Watching Zahawi on Marr, he clearly doesn’t understand other factors on exponential growth. He suggests 1 million cases by the end of the month means 2 million three days later, then 4 three days after that. Keep going, we’re all dead by the 30th jan. Yes exponential rise at first, but it ALWAYS slows. Is he spinning a line to get the message across, or does he believe what he is saying/has been told?
This 1m number is annoying. It seems to have been plucked out of thin air as it is a big round number.
A couple of days ago Sky reported the UKHSA as correcting it to 1m cumulative cases by the end of the month. Which is even weirder as that is fairly similar to current run rate and run rate for last few months in the first place.
Today we are back to ministers using it as 1m cases on a given day.
I think you are on the money. It a suspiciously large, easy number. I’m not saying it’s impossible for 31st dec having 1,000,000 new cases, but I think there is more chance of me winning the GP thus afternoon. There is a lack of clarity in the messaging. Assuming the ons figures are about right, probably around a million people in the U.K. would test positive today. But that’s not what they are saying (I think).
Balloux is astonished how fast SA rose and is now falling. Or appears to be.
I wonder whether Michael Levitt has done a gompertz curve for it yet?
What's interesting is the Omicron has a much shorter incubation period which could also be related to a much shorter infection time and it's seeming mildness in already immune people. Essentially people with immunity can recognise it and eradicate it before it becomes serious. Triple jabbed people have got enough antibodies to neutralise it completely.
Once again we come down to the same issue, the UK government is ramping Omicron to move the media agenda away from dodgy parties.
It is actually SAGE most ramping Omicron and pushing for even harder restrictions in January, the government is holding the line against a further lockdown and only introducing vaxports for nightclubs and large events while continuing to encourage people to get their boosters. Boosters being the best protection against symptomatic Omicron
Watching Zahawi on Marr, he clearly doesn’t understand other factors on exponential growth. He suggests 1 million cases by the end of the month means 2 million three days later, then 4 three days after that. Keep going, we’re all dead by the 30th jan. Yes exponential rise at first, but it ALWAYS slows. Is he spinning a line to get the message across, or does he believe what he is saying/has been told?
Yeah, that particular line of argument was a bit ... o_o
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
Hysteria?
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
He put extra money into the NHS and furlough and UC anyway during the lockdowns
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Starmer took exactly that line on Marr. Marr pushed, but Starmer was firm. We're on the science.
Credit where it is due. Labour have been quite grown up about this.
Perhaps SKS could make a humorous virtue of his perceived boringness like Steve David and James Milner have in the past? Done in the right way a self-deprecating “Captain Sensible” image could be a winner.
Yes, a joke about being first choice for "designated driver" would set the right tone. He is never going to be a standout for quick wit, so he should play the role of straight man, and set the scene for others to get in the zingers.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Nadhim Zahawi's line that the staff in the No10 quiz were there because "they had to respond to a national emergency" is in no way undermined by the fact that one of them is wearing tinsel. https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1469967317773828099
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
All the evidence suggests the vaccine rollout was a success despite BoZo
No, it really doesn't.
Indeed. I saw the big man in a lab in his lab coat in Oxford inventing vaccines to save the world. The camera never lies. Any quiz show host worth their salt knows this.
A brief story as an aside. Finally got home at half 9 last night (having left at 06:15...). This morning lets get onto Caledonian Sleeper to get a refund on tonight's ticket. Website says if you can't travel due to Covid please call us before noon on the day of travel to apply for a refund.
Guess what time their call centre opens today...
Not that it makes a difference as I think my ticket type is non-refundable. So I suspect I am going to get "its too late to apply for a refund" and "you can't have a refund despite us asking you to apply for one"... Giggling already
Perhaps SKS could make a humorous virtue of his perceived boringness like Steve David and James Milner have in the past? Done in the right way a self-deprecating “Captain Sensible” image could be a winner.
Not Flash, just Gordon. It works until Mandelson thinks up some Blair-lite stunt that undermines the image. The Conservatives did it with Theresa May, and arguably William Hague.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2023/4 they would govern for the priorities of Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Starmer took exactly that line on Marr. Marr pushed, but Starmer was firm. We're on the science.
Credit where it is due. Labour have been quite grown up about this.
It's about bringing about a Labour government. SKS doesn't seem to want to.
Otherwise there would be many ways of opposing the vote.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
The sub-sample size is only 115, but Opinium has Labour leading by 50% - 37% in seats gained by the Tories in 2019. Labour are also only just behind, by 38% - 35% in seats held by the Tories in 2019.
The subsample size is 425 unweighted and 420 weighted:
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
This is how news stories develop. Its the "does it have legs" test - if the story is going to keep going it walks / runs along under its own steam pulling in new information and new angles.
The "gotcha" is that they have caught him forcing people to die alone / give birth alone / live miserably whilst he and his ignore the rules they have imposed and carry on like they are ordained by God to do whatever they like.
People are outraged. Viscerally. Which superheats whatever new angles and information break. Propelling the story along every faster. The only way out for the PM is for a bigger story to replace it, but as Covid is powering up and lockdown is in the wings waiting to come on, this one will run and run getting bigger and bigger.
Does it ever cross your mind that the way our media "develop" news stories is just a little bit sick and self interested, feeding on themselves and eventually eating themselves?
Had no idea you had written today's Mail on Sunday front page.
A brief story as an aside. Finally got home at half 9 last night (having left at 06:15...). This morning lets get onto Caledonian Sleeper to get a refund on tonight's ticket. Website says if you can't travel due to Covid please call us before noon on the day of travel to apply for a refund.
Guess what time their call centre opens today...
Not that it makes a difference as I think my ticket type is non-refundable. So I suspect I am going to get "its too late to apply for a refund" and "you can't have a refund despite us asking you to apply for one"... Giggling already
Do you still have travel insurance? You might be able to claim on that for a UK trip.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
He put extra money into the NHS and furlough and UC anyway during the lockdowns
No, it really, really isn't. His job is to govern for all of us, albeit he will take into account the views of his party.
Nadhim Zahawi's line that the staff in the No10 quiz were there because "they had to respond to a national emergency" is in no way undermined by the fact that one of them is wearing tinsel. https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1469967317773828099
It seems some people are absolutely joyless Grinches.
Your man has been banged to rights.
You ( and/or your fellow Brexiteers) have nonetheless given me second thoughts over Johnson's departure by suggesting he could be replaced by Steve "hardman" Baker.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Like you I don't care too much whether people had parties a year ago and I might prefer discussion of Johnson's unfitness to govern revolved around things that have mattered and do matter.
Johnson's flaws go far beyond not being a family man. He has no concept of the truth, doesn't distinguish right from wrong, is utterly irresponsible, has a despotic tendency and is chaotic in his dealings. Nothing has changed in the past couple of weeks. All of this was obvious from the off to anyone paying attention and that cares.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls in general. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
The booster program is a largely unsung success, both in the forward contracts that again made vaccine available and in the speed of the roll out. We are doing over 400k a day now and have been for a while. The pressure put on the JVCI in relation to the vaccination of youngsters was brave and proved to be correct.
The furlough scheme and the grants were a spectacular success, greatly mitigating the incredible damage that lockdowns and interruptions to international trade have done to our economy.
As a result of that we have pretty much full employment and increasing real wages. Our economy will be back to pre-Covid levels this month which again is a remarkable success story.
We have real opportunities going forward on the back of our massive investment in both vaccines and testing which can be an important new industry for us.
There are many failures too and I completely agree that Boris is both chaotic and incapable of dealing with detail.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your party's voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your party's voters want first
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
We have had a wave of infection as a result of exiting restrictions on social contact. An exit wave.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
All the evidence suggests the vaccine rollout was a success despite BoZo
No, it really doesn't.
Indeed. I saw the big man in a lab in his lab coat in Oxford inventing vaccines to save the world. The camera never lies. Any quiz show host worth their salt knows this.
I thought it was a rather feisty woman who did it?
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
This is how news stories develop. Its the "does it have legs" test - if the story is going to keep going it walks / runs along under its own steam pulling in new information and new angles.
The "gotcha" is that they have caught him forcing people to die alone / give birth alone / live miserably whilst he and his ignore the rules they have imposed and carry on like they are ordained by God to do whatever they like.
People are outraged. Viscerally. Which superheats whatever new angles and information break. Propelling the story along every faster. The only way out for the PM is for a bigger story to replace it, but as Covid is powering up and lockdown is in the wings waiting to come on, this one will run and run getting bigger and bigger.
Does it ever cross your mind that the way our media "develop" news stories is just a little bit sick and self interested, feeding on themselves and eventually eating themselves?
Had no idea you had written today's Mail on Sunday front page.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
He put extra money into the NHS and furlough and UC anyway during the lockdowns
No, it really, really isn't. His job is to govern for all of us, albeit he will take into account the views of his party.
And if he goes against the views of his party that elected him then he will be removed from post
That's not quite true. Maggie Throup was on Question Time a couple of weeks ago. She was simply dreadful, so has probably been kept off the airwaves since then. Not a good look when the Vaccines Minister, who should be spending most of her time cajoling people to have vaccines/boosters, is deprived of the oxygen of publicity.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
He put extra money into the NHS and furlough and UC anyway during the lockdowns
No, it really, really isn't. His job is to govern for all of us, albeit he will take into account the views of his party.
And if he goes against the views of his party that elected him then he will be removed from post
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
Yes, and the troops are getting mutinous, or at least those who haven't deserted already. I am increasingly getting this sort of vibe from our nurses and junior doctors, not least from Mrs Foxy:
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
We did have an exit wave. It was an exit from restrictions, so it's automatically an exit. Just what else did you think exit referred to if not exiting restrictions?
Furthermore sustained is a wave since we had schools closed at the start of the wave, then schools open at the end of it. Had it not been a wave we should have seen cases lower while schools were closed then increasing when schools opened. That cases remained consistent is proof that the wave happened.
So both an exit and a wave. ✅✅
We don't face the same Omicron surge as others as others will have lesser natural immunity to us as they foolishly avoided the exit wave. So there will be much less risk here to other people's families than if we'd followed your panicking about the exit wave.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
You haven’t seen the Clive Owen character yet? He plays it brilliantly
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
That's not quite true. Maggie Throup was on Question Time a couple of weeks ago. She was simply dreadful, so has probably been kept off the airwaves since then. Not a good look when the Vaccines Minister, who should be spending most of her time cajoling people to have vaccines/boosters, is deprived of the oxygen of publicity.
She was probably appointed, in part at least, because she's a biomedical scientist by training, and early employment. Which, IMHO, makes it worse.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
Yes, and the troops are getting mutinous, or at least those who haven't deserted already. I am increasingly getting this sort of vibe from our nurses and junior doctors, not least from Mrs Foxy:
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
Hysteria?
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
Paterson was a serious misjudgement, both in terms of sticking up for a prat who wouldn't recognise a conflict of interest if it poleaxed him and in seeking to do so by undermining the standards commissioner. I think that showed his very considerable weaknesses at their worst.
Kabul I am not so sure about. The dog thing was morally offensive when vulnerable people were being left to die but the real sting was that we were shown once again to be totally subject to the whims and eccentricities of the Americans incapable of imposing our own will on the world. We wanted to blame someone for our inability to tidy up the world like an Economist article and for what amounted to a humiliating defeat.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Like you I don't care too much whether people had parties a year ago and I might prefer discussion of Johnson's unfitness to govern revolved around things that have mattered and do matter.
Johnson's flaws go far beyond not being a family man. He has no concept of the truth, doesn't distinguish right from wrong, is utterly irresponsible, has a despotic tendency and is chaotic in his dealings. Nothing has changed in the past couple of weeks. All of this was obvious from the off to anyone paying attention and that cares.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls in general. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
The booster program is a largely unsung success, both in the forward contracts that again made vaccine available and in the speed of the roll out. We are doing over 400k a day now and have been for a while. The pressure put on the JVCI in relation to the vaccination of youngsters was brave and proved to be correct.
The furlough scheme and the grants were a spectacular success, greatly mitigating the incredible damage that lockdowns and interruptions to international trade have done to our economy.
As a result of that we have pretty much full employment and increasing real wages. Our economy will be back to pre-Covid levels this month which again is a remarkable success story.
We have real opportunities going forward on the back of our massive investment in both vaccines and testing which can be an important new industry for us.
There are many failures too and I completely agree that Boris is both chaotic and incapable of dealing with detail.
Paragraph 1. There is criticism that it was late and slow when it started and is ramping up now because of the late fear of Omicron.
Paragraph 2. The jury is out here. Anecdotally I would suggest there were more efficient schemes that could have been considered.
Paragraph 3. You have added two and two to make twenty two.
Paragraph 4. Maybe.
Paragraph 5. Correct, but when the alternative is Steve Baker, these just seem like charming character quirks.
Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi opens up the prospect of the Tories losing the North Shropshire byelection on Thursday - a seat they've held since 1832 and with a current majority of 23,000. He tells T&G: "Byelections have been historically used as a protest vote because... https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1469981003938738180
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
You haven’t seen the Clive Owen character yet? He plays it brilliantly
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Like you I don't care too much whether people had parties a year ago and I might prefer discussion of Johnson's unfitness to govern revolved around things that have mattered and do matter.
Johnson's flaws go far beyond not being a family man. He has no concept of the truth, doesn't distinguish right from wrong, is utterly irresponsible, has a despotic tendency and is chaotic in his dealings. Nothing has changed in the past couple of weeks. All of this was obvious from the off to anyone paying attention and that cares.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls in general. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
The booster program is a largely unsung success, both in the forward contracts that again made vaccine available and in the speed of the roll out. We are doing over 400k a day now and have been for a while. The pressure put on the JVCI in relation to the vaccination of youngsters was brave and proved to be correct.
The furlough scheme and the grants were a spectacular success, greatly mitigating the incredible damage that lockdowns and interruptions to international trade have done to our economy.
As a result of that we have pretty much full employment and increasing real wages. Our economy will be back to pre-Covid levels this month which again is a remarkable success story.
We have real opportunities going forward on the back of our massive investment in both vaccines and testing which can be an important new industry for us.
There are many failures too and I completely agree that Boris is both chaotic and incapable of dealing with detail.
The furlough scheme was good, although not substantially different from what other countries in Europe were doing. Some of those programmes were more cost-effective. I'm not sure I would put that down as Johnson's "call" - but fair enough.
The UK is continuing to underperform its peers economically - more to do with Brexit (which IS Johnson's call at least in how it is being implemented) than Covid - with further bad numbers coming out just last Friday.
Isabel Hardman: Last week marked a fundamental shift in the way the Conservatives relate to their leader. Tory MPs are now actively discussing who could be the next big winner, as they no longer have confidence in this prime minister’s relationship with the electorate.
Perhaps even more worryingly, a number of Conservative MPs report falling trust in the vaccine programme. This should seriously concern Johnson because he has been banking on the goodwill from the success of the vaccine programme. It seems he may have taken so much political credit from this one thing that has gone well for the government that he is now in the red.
One MP who understands the party well says: “There’s a view that a line has been crossed and it’s about competency and respect for the office of prime minister.” Another senior Tory explains: “His judgment is so poor and it’s a clear pattern here, with at least three things – Dominic Cummings, Owen Paterson and now the Christmas party – which creates a narrative rather than a sense these are one-off events. They know now there will always be a next one.”
Even Johnson’s supporters tell me they have given him three months to turn things around before it’s too late. Johnson does still have his cabinet backers, despite the list of ambitious ministers.
Even if Downing Street has a relaunch in the new year with new staff and a better comms operation, Johnson won’t have changed. That was one of the things that attracted Tories and voters to him in the first place: he’s not someone who rebrands himself according to the political weather, but is his own man who doesn’t care if people see his flaws. But that attribute can be in itself a flaw because MPs don’t have faith that he will become someone they can trust again. And he is so used to getting away with it, he doesn’t seem to realise how vulnerable he is.
A brief story as an aside. Finally got home at half 9 last night (having left at 06:15...). This morning lets get onto Caledonian Sleeper to get a refund on tonight's ticket. Website says if you can't travel due to Covid please call us before noon on the day of travel to apply for a refund.
Guess what time their call centre opens today...
Not that it makes a difference as I think my ticket type is non-refundable. So I suspect I am going to get "its too late to apply for a refund" and "you can't have a refund despite us asking you to apply for one"... Giggling already
Do you still have travel insurance? You might be able to claim on that for a UK trip.
I do but as the policy excess is half the value of the ticket I'm not that bothered. I don't expect to get a refund from CalSleeper but I will have some fun sticking it to them over their stupid website.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
I've been saying this for ages. Governments don't win by elections.
Except Old Bexley and Sidcup, presumably.
Which just goes to show what a poor state the Labour Party is in. As will NS if the Lib Dems win it instead of them, considering Labour had over seventeen thousand voters there recently.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
All the evidence suggests the vaccine rollout was a success despite BoZo
No, it really doesn't.
Indeed. I saw the big man in a lab in his lab coat in Oxford inventing vaccines to save the world. The camera never lies. Any quiz show host worth their salt knows this.
I thought it was a rather feisty woman who did it?
That grandstander Gilbert? I never saw her in her lab in her lab coat inventing anything on the TV news.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
Starmer took exactly that line on Marr. Marr pushed, but Starmer was firm. We're on the science.
Credit where it is due. Labour have been quite grown up about this.
It's about bringing about a Labour government. SKS doesn't seem to want to.
Otherwise there would be many ways of opposing the vote.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
This is how news stories develop. Its the "does it have legs" test - if the story is going to keep going it walks / runs along under its own steam pulling in new information and new angles.
The "gotcha" is that they have caught him forcing people to die alone / give birth alone / live miserably whilst he and his ignore the rules they have imposed and carry on like they are ordained by God to do whatever they like.
People are outraged. Viscerally. Which superheats whatever new angles and information break. Propelling the story along every faster. The only way out for the PM is for a bigger story to replace it, but as Covid is powering up and lockdown is in the wings waiting to come on, this one will run and run getting bigger and bigger.
Does it ever cross your mind that the way our media "develop" news stories is just a little bit sick and self interested, feeding on themselves and eventually eating themselves?
Had no idea you had written today's Mail on Sunday front page.
Not even seen it RP. Are you still stuck in York?
No, turned round and came all the way back yesterday. Home for 21:30 having left at 06:20 - a long and pointless day. Mrs RP feels godawful but isn't seriously ill at the moment.
Please will you now stop with your anti-science nonsense? Note that this is NOT a call for a particular policy. There are still valid schools of thought that say "masks work, but we shouldn't mandate them". But anyone who says masks don't work is a liar.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
They would say both but of course in reality the latter most of all, hence this government has delivered Brexit, raised NI not inheritance tax or income tax nor imposed a wealth tax etc despite the ferocious opposition of opposition party voters to those policies
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
They would say both but of course in reality the latter most of all, hence this government has delivered Brexit, raised NI not inheritance tax or income tax nor imposed a wealth tax etc despite the ferocious opposition of opposition party voters to those policies
Oh dear, oh dear. This says it all really. Selfish Tories governing for their voters only.
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
Those months of "weakening" are why our numbers are not increasing in the same way as so many on the continent. As Whitty explained over a year ago the object of government policy is to flatten the curve and we have done that quite brilliantly. Tens of thousands of lives will be saved as a result.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
Hysteria?
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
Paterson was a serious misjudgement, both in terms of sticking up for a prat who wouldn't recognise a conflict of interest if it poleaxed him and in seeking to do so by undermining the standards commissioner. I think that showed his very considerable weaknesses at their worst.
Kabul I am not so sure about. The dog thing was morally offensive when vulnerable people were being left to die but the real sting was that we were shown once again to be totally subject to the whims and eccentricities of the Americans incapable of imposing our own will on the world. We wanted to blame someone for our inability to tidy up the world like an Economist article and for what amounted to a humiliating defeat.
Bizarre. Corruption and lies glossed over as not filling the right forms in
Almost everybody requires as an absolute precondition basic honesty and integrity of anyone they employ or whose services they retain, let alone people they want to govern them.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
Hysteria?
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
Paterson was a serious misjudgement, both in terms of sticking up for a prat who wouldn't recognise a conflict of interest if it poleaxed him and in seeking to do so by undermining the standards commissioner. I think that showed his very considerable weaknesses at their worst.
Kabul I am not so sure about. The dog thing was morally offensive when vulnerable people were being left to die but the real sting was that we were shown once again to be totally subject to the whims and eccentricities of the Americans incapable of imposing our own will on the world. We wanted to blame someone for our inability to tidy up the world like an Economist article and for what amounted to a humiliating defeat.
You’re missing out Brexit, which is the largest reason why Boris got the majority he did. Get caught out lying about the smaller stuff (though the various contexts of that smaller stuff aren’t small at all), and your new recruits to the cause start wondering if that was all bullshit, too. In the absence of the promised broad sunlit uplands, not a few will conclude it was.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
This is how news stories develop. Its the "does it have legs" test - if the story is going to keep going it walks / runs along under its own steam pulling in new information and new angles.
The "gotcha" is that they have caught him forcing people to die alone / give birth alone / live miserably whilst he and his ignore the rules they have imposed and carry on like they are ordained by God to do whatever they like.
People are outraged. Viscerally. Which superheats whatever new angles and information break. Propelling the story along every faster. The only way out for the PM is for a bigger story to replace it, but as Covid is powering up and lockdown is in the wings waiting to come on, this one will run and run getting bigger and bigger.
Does it ever cross your mind that the way our media "develop" news stories is just a little bit sick and self interested, feeding on themselves and eventually eating themselves?
Had no idea you had written today's Mail on Sunday front page.
Not even seen it RP. Are you still stuck in York?
No, turned round and came all the way back yesterday. Home for 21:30 having left at 06:20 - a long and pointless day. Mrs RP feels godawful but isn't seriously ill at the moment.
Best wishes to both of you. I fear you might not be feeling so well ere long too, but, if Mrs C's and my experiences are anything not go by, it will pass. Plenty of (non-alcoholic0 fluids and don't try anything too stressful. Some alcoholic fluids might be a good idea, but not too many!
One thing I haven't seen analysed is the difference between what the laws actually said at the time and the guidelines. The latter are not the law.
Are people sure that the two aren't being confused? The police were often confused by this as well, one reason why so many Covid prosecutions were dropped by the CPS?
Last year on 29 December we had a pub quiz at Daughter's pub. I was quiz mistress. Tables were set the right distance apart with all the rule of 6 and mask rules in place. We checked the rules at the time. Maybe it was because we were in a different tier, I dunno.
Appreciate that this doesn't explain the political impact. And there is also the question of the spirit of the rules. But, much as I dislike the PM, there are far worse things his government has done, than him hosting a quiz in the office via Zoom.
I also hope to God for Labour's sake than no Labour MP flouted the rules or the spirit of them at any point last autumn or Xmas.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
This is how news stories develop. Its the "does it have legs" test - if the story is going to keep going it walks / runs along under its own steam pulling in new information and new angles.
The "gotcha" is that they have caught him forcing people to die alone / give birth alone / live miserably whilst he and his ignore the rules they have imposed and carry on like they are ordained by God to do whatever they like.
People are outraged. Viscerally. Which superheats whatever new angles and information break. Propelling the story along every faster. The only way out for the PM is for a bigger story to replace it, but as Covid is powering up and lockdown is in the wings waiting to come on, this one will run and run getting bigger and bigger.
Does it ever cross your mind that the way our media "develop" news stories is just a little bit sick and self interested, feeding on themselves and eventually eating themselves?
Had no idea you had written today's Mail on Sunday front page.
Not even seen it RP. Are you still stuck in York?
No, turned round and came all the way back yesterday. Home for 21:30 having left at 06:20 - a long and pointless day. Mrs RP feels godawful but isn't seriously ill at the moment.
At least you missed the snow here. All the best to Mrs RP. Travelling when you are ill is just horrible.
I've been saying this for ages. Governments don't win by elections.
I thought someone linked to a twitter thread on by-elections which stated that governments won half of the by-election seats they were defending. Is that not true?
If they win half, then it follows that they are more likely to win a by-election in a safe seat, such as North Shropshire, than lose it. And so, if they lose it, this demonstrates that they are more unpopular than usual for a government.
Can you show that there is any flaw in fact or reasoning in what I have written?
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
Hysteria?
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
Paterson was a serious misjudgement, both in terms of sticking up for a prat who wouldn't recognise a conflict of interest if it poleaxed him and in seeking to do so by undermining the standards commissioner. I think that showed his very considerable weaknesses at their worst.
Kabul I am not so sure about. The dog thing was morally offensive when vulnerable people were being left to die but the real sting was that we were shown once again to be totally subject to the whims and eccentricities of the Americans incapable of imposing our own will on the world. We wanted to blame someone for our inability to tidy up the world like an Economist article and for what amounted to a humiliating defeat.
Lets pick these apart: 1. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated. This is false. Whilst he has repeatedly lied to the Commons and the cabinet office by saying he paid for it himself, it is a fact that the money was not his. The party has just been slapped with a big fine for illegally channeling money to him for the redecoration
2. Paterson was a serious misjudgement. True, but for the opposite reason you state. Paterson was used as a patsy, the excuse to remove the commissioner who was threatening to dig into his misdeeds over wallpapergate
3. Kabul. Nothing screams incompetence and irrelevance as our series of fuck ups. Not only were we at the whim of the Americans as you say, but we managed to betray the trust of the people we owed and instead shipped out a load of animals cos Carrie likes puppies. The "it was the PM's PPS acting in her personal capacity as a constituency MP" excuse is laughable. So much for the "Global Britain" bullshit they are propagating.
None of these are little stories, nor are they isolated. The government is openly corrupt, is self-serving, is built on a web of arrogance incompetence and lies and see the various abject humiliations of this country ("Kermit the Frog") as positives.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
They would say both but of course in reality the latter most of all, hence this government has delivered Brexit, raised NI not inheritance tax or income tax nor imposed a wealth tax etc despite the ferocious opposition of opposition party voters to those policies
So that's another reason why you are out of step with the Tories.
They would say they govern for everyone and you wouldn't.
I also don't think Johnson has made good calls. I can credit him with early energy on the vaccination programme, but not a lot else.
All the evidence suggests the vaccine rollout was a success despite BoZo
No, it really doesn't.
Indeed. I saw the big man in a lab in his lab coat in Oxford inventing vaccines to save the world. The camera never lies. Any quiz show host worth their salt knows this.
Are you denying the government made a series of good choices in March-June 2020 relating to the purchase of a series of vaccines, and of lubricating the process of getting them trialled and some of them manufactured? That they did not accelerate the approvals process - safely - and produce an effective roll-out process to the vulnerable?
The vaccination success involved a lot more than just inventing the vaccines, and Johnson and his government were at the heart of it. There have been a few mis-steps in the last half-year (e.g. vaccinations between 12-18), but on the whole it has been a success. And that was down to the government.
I might also add our genomics successes as well.
There's enough stuff to criticise Boris and the government for without inventing stuff.
I mean, look at the alternative: Corbyn, whose brother is an arch-antivaxxer, refuses to say if he's even been vaccinated. Can you imagine his government having driven the vaccination process as well?
"Well, yes, we've procured vaccines, but I feel for privacy reasons that I should not have to say how many we have got, to whom they have been given, or how much we bunged Venezuela for their new VenezVax."
I've been saying this for ages. Governments don't win by elections.
I thought someone linked to a twitter thread on by-elections which stated that governments won half of the by-election seats they were defending. Is that not true?
If they win half, then it follows that they are more likely to win a by-election in a safe seat, such as North Shropshire, than lose it. And so, if they lose it, this demonstrates that they are more unpopular than usual for a government.
Can you show that there is any flaw in fact or reasoning in what I have written?
Failure to update your priors? P(win_election|had_illicit_party) or something
One thing I haven't seen analysed is the difference between what the laws actually said at the time and the guidelines. The latter are not the law.
Are people sure that the two aren't being confused? The police were often confused by this as well, one reason why so many Covid prosecutions were dropped by the CPS?
Last year on 29 December we had a pub quiz at Daughter's pub. I was quiz mistress. Tables were set the right distance apart with all the rule of 6 and mask rules in place. We checked the rules at the time. Maybe it was because we were in a different tier, I dunno.
Appreciate that this doesn't explain the political impact. And there is also the question of the spirit of the rules. But, much as I dislike the PM, there are far worse things his government has done, than him hosting a quiz in the office via Zoom.
I also hope to God for Labour's sake than no Labour MP flouted the rules or the spirit of them at any point last autumn or Xmas.
Watching Zahawi on Marr, he clearly doesn’t understand other factors on exponential growth. He suggests 1 million cases by the end of the month means 2 million three days later, then 4 three days after that. Keep going, we’re all dead by the 30th jan. Yes exponential rise at first, but it ALWAYS slows. Is he spinning a line to get the message across, or does he believe what he is saying/has been told?
Have we ever seen exponential growth for more than about 2 weeks? There are always a lot of barriers to growth in the real world that slow things. Always.
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
You don't think there is a problem with the Prime Minister seeking to sell himself to the highest bidder?
He who pays the piper calls the tune. Our Prime Minister can be bought. He is desperate to be bought. It should be an embarrassment as well as an outrage.
I don't know whether it applies nationally, but several of my relatives who are in their 30s have been able to book their boosters since last night. My son-in-law managed to get his appointment for later today!
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
They would say both but of course in reality the latter most of all, hence this government has delivered Brexit, raised NI not inheritance tax or income tax nor imposed a wealth tax etc despite the ferocious opposition of opposition party voters to those policies
So that's another reason why you are out of step with the Tories.
They would say they govern for everyone and you wouldn't.
They wouldn't, because they don't. No government in a democracy ever governs for everyone as no government will ever be able to deliver policies which deliver what 100% of the voters want. That is the whole reason we have elections. It is not possible to elect a government which delivers policies which deliver for capitalists and socialists and social liberals and social conservatives and Leavers and Remainers as they are incompatible.
You can say you believe your policies will benefit everyone but they will not deliver for everyone as voters for the opposition will oppose those which do not benefit them and their ideologies
What do we think has been pixelated from the bottom centre of the photo, between the two clocks? I was assuming it was another clock but, pixelated for what reason?
I also hope to God for Labour's sake than no Labour MP flouted the rules or the spirit of them at any point last autumn or Xmas.
One of the corrosive aspects of the Coronavirus rules is that they have been so detailed, and changed so often, that it is likely that the vast majority of people will have broken at least one of them, at least once. This means that we are all vulnerable to being denounced as lawbreakers.
I suspect the media are building up a dossier of breaches by Labour MPs to be deployed at the most opportune moment.
What do we think has been pixelated from the bottom centre of the photo, between the two clocks? I was assuming it was another clock but, pixelated for what reason?
Bozza should be ejected from office on account of holding an absolutely woeful Christmas party. Even @NickPalmer ’s mince pies over zoom would be less turgid.
Where are the Prosecco-addled receptionists in their glad rags? Why no married office manager tangling with the post room supervisor under the mistletoe? Where is the sales team high “on life”?
Poor effort. We expect much, much better from our leaders.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2023/4 they would govern for the priorities of Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
Watching Zahawi on Marr, he clearly doesn’t understand other factors on exponential growth. He suggests 1 million cases by the end of the month means 2 million three days later, then 4 three days after that. Keep going, we’re all dead by the 30th jan. Yes exponential rise at first, but it ALWAYS slows. Is he spinning a line to get the message across, or does he believe what he is saying/has been told?
Have we ever seen exponential growth for more than about 2 weeks? There are always a lot of barriers to growth in the real world that slow things. Always.
Yes, as @rcs1000 always says, people implement their own NPIs and at a very high burn rate the virus runs out of viable hosts pretty quickly. We may already be there in the UK because of vaccines and prior infections.
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
You don't think there is a problem with the Prime Minister seeking to sell himself to the highest bidder?
He who pays the piper calls the tune. Our Prime Minister can be bought. He is desperate to be bought. It should be an embarrassment as well as an outrage.
Sadly, and incredibly that has been true of our last few PMs. Putin connected multi millionaires especially welcomed.
I am watching Impeachment on BBC Iplayer at the moment. It is a familiar tale about people trying to bring down someone they hated but could not beat electorally by exploiting foibles and trying to pretend that they demonstrated fundamental flaws or an unfitness to govern or whatever else they used to justify their odious behaviour.
Things really haven't changed in the last 25 years, have they?
I have to say that Sarah Poulson is absolutely brilliant as Linda Tripp. The most repulsive, vile and self interested character I have seen since GoT.
What about the possibility that someone might actually be fundamentally flawed and unfit to govern?
In an ideal world I would like to have a PM who is a good family man, who adores his wife and who lives by a strict moral code but, frankly, these are nice to haves. What we absolutely need in a leader is someone who gets the big calls right and steers us through difficult times. Boris's record on this is mixed, I don't dispute that for a moment. For every good call there is an unnecessary blunder, sometimes more than one.
But I am sick to death of this gotcha mentality in the media which means every little thing has to be the big thing and all sense of proportion is lost. There was a stunning interview by Justin Webb on Friday on the Today program where he was frothing that Labour was missing out on the chance to damage the PM by voting for new restrictions next week. The Labour Shadow gently tried to point out that what Labour was doing was supporting the recommendations of the CMO and the CSO and that just might be just a little more important than some political spat.
If I was editor of the Today program Webb would have done his last interview. It would have disgraced a red top chasing down a dodgy celebrity. For the BBC it was unacceptable.
The thing is that Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the Aldridge Prior of politics. Having a Prime Minister who is completely untrustworthy is highly damaging, even when he is telling the truth. If Johnson said that the sun will rise in the east, people would doubt it.
If the Tories want a sound family man, sober and of sound morals they only need to look to number 11.
The Chancellor who piled necessary taxes on NI instead of IT or a capital tax of some description? Who cut the benefits of the poorest to balance the books whilst protecting wealthy pensioners, again? I am a fan but no one in politics deserves adoration or unqualified admiration.
The Chancellor knows who the Tory base is (and of course he only ended the extension of a UC uplift he had given the poorest in the first place)
His job is to govern for the country as a whole and in particular for those who need the most help to live a decent life whether because of ill health, incapacity, afflictions etc. But he is not the worst and would make a good replacement if the current hysteria carries Boris away, which it might.
His job is to govern for the Tory 2019 voters who elected him with a majority of 80 first and deliver what they voted for.
This attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Rubbish.
If Labour won a majority in 2024 they would govern for Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
As I said that attitude is not going to help you achieve elected office.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
Stop sprouting rubbish, to achieve elected office you need to get the support of your party and get the voters out for your party and deliver on the priorities of your voters when in office. In any case I am already in elected office having got over 1,000 Conservative voters to vote for me, even if only at town council level.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your voters want first
The more you rant won't make what you say true. It is not.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you do wish.
You will govern above all for those who elected you, as they voted for your policies and platform. As I said you can help others who did not vote for you in terms of personal difficulty but you will not put their policy priorities over those of your party's voters.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
You should govern for everyone. No one is saying enact your opponent's policies but your own policies should be designed to benefit everyone.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
Under FPTP you govern for those who elected you and gave you a majority. Your policies are what they wanted and yes you believe they benefit everyone too even if your opponents don't but above all they benefit your voters which is why they voted for them.
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
Ok try a thought experiment.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
They would say both but of course in reality the latter most of all, hence this government has delivered Brexit, raised NI not inheritance tax or income tax nor imposed a wealth tax etc despite the ferocious opposition of opposition party voters to those policies
So that's another reason why you are out of step with the Tories.
They would say they govern for everyone and you wouldn't.
They wouldn't, because they don't. No government in a democracy ever governs for everyone as no government will ever be able to deliver policies which deliver what 100% of the voters want. That is the whole reason we have elections. It is not possible to elect a government which delivers policies which deliver for capitalists and socialists and social liberals and social conservatives and Leavers and Remainers as they are incompatible.
You can say you believe your policies will benefit everyone but they will not deliver for everyone as voters for the opposition will oppose those which do not benefit them and their ideologies
You just said that they would say they governed for everyone.
What do we think has been pixelated from the bottom centre of the photo, between the two clocks? I was assuming it was another clock but, pixelated for what reason?
Could it be a reflective surface that reveals the leaker? Someone who knows No 10 better than me says those Mirror pics are taken from the press office room. Who'd have thought throwing them under the bus would come back to haunt him. https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1469794193010798596
Another who's deleted but maintains the calibre of offender
It's surprising how many prominent lawyers are also idiots. You would have thought that there would be little overlap between the two groups, but it seems to be a requirement for the loudest of lawyers to have little sense.
One thing I haven't seen analysed is the difference between what the laws actually said at the time and the guidelines. The latter are not the law.
Are people sure that the two aren't being confused? The police were often confused by this as well, one reason why so many Covid prosecutions were dropped by the CPS?
Last year on 29 December we had a pub quiz at Daughter's pub. I was quiz mistress. Tables were set the right distance apart with all the rule of 6 and mask rules in place. We checked the rules at the time. Maybe it was because we were in a different tier, I dunno.
Appreciate that this doesn't explain the political impact. And there is also the question of the spirit of the rules. But, much as I dislike the PM, there are far worse things his government has done, than him hosting a quiz in the office via Zoom.
I also hope to God for Labour's sake than no Labour MP flouted the rules or the spirit of them at any point last autumn or Xmas.
I've been saying this for ages. Governments don't win by elections.
I thought someone linked to a twitter thread on by-elections which stated that governments won half of the by-election seats they were defending. Is that not true?
If they win half, then it follows that they are more likely to win a by-election in a safe seat, such as North Shropshire, than lose it. And so, if they lose it, this demonstrates that they are more unpopular than usual for a government.
Can you show that there is any flaw in fact or reasoning in what I have written?
Failure to update your priors? P(win_election|had_illicit_party) or something
That's consistent with making my argument, as it would mean that PT's argument is not "governments don't win by-elections" it is "fantastically unpopular governments on course to be trounced at the next general election unless they take major corrective action don't win by-elections" which is a slightly different take on the situation.
While I've advocated for a VONC I'm not expecting one in the short-term.
I expect the Lib Dems will win NS next week with a majority in the thousands, but then we're into Christmas and people will switch off from politics for a few weeks.
In January people won't be bothered about 'Last Christmas' parties anymore, they'll be bothered by what happened this Christmas and any possible Omicron restrictions in January. If the UK ends up back in lockdown then the PM must be ousted.
The UK should be almost uniquely well-placed to ride an Omicron wave without lockdown thanks to very high vaccine rates, booster rates, plus having the exit wave over the summer boosting natural immunity too. If we avoid an Omicron lockdown and other nations don't, then that could boost the government's popularity again prior to other possible news stories moving the agenda on like Article 16 being invoked.
For the bet I wouldn't take the bet either way as there's too many complications. If Boris really gets mired in worse he could jump before being pushed. Even if Boris recovers from this in January then it wouldn't pay out until potentially 2024 and there's always the possibility to have a VONC in 2023 on entirely unrelated matters.
We haven't had an exit wave. You and Max keep saying this. A sustained 40k new cases daily is neither a wave nor an exit. What we have done is maintained steady pressure on the NHS for months and months and now face the same Omicron surge as everyone else. The difference between us and everyone else is that we've had months of weakening of the health system and months of illness and death.
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
So why have the numbers in hospital been regularly higher in the likes of France and Spain than in the UK during the last six months.
What do we think has been pixelated from the bottom centre of the photo, between the two clocks? I was assuming it was another clock but, pixelated for what reason?
Could it be a reflective surface that reveals the leaker? Someone who knows No 10 better than me says those Mirror pics are taken from the press office room. Who'd have thought throwing them under the bus would come back to haunt him. https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1469794193010798596
Have we killed the myth that this was civil servants breaking the law when in reality it was Johnson's political teams?
The wallpaper nonsense is every bit as ridiculous as the parties. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated according to his wife's taste! Even worse, someone else, not the public purse, paid for it for him in the first place and might well have done so permanently if it had not come out! Even worse, the right forms were not filled in!!
You don't think there is a problem with the Prime Minister seeking to sell himself to the highest bidder?
He who pays the piper calls the tune. Our Prime Minister can be bought. He is desperate to be bought. It should be an embarrassment as well as an outrage.
What's he sold to Lord Brownlow?
He's already a CVO. I really wouldn't be terribly upset if he became a KCVO.
Comments
if he would ever confirm the bet I want with him. Struck at 800k/day.
Parties are fluff for sure and in isolation would have zero traction. But Paterson, Kabul, wallpaper all hysteria?
He put extra money into the NHS and furlough and UC anyway during the lockdowns
Yes it is standard attire. Donnez moi un grip.
It seems some people are absolutely joyless Grinches.
Guess what time their call centre opens today...
Not that it makes a difference as I think my ticket type is non-refundable. So I suspect I am going to get "its too late to apply for a refund" and "you can't have a refund despite us asking you to apply for one"... Giggling already
If Labour won a majority in 2023/4 they would govern for the priorities of Labour voters first not Tories, don't try and pretend otherwise.
That is the nature of FPTP majority governments
Otherwise there would be many ways of opposing the vote.
Don't shoot the messenger it just won't.
When you next put yourself forward in an election you'd be well advised to remember that.
https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1469977041890160649
But as its other people's families dying and not your own, you're in favour.
You ( and/or your fellow Brexiteers) have nonetheless given me second thoughts over Johnson's departure by suggesting he could be replaced by Steve "hardman" Baker.
Huzzah for Bozza!
The furlough scheme and the grants were a spectacular success, greatly mitigating the incredible damage that lockdowns and interruptions to international trade have done to our economy.
As a result of that we have pretty much full employment and increasing real wages. Our economy will be back to pre-Covid levels this month which again is a remarkable success story.
We have real opportunities going forward on the back of our massive investment in both vaccines and testing which can be an important new industry for us.
There are many failures too and I completely agree that Boris is both chaotic and incapable of dealing with detail.
You are not going to win voters who never normally support your party regardless, you can assist them in terms of personal difficulty but in terms of policy you will always vote for what your party's voters want first
She was simply dreadful, so has probably been kept off the airwaves since then.
Not a good look when the Vaccines Minister, who should be spending most of her time cajoling people to have vaccines/boosters, is deprived of the oxygen of publicity.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-wont-go-back-to-covid-wards-say-traumatised-nhs-staff-jbzqjmn6g?s=09
Furthermore sustained is a wave since we had schools closed at the start of the wave, then schools open at the end of it. Had it not been a wave we should have seen cases lower while schools were closed then increasing when schools opened. That cases remained consistent is proof that the wave happened.
So both an exit and a wave. ✅✅
We don't face the same Omicron surge as others as others will have lesser natural immunity to us as they foolishly avoided the exit wave. So there will be much less risk here to other people's families than if we'd followed your panicking about the exit wave.
If you are seeking national office telling people you will only govern for those who voted for you is not a successful strategy.
I have no idea what position you were elected to I know it was something in Essex but just giving you some advice for the future.
Please ignore it should you so wish.
Which, IMHO, makes it worse.
Otherwise you will end up with a classic case of trying to appease everyone, end up pleasing nobody as your party's voters will not vote for you anymore if your party has not deselected you first and those who did not vote for you last time will still vote for their usual party not yours anyway
The NHS is in a worse state than I feared.
This is such a transparently obvious truth that I can't believe I am typing it out.
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/1469980224200847360
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1469978597544841218
Paterson was a serious misjudgement, both in terms of sticking up for a prat who wouldn't recognise a conflict of interest if it poleaxed him and in seeking to do so by undermining the standards commissioner. I think that showed his very considerable weaknesses at their worst.
Kabul I am not so sure about. The dog thing was morally offensive when vulnerable people were being left to die but the real sting was that we were shown once again to be totally subject to the whims and eccentricities of the Americans incapable of imposing our own will on the world. We wanted to blame someone for our inability to tidy up the world like an Economist article and for what amounted to a humiliating defeat.
Paragraph 2. The jury is out here. Anecdotally I would suggest there were more efficient schemes that could have been considered.
Paragraph 3. You have added two and two to make twenty two.
Paragraph 4. Maybe.
Paragraph 5. Correct, but when the alternative is Steve Baker, these just seem like charming character quirks.
Have reviewed, Spartan Victory by Mark Francois, for today’s paper:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/spartan-victory-by-mark-francois-review-brexit-cheeky-girls-and-heartbreaking-family-tragedy-v3xjqv78f https://twitter.com/CharlotteIvers/status/1469980190881157124/photo/1
I've been saying this for ages. Governments don't win by elections.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1469981003938738180
The only governments which govern for over 50% of the population are coalition governments of multiple parties eg as we had from 2010-2015 between the Tories and LDs or as countries with PR normally have. However such coalition governments by nature dilute what you can deliver for your party's voters at the same time, while still not delivering the priorities of the voters of opposition parties who are still not in government
The UK is continuing to underperform its peers economically - more to do with Brexit (which IS Johnson's call at least in how it is being implemented) than Covid - with further bad numbers coming out just last Friday.
Oh and real wages are probably not rising.
Perhaps even more worryingly, a number of Conservative MPs report falling trust in the vaccine programme. This should seriously concern Johnson because he has been banking on the goodwill from the success of the vaccine programme. It seems he may have taken so much political credit from this one thing that has gone well for the government that he is now in the red.
One MP who understands the party well says: “There’s a view that a line has been crossed and it’s about competency and respect for the office of prime minister.” Another senior Tory explains: “His judgment is so poor and it’s a clear pattern here, with at least three things – Dominic Cummings, Owen Paterson and now the Christmas party – which creates a narrative rather than a sense these are one-off events. They know now there will always be a next one.”
Even Johnson’s supporters tell me they have given him three months to turn things around before it’s too late. Johnson does still have his cabinet backers, despite the list of ambitious ministers.
Even if Downing Street has a relaunch in the new year with new staff and a better comms operation, Johnson won’t have changed. That was one of the things that attracted Tories and voters to him in the first place: he’s not someone who rebrands himself according to the political weather, but is his own man who doesn’t care if people see his flaws. But that attribute can be in itself a flaw because MPs don’t have faith that he will become someone they can trust again. And he is so used to getting away with it, he doesn’t seem to realise how vulnerable he is.
If you asked any member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson for example, whether their government governed for everyone or for "those who elected you" what would they say.
Masks work:
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n432
Please will you now stop with your anti-science nonsense?
Note that this is NOT a call for a particular policy. There are still valid schools of thought that say "masks work, but we shouldn't mandate them". But anyone who says masks don't work is a liar.
Almost everybody requires as an absolute precondition basic honesty and integrity of anyone they employ or whose services they retain, let alone people they want to govern them.
Get caught out lying about the smaller stuff (though the various contexts of that smaller stuff aren’t small at all), and your new recruits to the cause start wondering if that was all bullshit, too. In the absence of the promised broad sunlit uplands, not a few will conclude it was.
Plenty of (non-alcoholic0 fluids and don't try anything too stressful.
Some alcoholic fluids might be a good idea, but not too many!
Are people sure that the two aren't being confused? The police were often confused by this as well, one reason why so many Covid prosecutions were dropped by the CPS?
Last year on 29 December we had a pub quiz at Daughter's pub. I was quiz mistress. Tables were set the right distance apart with all the rule of 6 and mask rules in place. We checked the rules at the time. Maybe it was because we were in a different tier, I dunno.
Appreciate that this doesn't explain the political impact. And there is also the question of the spirit of the rules. But, much as I dislike the PM, there are far worse things his government has done, than him hosting a quiz in the office via Zoom.
I also hope to God for Labour's sake than no Labour MP flouted the rules or the spirit of them at any point last autumn or Xmas.
If they win half, then it follows that they are more likely to win a by-election in a safe seat, such as North Shropshire, than lose it. And so, if they lose it, this demonstrates that they are more unpopular than usual for a government.
Can you show that there is any flaw in fact or reasoning in what I have written?
1. Boris paid for his publicly owned flat to be redecorated. This is false. Whilst he has repeatedly lied to the Commons and the cabinet office by saying he paid for it himself, it is a fact that the money was not his. The party has just been slapped with a big fine for illegally channeling money to him for the redecoration
2. Paterson was a serious misjudgement. True, but for the opposite reason you state. Paterson was used as a patsy, the excuse to remove the commissioner who was threatening to dig into his misdeeds over wallpapergate
3. Kabul. Nothing screams incompetence and irrelevance as our series of fuck ups. Not only were we at the whim of the Americans as you say, but we managed to betray the trust of the people we owed and instead shipped out a load of animals cos Carrie likes puppies. The "it was the PM's PPS acting in her personal capacity as a constituency MP" excuse is laughable. So much for the "Global Britain" bullshit they are propagating.
None of these are little stories, nor are they isolated. The government is openly corrupt, is self-serving, is built on a web of arrogance incompetence and lies and see the various abject humiliations of this country ("Kermit the Frog") as positives.
They would say they govern for everyone and you wouldn't.
The vaccination success involved a lot more than just inventing the vaccines, and Johnson and his government were at the heart of it. There have been a few mis-steps in the last half-year (e.g. vaccinations between 12-18), but on the whole it has been a success. And that was down to the government.
I might also add our genomics successes as well.
There's enough stuff to criticise Boris and the government for without inventing stuff.
I mean, look at the alternative: Corbyn, whose brother is an arch-antivaxxer, refuses to say if he's even been vaccinated. Can you imagine his government having driven the vaccination process as well?
"Well, yes, we've procured vaccines, but I feel for privacy reasons that I should not have to say how many we have got, to whom they have been given, or how much we bunged Venezuela for their new VenezVax."
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/review-of-local-restriction-tiers-17-december-2020
Also, remember that people have been prosecuted and fined for breaches last December in the last fortnight.
He who pays the piper calls the tune. Our Prime Minister can be bought. He is desperate to be bought. It should be an embarrassment as well as an outrage.
You can say you believe your policies will benefit everyone but they will not deliver for everyone as voters for the opposition will oppose those which do not benefit them and their ideologies
I suspect the media are building up a dossier of breaches by Labour MPs to be deployed at the most opportune moment.
Where are the Prosecco-addled receptionists in their glad rags? Why no married office manager tangling with the post room supervisor under the mistletoe? Where is the sales team high “on life”?
Poor effort. We expect much, much better from our leaders.
Someone who knows No 10 better than me says those Mirror pics are taken from the press office room. Who'd have thought throwing them under the bus would come back to haunt him.
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1469794193010798596
They voted on independence from France in both 2020 and 2018, rejecting it both times.
https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20211211-new-caledonia-votes-in-tense-final-referendum-on-independence-from-france
We will have another quiz this Xmas as well. They are great fun and I get to show off as well, frustrated actress that I am.
Labour really ought to be winning the Shropshire by-election next week.
He's already a CVO. I really wouldn't be terribly upset if he became a KCVO.
A GCVO would just be a step too far though.