Boris Johnson- Prime Minister
Discussion
Otis Criblecoblis said:
banjowilly said:
Otis Criblecoblis said:
You do also have to think a little bit on the subject too. Blair and Brown pre planned Brown's takeover years in advance, all with as if it was their right to play games. That might be where the arrogance comes in to it. Failing to recognise the difference here is a tad disengenuous.
If you want to campaign for a new law that a general election must be held in the PM steps down or is removed, that's all well and good.
All of which is a total irrelevance. No surprise the point eludes you but the point does elude you. Tenner says I scan back through your posts & find more than a few bandying the word hypocrisy about.If you want to campaign for a new law that a general election must be held in the PM steps down or is removed, that's all well and good.
If you want to take simple quotes and hold them up as being equal , then you really need to them to be equal in the situation , but here they are not really the same. The pre planned take over of Brown is not the same as Boris standing for leader when another Remainer PM quit.
To anyone else it would be an interesting point in the difference. To you its an opportunity to stick your fingers in your ears and scream.
I guess its not like Blohard hadn't tried to become leader before
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johns...
Otis Criblecoblis said:
Oh, you are back trying to be top PH nutter.
If you want to take simple quotes and hold them up as being equal , then you really need to them to be equal in the situation , but here they are not really the same. The pre planned take over of Brown is not the same as Boris standing for leader when another Remainer PM quit.
To anyone else it would be an interesting point in the difference. To you its an opportunity to stick your fingers in your ears and scream.
Not true. Brown's ascendancy was not a take-over. Blair standing down was announced publicly three years in advance, plenty of time for candidates to build support and campaign. As it was, Gordon Brown was so much more popular (88% - significantly better than BJ's result, BTW) that the other candidates dropped out. It was as democratic as BJ's ascendancy.If you want to take simple quotes and hold them up as being equal , then you really need to them to be equal in the situation , but here they are not really the same. The pre planned take over of Brown is not the same as Boris standing for leader when another Remainer PM quit.
To anyone else it would be an interesting point in the difference. To you its an opportunity to stick your fingers in your ears and scream.
I understand that BJ as PM is a wet dream for a certain faction of the PH right, but he has a long history of hypocrisy. It's simultaneously fun and tiresome to see his fans dance their way out of just saying "I don't care".
(Same goes for Trump, Berlusconi, Strache - all are unprincipled scumbags who rely on otherwise decent people to hold their noses while their dog s
ts all over the place.)Escapegoat said:
It's simultaneously fun and tiresome to see his fans dance their way out of just saying "I don't care".
And right on cue as predicted:Oilchange said:
Does it pee you off that Trump is US President and Johnson is PM by any chance?
Meanwhile, here's an interesting take on the next few weeks for BJ:
John145 said:
It's quite amazing how a fraction of a second can be held in eternity by a photograph and then spun to whatever ends.
Reminds me of the photograph of a migrant holding a woman on a railway line with police stood over them. Photo looks like police brutality. The video shows the man grab the woman and drag her down from the platform onto the railway line and the police trying to help her...
Or Ed and his bacon sandwich.Reminds me of the photograph of a migrant holding a woman on a railway line with police stood over them. Photo looks like police brutality. The video shows the man grab the woman and drag her down from the platform onto the railway line and the police trying to help her...
glazbagun said:
John145 said:
It's quite amazing how a fraction of a second can be held in eternity by a photograph and then spun to whatever ends.
Reminds me of the photograph of a migrant holding a woman on a railway line with police stood over them. Photo looks like police brutality. The video shows the man grab the woman and drag her down from the platform onto the railway line and the police trying to help her...
Or Ed and his bacon sandwich.Reminds me of the photograph of a migrant holding a woman on a railway line with police stood over them. Photo looks like police brutality. The video shows the man grab the woman and drag her down from the platform onto the railway line and the police trying to help her...
Mothersruin said:
Nah, Ed was useless at whatever he was doing.
See "Edstone" "Dan Hodges reported that while watching Miliband unveil the tablet on television, a Labour press officer "started screaming. He stood in the office, just screaming over and over again at the screen. It was so bad they thought he was having a breakdown""
Vaud said:
Mothersruin said:
Nah, Ed was useless at whatever he was doing.
See "Edstone" "Dan Hodges reported that while watching Miliband unveil the tablet on television, a Labour press officer "started screaming. He stood in the office, just screaming over and over again at the screen. It was so bad they thought he was having a breakdown""
banjowilly said:
All of which is a total irrelevance. No surprise the point eludes you but the point does elude you. Tenner says I scan back through your posts & find more than a few bandying the word hypocrisy about.
Which as your new account , under the current username, is only 2 months old it makes it difficultfor those who may want to scan back through your previous posts..
Escapegoat said:
Otis Criblecoblis said:
Oh, you are back trying to be top PH nutter.
If you want to take simple quotes and hold them up as being equal , then you really need to them to be equal in the situation , but here they are not really the same. The pre planned take over of Brown is not the same as Boris standing for leader when another Remainer PM quit.
To anyone else it would be an interesting point in the difference. To you its an opportunity to stick your fingers in your ears and scream.
Not true. Brown's ascendancy was not a take-over. Blair standing down was announced publicly three years in advance, plenty of time for candidates to build support and campaign. As it was, Gordon Brown was so much more popular (88% - significantly better than BJ's result, BTW) that the other candidates dropped out. It was as democratic as BJ's ascendancy.If you want to take simple quotes and hold them up as being equal , then you really need to them to be equal in the situation , but here they are not really the same. The pre planned take over of Brown is not the same as Boris standing for leader when another Remainer PM quit.
To anyone else it would be an interesting point in the difference. To you its an opportunity to stick your fingers in your ears and scream.
)
So years after the deal between Blair and Brown for Blair to resign midway through a parliament and do everything he could to ensure Brown became PM, Gordon won a huge victory ( a massive 88% ! ) against McDonnell. Wow !
You also forgot to mention he was elected by a massive number of people , all 313 of them ( Boris got 66% and 92k votes ), all strangely able to be lent on and only one of whom rivaled him.
If you are actually old enough to remember back to then, just about everyone thought it a preconceived plan and was a little bit appalled, not just Boris. Not quite the same as when a PM fails hopelessly and can't continue and resulting leadership election where they were considering limiting the number who could stand, is it ?
Other than that, I enjoyed that creatively worded bulls
t and crazy rant at the end !Edited by Otis Criblecoblis on Sunday 25th August 00:41
Otis Criblecoblis said:
Yeah, it was no takeover when only one other person stood in the leadership election for the Labour party to become PM,that being McDonnell only doing so because he was hard left loon who opposed Blair bitterly. Strange how no one had any ambitions to stand to become an automatic PM of the country, maybe they all decided they were totally inadequate ?
So years after the deal between Blair and Brown for Blair to resign midway through a parliament and do everything he could to ensure Brown became PM, Gordon won a huge victory ( a massive 88% ! ) against McDonnell. Wow !
You also forgot to mention he was elected by a massive number of people , all 313 of them ( Boris got 66% and 92k votes ), all strangely able to be lent on and only one of whom rivaled him.
If you are actually old enough to remember back to then, just about everyone thought it a preconceived plan and was a little bit appalled, not just Boris. Not quite the same as when a PM fails hopelessly and can't continue and resulting leadership election where they were considering limiting the number who could stand, is it ?
Other than that, I enjoyed that creatively worded bullst and crazy rant at the end !
So now you need actual conspiracy to help you wriggle out of recognising Boris' hypocrisy? All of the BJ fans here were saying "it's perfectly legal and democratic" a few weeks ago. Well, well:So years after the deal between Blair and Brown for Blair to resign midway through a parliament and do everything he could to ensure Brown became PM, Gordon won a huge victory ( a massive 88% ! ) against McDonnell. Wow !
You also forgot to mention he was elected by a massive number of people , all 313 of them ( Boris got 66% and 92k votes ), all strangely able to be lent on and only one of whom rivaled him.
If you are actually old enough to remember back to then, just about everyone thought it a preconceived plan and was a little bit appalled, not just Boris. Not quite the same as when a PM fails hopelessly and can't continue and resulting leadership election where they were considering limiting the number who could stand, is it ?
Other than that, I enjoyed that creatively worded bulls
t and crazy rant at the end !Edited by Otis Criblecoblis on Sunday 25th August 00:41
- It was the Labour Party's democratic and legal process that got Brown to No10.
- It was the Conservative Party's democratic and legal process that got Johnson to No10.
Escapegoat said:
So now you need actual conspiracy to help you wriggle out of recognising Boris' hypocrisy? All of the BJ fans here were saying "it's perfectly legal and democratic" a few weeks ago. Well, well:
Blair and Brown did a deal before the 97 election that was common knowledge and regularly reported on, and while they may have tried to show some sort of due process, none existed.- It was the Labour Party's democratic and legal process that got Brown to No10.
- It was the Conservative Party's democratic and legal process that got Johnson to No10.
I don't really get why people struggle to say Boris has been a hypocrite with his words on Gordon Brown as I think it's clear he has.
I'll eat some humble pie and admit that he's surprised me so far in that he doesn't seem to have put his foot in it and appears to be making the right noises whilst trying to ride every horse.
Better than expected.
So far.
I'll eat some humble pie and admit that he's surprised me so far in that he doesn't seem to have put his foot in it and appears to be making the right noises whilst trying to ride every horse.
Better than expected.
So far.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I don't really get why people struggle to say Boris has been a hypocrite with his words on Gordon Brown as I think it's clear he has.
.
Only if you are blinkered to the facts about the differences between his election and Browns pre arranged take over..
But if you put those blinkers on yourself what else to you expect ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff