just be about the 3-500bn needed, but a dialogue about universal job guarantee, MMT, shareholder power (same as what's going on in the EU), education etc. Education is a big one. They have to unfk the mess that Blair made in the 90s with pushing way too many into Uni. It's delivered the mother of unintended consequence. You have psychology grads with 2.1s making coffee in Starbucks on minimum wage, but school leaver plumbers pulling down "6 figs". Boris's dance card of things to be doing is long, and he's not really bucking down. Doing nothing is a big failure.

That bothers me more than wallpaper st. IF they are smart, they might be letting that crap run; but if they are not perhaps seige mentality is setting in. And that's proper dumb, because the election result suggests he was put in to do "stuff".

Brexit landed 20 years early, they are so on the back foot they need to be running at 8000mph by now. You and I both know the only solution or direction of travel for the EU HAS to be Federal and Fiscal transfers. That is never, ever flying here with our UK inequalities. It actually matters NOT to the UK what solution the EU seeks, we are out and the govt need to be dealing with that economic dent; but the inaction suggests they are conflicted (still) or worse hedging bets. Being wrong is always better than doing nothing.

[Tuna]

roger.mellie said:

To me personally, levelling up means addressing the imbalance in the UK economy. It is a sloganeering and marketing phrase but the underlying reason remains. The UK economy is built on the SE being the driver of profit for the rest of the country, they just forgot to share it about .

Sarcasm off. It’s not only a uk problem, it’s in Ireland too and I’m sure many other countries that I don’t pay as much attention to. Globalisation and the divide between those who are “economically valuable” and those who aren’t is only going in one direction. I think levelling up is a crap solution unless it brings a real economy with real jobs and real outcomes, spending a few quid on roads is not levelling up. I can’t see how the uk (or Ireland) can do that without a major restructuring that they’re not prepared to do.

I very much doubt Johnson will deliver some magical transformation. Significant elements of his own party are not in favour of the sort of restructuring that is being suggested. Even with full support, there is so much that is deeply ingrained, structurally embedded in how the country works.

Even more so, having made such a lofty goal, every single time he fails to deliver cake and unicorns will be measured against "that's not levelling up"...

So it's an impossible goal, that will not be delivered. But the thing that Brexit revealed was that our political classes have so completely accepted that this must be the case, that they actively decry anyone trying to change things. Better still, people who object to Johson will cheer every shorftall and declare the job a failure.

Against that, it seems to me to be a miserable outlook to deny that even small changes, even just being willing to talk about the problem, even just acknowledging there is a problem offers some benefit. As the phrase goes "perfection is the enemy of progress", and the usual virtue signalling perfectionists would rather see no progress than accept that "levelling up" might be a legitimate aim.