Boris Johnson-Prime Minister (Vol 8)
Discussion
skwdenyer said:
Garvin said:
Nobody has made a fool out of me, or anyone else for that matter. The only person Boris (Hancock, Truss) made, and continues to make, a fool of is himself.
You want change which, I think, most of us do. But change for change sake is a dangerous emotional, not objective or rational, action. If you wish to be guided by emotional response over all else that is your prerogative, but please don’t allude to others being fools!
Boris, Hancock, Truss etc are history, but if you want to consider flogging a dead horse as a meaningful activity and looking backwards not forward as a reasonable way to lead your life then fill ya boots.
Boris & Truss are history; the people who supported them, voted for them, justified them are still there.You want change which, I think, most of us do. But change for change sake is a dangerous emotional, not objective or rational, action. If you wish to be guided by emotional response over all else that is your prerogative, but please don’t allude to others being fools!
Boris, Hancock, Truss etc are history, but if you want to consider flogging a dead horse as a meaningful activity and looking backwards not forward as a reasonable way to lead your life then fill ya boots.
skwdenyer said:
Boris & Truss are history; the people who supported them, voted for them, justified them are still there.
You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
Priceless! Ignore performance and select solely according to your crystal ball. What can possibly go wrong?You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
Garvin said:
skwdenyer said:
Boris & Truss are history; the people who supported them, voted for them, justified them are still there.
You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
Priceless! Ignore performance and select solely according to your crystal ball. What can possibly go wrong?You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
It seems reasonable to look at political ideology underpinning actions and their results.
Garvin said:
Maybe most people would. But there lies the problem, people letting their emotional anger get the better of their rational assessment.
It is in no way a “weird take”. You stated you were not prepared to put up with, essentially, Boris’ behaviour and will vote against the Conservatives come what may. But Boris is history. Indeed, Truss is also history. What you are saying is that no matter how well Sunak at al do over the next couple of years you have already decided to vote them out no matter how dire the alternative looks as some sort of punishment for them. Voting out a successful government, based on historical behaviour of people no longer there, for an unknown quantity is, quite frankly, just bonkers. The only people who will be punished is the general public. It’s just emotional b
ks.
Now I can believe quite a number of people will vote that way but I will never be persuaded that it is a remotely sensible or rational way of proceeding. If that puts me at odds with the majority then so be it, I can deal with that because, quite frankly, I will have to whatever government comes along.
Now, if in the meantime the government makes a complete Horlicks of things and Starmer, somehow, finds a way to emerge from his malaise and gather a team of vaguely credible MPs around him with a manifesto that is not a re-write of the previous one then I might just be persuaded to vote for them as unlikely as that may seem.
Stretching the imagination further, Ed Davey (who, I hear you cry!) might do the same thing but that is probably stretching things too far.
I’m not really sure what you’re arguing as you’ve just re-stated your position again. I’m pretty clear where you stand and think it’s also pretty clear where I stand so short of blowhard grandstanding, I’m unsure what you’re trying to accomplish.It is in no way a “weird take”. You stated you were not prepared to put up with, essentially, Boris’ behaviour and will vote against the Conservatives come what may. But Boris is history. Indeed, Truss is also history. What you are saying is that no matter how well Sunak at al do over the next couple of years you have already decided to vote them out no matter how dire the alternative looks as some sort of punishment for them. Voting out a successful government, based on historical behaviour of people no longer there, for an unknown quantity is, quite frankly, just bonkers. The only people who will be punished is the general public. It’s just emotional b
ks.Now I can believe quite a number of people will vote that way but I will never be persuaded that it is a remotely sensible or rational way of proceeding. If that puts me at odds with the majority then so be it, I can deal with that because, quite frankly, I will have to whatever government comes along.
Now, if in the meantime the government makes a complete Horlicks of things and Starmer, somehow, finds a way to emerge from his malaise and gather a team of vaguely credible MPs around him with a manifesto that is not a re-write of the previous one then I might just be persuaded to vote for them as unlikely as that may seem.
Stretching the imagination further, Ed Davey (who, I hear you cry!) might do the same thing but that is probably stretching things too far.
As I said, two types of people.
skwdenyer said:
You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
That's about the best summation of why we should never, ever elect a Labour Goverment again ! (That and past disasters).OTOH , from the other end, given that we have no idea what Starmer actually believes in (having stood Squarely behind Cobyn, then disowned him and given the current absolute absence of any policy), once again, plainly they are not the answer !
Disastrous said:
I’m not really sure what you’re arguing as you’ve just re-stated your position again. I’m pretty clear where you stand and think it’s also pretty clear where I stand so short of blowhard grandstanding, I’m unsure what you’re trying to accomplish.
As I said, two types of people.
I’m pretty sure you know what I’m arguing, you give it away with the attempts at insults such as “weird take” and “blowhard grandstanding”. Playing the man not the ball is a sure sign that an argument has been lost.As I said, two types of people.
Garvin said:
Disastrous said:
I’m not really sure what you’re arguing as you’ve just re-stated your position again. I’m pretty clear where you stand and think it’s also pretty clear where I stand so short of blowhard grandstanding, I’m unsure what you’re trying to accomplish.
As I said, two types of people.
I’m pretty sure you know what I’m arguing, you give it away with the attempts at insults such as “weird take” and “blowhard grandstanding”. Playing the man not the ball is a sure sign that an argument has been lost.As I said, two types of people.
As I said, you just said the same thing, again, but more verbose. I don’t know what the point is as you clearly aren’t going to convince me, not because I think you’re wrong or thick or whatever, but because I think we just have fundamentally different views on life/risk/unknowns.
turbobloke said:
Hungrymc said:
Competence is off course a key issue. But competence means different things depending on the desired outcomes, which is where values become important again.
Can't disagree with values being important. S600BSB said:
turbobloke said:
Hungrymc said:
Competence is off course a key issue. But competence means different things depending on the desired outcomes, which is where values become important again.
Can't disagree with values being important. Self-serving muppetry in all its unwelcome guises.
Wombat3 said:
skwdenyer said:
You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
That's about the best summation of why we should never, ever elect a Labour Goverment again ! (That and past disasters).OTOH , from the other end, given that we have no idea what Starmer actually believes in (having stood Squarely behind Cobyn, then disowned him and given the current absolute absence of any policy), once again, plainly they are not the answer !
...ever!
You silly fan boy.
Perhaps choose not to vote Tory ever again until they prove that they can be honest and trustworthy enough not to steal from the public purse? If thirteen years of this slow motion car crash isn't enough to make you at least sit on your hands in a GE you have left the orbit of democracy you are advocating for a single party state. Votes should indeed be earned you cannot convince me that the Tories have done anything but operate in the best interests of themselves, their chums and their sponsors.
Of course if you happen to be a multi millionaire (especially of the Russian persuasion) you should definitely vote blue.
Rumblestripe said:
Wombat3 said:
skwdenyer said:
You shouldn’t select a Govt based upon “results” - you should choose based on whether you trust their instincts & beliefs to make good decisions, most especially in extremis.
That's about the best summation of why we should never, ever elect a Labour Goverment again ! (That and past disasters).OTOH , from the other end, given that we have no idea what Starmer actually believes in (having stood Squarely behind Cobyn, then disowned him and given the current absolute absence of any policy), once again, plainly they are not the answer !
...ever!
You silly fan boy.
Perhaps choose not to vote Tory ever again until they prove that they can be honest and trustworthy enough not to steal from the public purse? If thirteen years of this slow motion car crash isn't enough to make you at least sit on your hands in a GE you have left the orbit of democracy you are advocating for a single party state. Votes should indeed be earned you cannot convince me that the Tories have done anything but operate in the best interests of themselves, their chums and their sponsors.
Of course if you happen to be a multi millionaire (especially of the Russian persuasion) you should definitely vote blue.
The single point made is that just because you don't like the Tories is no reason to vote Labour either, especially given previous experience (if you can remember it). There has been absolutely NOTHING to recommend voting Labour in my lifetime and the current lot are nowhere near good enough to change that.
https://twitter.com/MarieAnnUK/status/163736674285...
Oh dear the rehab tour isn't going too well
I don't think Bojo, Braverman et al have any concept of how much they energise young people against what they represent
Oh dear the rehab tour isn't going too well
I don't think Bojo, Braverman et al have any concept of how much they energise young people against what they represent
Edited by cgt2 on Sunday 19th March 19:03
cgt2 said:
https://twitter.com/MarieAnnUK/status/163736674285...
Oh dear the rehab tour isn't going too well
I don't think Bojo, Braverman et al have any concept of how much they energise young people against what they represent
Did they get the wrong PM? wasn't it Cameron with the penchant for porcine. Do they not teach kids anything these days? Oh dear the rehab tour isn't going too well
I don't think Bojo, Braverman et al have any concept of how much they energise young people against what they represent
Edited by cgt2 on Sunday 19th March 19:03
edited to add... and the video is from 2017...
Edited by Vanden Saab on Sunday 19th March 19:59
cgt2 said:
S600BSB said:
So hope he gets recalled and booted out by the good people of Uxbridge! Would stay up for that count!
He's probably hoping it happens gives him more time to grift millions overseashttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64569598
"It comes on top of almost £1.8m he has registered since leaving office for nine speeches delivered in the US, India, Portugal, the UK and Singapore."
soon to be ex-mp giving his best wookie speech now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-650254...
He really has zero shame.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-650254...
He really has zero shame.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff