Boris Johnson- Prime Minister
Discussion
psi310398 said:
He is not trusted by TBP voters who are currently giving him the benefit of the doubt. At the first sign of a cop out (as they see it) they will write him off and simply not vote Conservative again, ever. It is hard to calculate how many additional Conservative voters would move to TBP as well.
Spot on.psi310398 said:
I agree but the logic for doing it does not stack up. He is stuck between a rock and the proverbial hard place but leaving without a WA has more upside for him than a fudge.
If the PM tries flogging the WA as is but without the backstop he must know that he seriously risks failing to get it through Parliament and will certainly destroy his party, in the process.
He is not trusted by TBP voters who are currently giving him the benefit of the doubt. At the first sign of a cop out (as they see it) they will write him off and simply not vote Conservative again, ever. It is hard to calculate how many additional Conservative voters would move to TBP as well.
It is moot how many Remainer Tories would be content to leave on the basis of the WA but to get little further in substance than TM is unlikely to impress many.
Tbh I've forgotten the other bits that were less than optimal as the backstop was by far the worst. Which bits do you think would stop it getting through?If the PM tries flogging the WA as is but without the backstop he must know that he seriously risks failing to get it through Parliament and will certainly destroy his party, in the process.
He is not trusted by TBP voters who are currently giving him the benefit of the doubt. At the first sign of a cop out (as they see it) they will write him off and simply not vote Conservative again, ever. It is hard to calculate how many additional Conservative voters would move to TBP as well.
It is moot how many Remainer Tories would be content to leave on the basis of the WA but to get little further in substance than TM is unlikely to impress many.
- money? Drop in the ocean really. Galling in terms of the calcs but half was for continued membership fees, a chunk for projects we'd still have an interest in and the rest not even payable until the actuals become due over the next 30yrs.
- time? 2yrs to settle an FTA with the EU might not be long enough! But sans backstop, WE can choose. Again, not ideal but a short time in the overall scheme of things, especially considering the buggering about to date.
- no voting rights in that 2yrs? We'll cope. And there's only so far they'd be able to push IMO so couldn't take the piss
- the PD? I'd drop that personally... But it's not binding in any way.
There has to be some compromise IMO, and these things seem easy enough to compromise on.
Though I have never looked forward to this day I do think that he needs to be Churchill rather than Chamberlain.
Europe still does not think it will suffer compared to the UK, at least at the European parliament side rather than country by country.
Like it or hate it we still have enough spirit in us to make it work, unlike places like Belgium who just muddle along.
Germany going into this with a first hiccup in a long time with their long term policies v France who just are idealists and sell overpriced handbags.
An interesting run up to October. I wonder where the cards will fall??
Europe still does not think it will suffer compared to the UK, at least at the European parliament side rather than country by country.
Like it or hate it we still have enough spirit in us to make it work, unlike places like Belgium who just muddle along.
Germany going into this with a first hiccup in a long time with their long term policies v France who just are idealists and sell overpriced handbags.
An interesting run up to October. I wonder where the cards will fall??
digimeistter said:
psi310398 said:
He is not trusted by TBP voters who are currently giving him the benefit of the doubt. At the first sign of a cop out (as they see it) they will write him off and simply not vote Conservative again, ever. It is hard to calculate how many additional Conservative voters would move to TBP as well.
Spot on.It would be done except maybe not in the way some wanted it.
It’s not like they could reopen it.
Murph7355 said:
Tbh I've forgotten the other bits that were less than optimal as the backstop was by far the worst. Which bits do you think would stop it getting through?
- money? Drop in the ocean really. Galling in terms of the calcs but half was for continued membership fees, a chunk for projects we'd still have an interest in and the rest not even payable until the actuals become due over the next 30yrs.
- time? 2yrs to settle an FTA with the EU might not be long enough! But sans backstop, WE can choose. Again, not ideal but a short time in the overall scheme of things, especially considering the buggering about to date.
- no voting rights in that 2yrs? We'll cope. And there's only so far they'd be able to push IMO so couldn't take the piss
- the PD? I'd drop that personally... But it's not binding in any way.
There has to be some compromise IMO, and these things seem easy enough to compromise on.
This is a useful summary adjusting for the potential removal of the Backstop: - money? Drop in the ocean really. Galling in terms of the calcs but half was for continued membership fees, a chunk for projects we'd still have an interest in and the rest not even payable until the actuals become due over the next 30yrs.
- time? 2yrs to settle an FTA with the EU might not be long enough! But sans backstop, WE can choose. Again, not ideal but a short time in the overall scheme of things, especially considering the buggering about to date.
- no voting rights in that 2yrs? We'll cope. And there's only so far they'd be able to push IMO so couldn't take the piss
- the PD? I'd drop that personally... But it's not binding in any way.
There has to be some compromise IMO, and these things seem easy enough to compromise on.
https://brexitcentral.com/reminder-theresa-mays-de...
p1stonhead said:
If the withdrawal agreement gets signed off, what purpose would TBP serve any more?
It would be done except maybe not in the way some wanted it.
It’s not like they could reopen it.
Its purpose would be (i) to destroy the Conservative Party and (ii) to provide a focus around which a new opposition would coalesce to repudiate any “stitch up”. It would be done except maybe not in the way some wanted it.
It’s not like they could reopen it.
It is open to speculation how successful Farage would be in performing (ii) but I’d imagine (i) would be achieved at the next election.
After all, TBP need not win a single seat: all it has to do is deny the Tories enough votes to ensure that they lose seats. It might manage the same trick in Labour in the Midlands and North.
psi310398 said:
Its purpose would be (i) to destroy the Conservative Party and (ii) to provide a focus around which a new opposition would coalesce to repudiate any “stitch up”.
It is open to speculation how successful Farage would be in performing (ii) but I’d imagine (i) would be achieved at the next election.
After all, TBP need not win a single seat: all it has to do is deny the Tories enough votes to ensure that they lose seats. It might manage the same trick in Labour in the Midlands and North.
I think that’s very pessimistic. The BP will disappear after Brexit. It’s a rag bag of loons that currently serves to offer a protest vote.It is open to speculation how successful Farage would be in performing (ii) but I’d imagine (i) would be achieved at the next election.
After all, TBP need not win a single seat: all it has to do is deny the Tories enough votes to ensure that they lose seats. It might manage the same trick in Labour in the Midlands and North.
Very few people are Hard Brexiteers, and even they will get bored of moaning.
I expect the chap spouting racist nonsense above will still pray for a harder Brexit, but he can cry quietly into his warm ale and blame the Frogs for his gout.
?Escapegoat said:
Well... it's complicated. Boris dithered about Leave/Remain when push came to shove. Now that he looks in the No10 mirror and says to himself "crikey, I've actually bloody gone and done it - me: PM!", I think he will choose whichever path he thinks will provide him the longest time as PM. Calling a GE before Brexit is the most risky approach.
His dream is to be seen as a Churchill-like statesman, but he doesn't have the courage of his convictions to go for it.
Doesn’t have the courage of his convictions ? You’d do spout some utter sHis dream is to be seen as a Churchill-like statesman, but he doesn't have the courage of his convictions to go for it.
te. Churchill was a pragmatist first and foremost, and (if you’d read Boris’s book on Churchill). You’d surely know that Churchill himself crossed the floor of the commons when it suited him. So to be Churchillian isn’t the same as being inflexible.
The best politicians are surely those that sense the public mood and act accordingly.
Whether they are the best out and out leaders is another matter entirely.
100% of Politicians go into politics to try to do some good in the world, and because of a bit of internal vanity/ego that tells themthat they are capable.
Being ambitious to be PM isn’t unique to Boris, I would wager at least half of NP&E posters would mind a crack at the job either.
There are some seriously weird accusations leveled at Boris Johnson.
Dominating the coffee table, the mannerless oaf 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
hyphen said:
Dominating the coffee table, the mannerless oaf
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
Excellent! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
digimeistter said:
hyphen said:
Dominating the coffee table, the mannerless oaf
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
Excellent! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7383181/B...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff