Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The issue that won’t go away – moves to oust Johnson – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited June 5 in General
The issue that won’t go away – moves to oust Johnson – politicalbetting.com

NEW:  Conservative MPs war-gaming how a rebellion against Boris Johnson might play out are worried the PM could respond to a slim victory in a party vote of confidence by calling a general election. Story to follow…

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,101
    first
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,821
    The FLSOJ is on course to lose his seat, he won't call an early election.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,357
    edited May 31
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,047
    Curse the new thread:
    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    As a Spurs fan it all feels very odd that we've already signed two players before the window has properly opened and we've got two likely signings in Spence and Bastoni to be completed in the next week or so and 3-4 more to come.

    Baby Jen truly has been born into a different era, long may it continue.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtUJZkB_hGlRhNLzlK_YsNAb14MUgQC368mg&usqp=CAU
    Arsenal fans are just so bitter. Have fun on those Thursday nights! Super Mikel couldn't get Champions League.
    Don’t worry, I’m not bitter. :)

    But it does make me smile. For years, I had to put up with morons (both Arsenal fans and fans of other clubs) criticising us for finishing in the Top 4.

    Whilst I’d take winning a cup over finishing fourth, I wouldn’t take winning a cup over having a team capable of finishing fourth. And having a team capable of finishing fourth is very difficult to achieve.
    I think the criticism from rival fans was that Arsenal seemed to believe that 4th was an achievement in and of itself rather than a stepping stone to greater things. Spurs, at least this time and the last few times we were in it definitely attempted to win and compete on all stages.

    There really does seem to have been a huge lowering of expectations at Arsenal, I don't understand how the fans are satisfied with the season or the manager. He's clearly out of his depth and having spent £150 last summer and £100m the summer before I'm also not sure how much more the owners will be willing to sink into the club while he's in charge.

    Getting Conte and Paritici in is the best thing Spurs have done in ages. They're both world class in their positions and now we've held onto them as well as Kane and Son there's a semblance of something great being assembled at Hotspur Way.

    If I was an Arsenal fan I'd be looking over my shoulder at Newcastle, Man United and Leicester all of whom have better managers and the first two will out muscle Arsenal in the transfer market all summer. I'd also say Howe and Ten Hag are a bigger pull factor than Arteta. The way Arteta has publicly fallen out with star players like Aubameyang, Pepe and Guendouzi is going to be a factor in getting that big name world class signing.
    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,515

    The FLSOJ is on course to lose his seat, he won't call an early election.

    All polls are lies remember when you disagree with what they say. If he survives the VONC then clearly he is a Golden God, a man who cannot die who absolutely will not only win the election but keep his own seat.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,821
    edited May 31
    tlg86 said:

    Curse the new thread:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    As a Spurs fan it all feels very odd that we've already signed two players before the window has properly opened and we've got two likely signings in Spence and Bastoni to be completed in the next week or so and 3-4 more to come.

    Baby Jen truly has been born into a different era, long may it continue.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtUJZkB_hGlRhNLzlK_YsNAb14MUgQC368mg&usqp=CAU
    Arsenal fans are just so bitter. Have fun on those Thursday nights! Super Mikel couldn't get Champions League.
    Don’t worry, I’m not bitter. :)

    But it does make me smile. For years, I had to put up with morons (both Arsenal fans and fans of other clubs) criticising us for finishing in the Top 4.

    Whilst I’d take winning a cup over finishing fourth, I wouldn’t take winning a cup over having a team capable of finishing fourth. And having a team capable of finishing fourth is very difficult to achieve.
    I think the criticism from rival fans was that Arsenal seemed to believe that 4th was an achievement in and of itself rather than a stepping stone to greater things. Spurs, at least this time and the last few times we were in it definitely attempted to win and compete on all stages.

    There really does seem to have been a huge lowering of expectations at Arsenal, I don't understand how the fans are satisfied with the season or the manager. He's clearly out of his depth and having spent £150 last summer and £100m the summer before I'm also not sure how much more the owners will be willing to sink into the club while he's in charge.

    Getting Conte and Paritici in is the best thing Spurs have done in ages. They're both world class in their positions and now we've held onto them as well as Kane and Son there's a semblance of something great being assembled at Hotspur Way.

    If I was an Arsenal fan I'd be looking over my shoulder at Newcastle, Man United and Leicester all of whom have better managers and the first two will out muscle Arsenal in the transfer market all summer. I'd also say Howe and Ten Hag are a bigger pull factor than Arteta. The way Arteta has publicly fallen out with star players like Aubameyang, Pepe and Guendouzi is going to be a factor in getting that big name world class signing.
    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.
    I was at both 2008 matches, how were you cheated?
  • ajbajb Posts: 43
    The appropriate scene from Quo Vadis:
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=E4qWD37bJws
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,903
    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 4,189
    Isn't Richie back in the good books as a result of borrowing 10 billion quid? Chancellor Magic Money Tree strikes again.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,711
    edited May 31

    The FLSOJ is on course to lose his seat, he won't call an early election.

    Not sure that analysis works. It's not so much being MP as PM that counts. Two options:

    (a) he has had a Tory Party vonc and won it - he's OK for a year, but only one year, and will his position be any better when the time for the next TPV comes round? So he might as well call an election now before the tractor with the financial manure-spreader comes round.

    (b) he's not had a Tory Party vonc - he might as well call the election before someone puts in the 54th letter, or some other event happens, and have a go in the hope of winning another 4-5 years, ditto ditto manure spreader.

    In both cases, having Labour leadership possibly inactivated might seem a big bonus.

    And who cares about Uxbridge if he has lost Downing St? The two probabilities are fairly strongly correlated of course.

    So perhaps he will call an election on Monday?

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,047

    tlg86 said:

    Curse the new thread:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    As a Spurs fan it all feels very odd that we've already signed two players before the window has properly opened and we've got two likely signings in Spence and Bastoni to be completed in the next week or so and 3-4 more to come.

    Baby Jen truly has been born into a different era, long may it continue.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtUJZkB_hGlRhNLzlK_YsNAb14MUgQC368mg&usqp=CAU
    Arsenal fans are just so bitter. Have fun on those Thursday nights! Super Mikel couldn't get Champions League.
    Don’t worry, I’m not bitter. :)

    But it does make me smile. For years, I had to put up with morons (both Arsenal fans and fans of other clubs) criticising us for finishing in the Top 4.

    Whilst I’d take winning a cup over finishing fourth, I wouldn’t take winning a cup over having a team capable of finishing fourth. And having a team capable of finishing fourth is very difficult to achieve.
    I think the criticism from rival fans was that Arsenal seemed to believe that 4th was an achievement in and of itself rather than a stepping stone to greater things. Spurs, at least this time and the last few times we were in it definitely attempted to win and compete on all stages.

    There really does seem to have been a huge lowering of expectations at Arsenal, I don't understand how the fans are satisfied with the season or the manager. He's clearly out of his depth and having spent £150 last summer and £100m the summer before I'm also not sure how much more the owners will be willing to sink into the club while he's in charge.

    Getting Conte and Paritici in is the best thing Spurs have done in ages. They're both world class in their positions and now we've held onto them as well as Kane and Son there's a semblance of something great being assembled at Hotspur Way.

    If I was an Arsenal fan I'd be looking over my shoulder at Newcastle, Man United and Leicester all of whom have better managers and the first two will out muscle Arsenal in the transfer market all summer. I'd also say Howe and Ten Hag are a bigger pull factor than Arteta. The way Arteta has publicly fallen out with star players like Aubameyang, Pepe and Guendouzi is going to be a factor in getting that big name world class signing.
    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.
    I was at both 2008 matches, how were you cheated?
    We should have had a penalty in the first leg (Kuyt on Hleb) and Babel dived in the second leg.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,905
    edited May 31
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    But Nadine apart who really loves him? I just think once the VONC becomes a reality, legions of the quiet and previously loyal will turn against him. It’ll be like that scene in The Man Who Would Be King when all the onlookers Sean Connery bleed.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 4,013
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    Tricky one for the MPs. It needs a credible candidate who can be relied upon to a) keep arming Ukraine to its eyeballs, b) ditch the socialism / fiscal incontinence, c) be a clean slate wrt to covid misdemeanours.

    That candidate also has to have a sufficient power base in the parliamentary power that a VONC-ing MP can be sure their pick makes the run off. All the while there has to be a second candidate who wouldn’t be more appealing to the members but toxic to voters in your seat (cough cough Liz).
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    PLUS as speculation mounts about a potential PM leadership vote, we've hoicked the Newsnight whiteboard out of storage to help our expert panel explain what they think will happen next.. @DavidGauke @pollymackenzie @IainDale join us live to make their predictions.. 2/3
    https://twitter.com/stewartmaclean/status/1531725145378803713
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,905
    EPG said:

    Isn't Richie back in the good books as a result of borrowing 10 billion quid? Chancellor Magic Money Tree strikes again.

    He’s so much better at media too. I think most likely we’ll end up with him after all.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 4,013

    EPG said:

    Isn't Richie back in the good books as a result of borrowing 10 billion quid? Chancellor Magic Money Tree strikes again.

    He’s so much better at media too. I think most likely we’ll end up with him after all.
    I dont think he’ll make the final two. I find it hard to believe there are enough Tory MPs willing to plump for his spray gun socialism but who knows, the new intake might quite like it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,821
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Curse the new thread:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    As a Spurs fan it all feels very odd that we've already signed two players before the window has properly opened and we've got two likely signings in Spence and Bastoni to be completed in the next week or so and 3-4 more to come.

    Baby Jen truly has been born into a different era, long may it continue.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtUJZkB_hGlRhNLzlK_YsNAb14MUgQC368mg&usqp=CAU
    Arsenal fans are just so bitter. Have fun on those Thursday nights! Super Mikel couldn't get Champions League.
    Don’t worry, I’m not bitter. :)

    But it does make me smile. For years, I had to put up with morons (both Arsenal fans and fans of other clubs) criticising us for finishing in the Top 4.

    Whilst I’d take winning a cup over finishing fourth, I wouldn’t take winning a cup over having a team capable of finishing fourth. And having a team capable of finishing fourth is very difficult to achieve.
    I think the criticism from rival fans was that Arsenal seemed to believe that 4th was an achievement in and of itself rather than a stepping stone to greater things. Spurs, at least this time and the last few times we were in it definitely attempted to win and compete on all stages.

    There really does seem to have been a huge lowering of expectations at Arsenal, I don't understand how the fans are satisfied with the season or the manager. He's clearly out of his depth and having spent £150 last summer and £100m the summer before I'm also not sure how much more the owners will be willing to sink into the club while he's in charge.

    Getting Conte and Paritici in is the best thing Spurs have done in ages. They're both world class in their positions and now we've held onto them as well as Kane and Son there's a semblance of something great being assembled at Hotspur Way.

    If I was an Arsenal fan I'd be looking over my shoulder at Newcastle, Man United and Leicester all of whom have better managers and the first two will out muscle Arsenal in the transfer market all summer. I'd also say Howe and Ten Hag are a bigger pull factor than Arteta. The way Arteta has publicly fallen out with star players like Aubameyang, Pepe and Guendouzi is going to be a factor in getting that big name world class signing.
    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.
    I was at both 2008 matches, how were you cheated?
    We should have had a penalty in the first leg (Kuyt on Hleb) and Babel dived in the second leg.
    It was no dive.

    Plus it wasn't decisive, we scored another one to confirm the victory.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,752
    So those Marder IFVs which Germany was supposed to send to Ukraine, and Scholz has been holding back…

    https://mobile.twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1531659355283767296
    BREAKING: Germany will supply Greece with infantry fighting vehicles. This will allow Greece to supply (obsolete) Soviet era equipment to Ukraine

    Germany’s Olaf Scholz and weapon delivery to #Ukraine. A video trending now on Ukrainian telegram channels. So true and so ridiculous at the same time
    https://mobile.twitter.com/lesiavasylenko/status/1531329125167816707
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 21,007
    Anyone know who's broadcasting tomorrow night's Scotland v Ukraine game?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    tlg86 said:

    Curse the new thread:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    As a Spurs fan it all feels very odd that we've already signed two players before the window has properly opened and we've got two likely signings in Spence and Bastoni to be completed in the next week or so and 3-4 more to come.

    Baby Jen truly has been born into a different era, long may it continue.

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtUJZkB_hGlRhNLzlK_YsNAb14MUgQC368mg&usqp=CAU
    Arsenal fans are just so bitter. Have fun on those Thursday nights! Super Mikel couldn't get Champions League.
    Don’t worry, I’m not bitter. :)

    But it does make me smile. For years, I had to put up with morons (both Arsenal fans and fans of other clubs) criticising us for finishing in the Top 4.

    Whilst I’d take winning a cup over finishing fourth, I wouldn’t take winning a cup over having a team capable of finishing fourth. And having a team capable of finishing fourth is very difficult to achieve.
    I think the criticism from rival fans was that Arsenal seemed to believe that 4th was an achievement in and of itself rather than a stepping stone to greater things. Spurs, at least this time and the last few times we were in it definitely attempted to win and compete on all stages.

    There really does seem to have been a huge lowering of expectations at Arsenal, I don't understand how the fans are satisfied with the season or the manager. He's clearly out of his depth and having spent £150 last summer and £100m the summer before I'm also not sure how much more the owners will be willing to sink into the club while he's in charge.

    Getting Conte and Paritici in is the best thing Spurs have done in ages. They're both world class in their positions and now we've held onto them as well as Kane and Son there's a semblance of something great being assembled at Hotspur Way.

    If I was an Arsenal fan I'd be looking over my shoulder at Newcastle, Man United and Leicester all of whom have better managers and the first two will out muscle Arsenal in the transfer market all summer. I'd also say Howe and Ten Hag are a bigger pull factor than Arteta. The way Arteta has publicly fallen out with star players like Aubameyang, Pepe and Guendouzi is going to be a factor in getting that big name world class signing.
    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.
    I was at both 2008 matches, how were you cheated?
    I believe Liverpool "played better", and if that isn't cheating, I don't know what is.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,821

    Anyone know who's broadcasting tomorrow night's Scotland v Ukraine game?

    Sky Sports.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,752
    For @Leon

    DALLE-2 has a secret language.
    "Apoploe vesrreaitais" means birds.
    "Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" means bugs or pests.

    The prompt: "Apoploe vesrreaitais eating Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" gives images of birds eating bugs.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/giannis_daras/status/1531693093040230402
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    Tory MPs need to accept knifing the dog will be the most cathartic release of gloom and despondency they will find before 2024. Its the only way out of the miasma. No more big dog. Ever.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970
    Nigelb said:

    For @Leon

    DALLE-2 has a secret language.
    "Apoploe vesrreaitais" means birds.
    "Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" means bugs or pests.

    The prompt: "Apoploe vesrreaitais eating Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" gives images of birds eating bugs.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/giannis_daras/status/1531693093040230402

    This gave me a shudder, I don't mind telling you.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452
    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,607
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    edited May 31
    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    Would be appropriate for the architect of lockdown and its chief cheerleader to both be removed due to their obvious disregard for it and as karma for introducing the damn infernal thing in the first place.
    Very satisfactory outcome for me should it occur.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,752
    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    For @Leon

    DALLE-2 has a secret language.
    "Apoploe vesrreaitais" means birds.
    "Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" means bugs or pests.

    The prompt: "Apoploe vesrreaitais eating Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" gives images of birds eating bugs.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/giannis_daras/status/1531693093040230402

    This gave me a shudder, I don't mind telling you.
    You should hear what it says about @Leon
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,139
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    Boris is throwing everyone under the bus, now getting a sense there is a real momentum gathering on backbenches to ditch him sooner rather than later. Also, even those MPs not supportive of ditching him yet will soon start to realise that propping him up by supporting him in a vote of no confidence will only further damage the party in the longer term when there is two years left to rescue the Government in the polls with a new leader not discredited by partygate and focussed on the economy looking forward.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,281
    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,896
    tlg86 said:

    I think that’s harsh. In the Champions League, in our run of top four finishes, we lost to:

    2007: PSV - Last 16 (that was disappointing to be fair)
    2008: Liverpool - QF (we were cheated)
    2009: Man Utd - SF (they were quite good)
    2010: Barcelona - QF (they were quite good)
    2011: Barcelona - L16 (we were cheated)
    2012: Milan (we were cheated)
    2013: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2014: Bayern (they were quite good)
    2015: Monaco (disappointing)
    2016: Barcelona (they were quite good)

    As for Arteta, I’m happy with him. We can’t keep sacking the manager. We didn’t get a pre-season last year because of COVID, so hopefully we’ll make a better start.

    Of the three players you mention, it’s only Gurndouzi that I feel Arteta should have done more to accommodate as it’s our weak position. Aubameyang stunk the place out and sadly Pepe was the final disaster of the idiots that were spunking my money up the wall a few years ago.

    I don't see how you can be happy with Arteta, Conte came into the club and took over a bigger shambles than Arteta and got us into Champion's League football in less than a season with just one transfer window. I'd say the underlying quality of our squad was about the same as what Arteta inherited as well with the exception of Son who is better than any midfielder Arsenal have had in a long time. I'd rate Aubameyang on the same level as Kane in terms of goals though I think Kane is a better all round footballer, Aubameyang was and is a world class player (he's smashed it at Barca).

    I think you're looking at it the wrong way around, Aubameyang and Pepe not firing at Arsenal is because they were badly utilised by an inexperienced manager. Can you imagine Sir Alex telling Cantona to stop being late for training? No he didn't give a shit as long as Cantona produced the goods on the pitch, didn't Aubameyang end the season as your top scoring striker? Arteta can't handle the big personality, unprofessional world class player but there's so many of them around. Pepe is another one that should have been treated a lot better by Arteta IMO. At £20-25m he'll be a bargain purchase for whoever gets him this summer, I could see him go to Newcastle and get goals for fun playing just in front of Guimarez.

    For whatever reason you've kept your version Ryan Mason in charge of the club and made him immune to criticism. A manager than can't handle world class players isn't someone I'd want at Spurs. I still don't see Arsenal linked with any marquee signing that will transform the club on the level of a Kane, Guimarez or Salah. Worse is that there were rumours that Saka is refusing to sign a new contract that doesn't have a release clause in it, I'm sure Kane's struggle to force a move to City has left an impression with a lot of high potential young English footballers at clubs with no or low ambition. Will someone of Saka's quality continue to be happy being mismanaged and overused by Arteta and not get a taste of the top level of football? I don't see it and I wouldn't be surprised if Man City raid Arsenal next summer of there's no champions league.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452
    Nigelb said:

    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    For @Leon

    DALLE-2 has a secret language.
    "Apoploe vesrreaitais" means birds.
    "Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" means bugs or pests.

    The prompt: "Apoploe vesrreaitais eating Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" gives images of birds eating bugs.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/giannis_daras/status/1531693093040230402

    This gave me a shudder, I don't mind telling you.
    You should hear what it says about @Leon
    DALLE-2 must be stopped
    https://twitter.com/JanelleCShane/status/1531662143489294345
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 21,007

    Anyone know who's broadcasting tomorrow night's Scotland v Ukraine game?

    Sky Sports.
    Cheers. I'll be watching by text then.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970
    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    a bead curtain halfway up

    come on, you aren't even trying
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,896
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    @DavidL post independence?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452
    edited May 31
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 5,877
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The reason i disagree with you, once it gets to the vonc it changes the current question - rather than is Boris weak enough, his ratings bad enough, his crimes bad enough, his speech and commons performances bad enough, it becomes is he strong enough, his performances and record strong enough to expect a recovery. It swings round to needing Boris positives, reasons to believe, that he can turn round a losing position, reasons to believe it’s better to carry on with partygate, that’s far from over, stick with Boris bad ratings, that are truly bad, rather than twist on a fresh hand of cards.

    Once it gets to the vonc the Boris team have to change their approach, fear won’t work if you are about to be out of power, they are the team that starts on zero needing to get to 180 by filling the electors with hope, positives, and reasons to believe in a fight back.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,139

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later.






  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 21,046
    edited May 31
    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,101
    edited May 31
    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    They retract as you go downstairs, like in Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The reason i disagree with you, once it gets to the vonc it changes the current question - rather than is Boris weak enough, his ratings bad enough, his crimes bad enough, his speech and commons performances bad enough, it becomes is he strong enough, his performances and record strong enough to expect a recovery. It swings round to needing Boris positives, reasons to believe, that he can turn round a losing position, reasons to believe it’s better to carry on with partygate, that’s far from over, stick with Boris bad ratings, that are truly bad, rather than twist on a fresh hand of cards.

    Once it gets to the vonc the Boris team have to change their approach, fear won’t work if you are about to be out of power, they are the team that starts on zero needing to get to 180 by filling the electors with hope, positives, and reasons to believe in a fight back.
    Anyone seriously thinking of running could always commission a poll for the Sundays of 2019 Tory deserters and whether removing Boris would make them reconsider........
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970

    Alistair said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
    Butter the steps. Butter them hourly.
    THIS is the kind of patter we need :lol:
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,607
    edited May 31
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.

    And just to be clear, they would be claiming assylum in Britain. They just wouldn't be located in Britain whilst making their claim.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 5,965
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    If Boris does call an early election and manage to get re-elected and stay as PM, then it really does illustrate why the country needed the FTPA.

    Another 5 years of Boris in No.10 and who knows what damage will be inflicted to the UK's political system? Someone who wants to be in charge and possesses the power to pervert the system is exactly how dictatorships start.

    I hope the electorate has enough brains to dump the "Conservatives" into long term opposition.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513

    I was going to wait and try and get comment number 54 but got impatient.

    I can relate to that.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,905
    fitalass said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later.






    What is in Labour’s best interests is for Johnson to remain PM. However, what is in the country’s best interests is for him to go - and the sooner the better.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,374
    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    ...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452

    Alistair said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
    Butter the steps. Butter them hourly.
    Say you are coming downstairs then as you slip on the first one you probably get so much momentum with the additional butter you'll glide down the stairs like they re a slide.

    I think you need to alternate between butter and sandpaper.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,357
    dixiedean said:


    …snip…
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    A man, a plan, a canal—Panama!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 21,046

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The reason i disagree with you, once it gets to the vonc it changes the current question - rather than is Boris weak enough, his ratings bad enough, his crimes bad enough, his speech and commons performances bad enough, it becomes is he strong enough, his performances and record strong enough to expect a recovery. It swings round to needing Boris positives, reasons to believe, that he can turn round a losing position, reasons to believe it’s better to carry on with partygate, that’s far from over, stick with Boris bad ratings, that are truly bad, rather than twist on a fresh hand of cards.

    Once it gets to the vonc the Boris team have to change their approach, fear won’t work if you are about to be out of power, they are the team that starts on zero needing to get to 180 by filling the electors with hope, positives, and reasons to believe in a fight back.
    Anyone seriously thinking of running could always commission a poll for the Sundays of 2019 Tory deserters and whether removing Boris would make them reconsider........
    They could save money.
    Most of them are on here.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    a bead curtain halfway up

    come on, you aren't even trying
    Wire them into the mains, alternating positive and negative
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513
    fitalass said:

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    Boris is throwing everyone under the bus, now getting a sense there is a real momentum gathering on backbenches to ditch him sooner rather than later. Also, even those MPs not supportive of ditching him yet will soon start to realise that propping him up by supporting him in a vote of no confidence will only further damage the party in the longer term when there is two years left to rescue the Government in the polls with a new leader not discredited by partygate and focussed on the economy looking forward.
    Sometimes, and his opponents will hope it is the case now, things just get so bad that even attempts to get a grip only make others feel the writing is on the wall.

    His defence on this whole affair has been how foolish he has been; it may simply be harder for many of them to simultaneously put forth the official view that he is also the best person to take things forward for the country.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,905
    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    Johnsonism is doing what is best for Johnson. It’s difficult to secure ideological buy-in from others to that programme.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 14,190

    fitalass said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later.






    What is in Labour’s best interests is for Johnson to remain PM. However, what is in the country’s best interests is for him to go - and the sooner the better.
    And what is in my betting interest is for him to last until the next election! Still think he is very likely to do so, but a bet I really don't mind losing. Unless we get Dorries next........
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
    Butter the steps. Butter them hourly.
    THIS is the kind of patter we need :lol:
    I'm nothing if not alarmingly variable.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452
    Cookie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
    You should have heard the emotion when Corbyn was mentioned :smile:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 40,468
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
    Talking about Norway and off-shore in the same post conjures up an image of sending people to oil rigs.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    dixiedean said:

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The reason i disagree with you, once it gets to the vonc it changes the current question - rather than is Boris weak enough, his ratings bad enough, his crimes bad enough, his speech and commons performances bad enough, it becomes is he strong enough, his performances and record strong enough to expect a recovery. It swings round to needing Boris positives, reasons to believe, that he can turn round a losing position, reasons to believe it’s better to carry on with partygate, that’s far from over, stick with Boris bad ratings, that are truly bad, rather than twist on a fresh hand of cards.

    Once it gets to the vonc the Boris team have to change their approach, fear won’t work if you are about to be out of power, they are the team that starts on zero needing to get to 180 by filling the electors with hope, positives, and reasons to believe in a fight back.
    Anyone seriously thinking of running could always commission a poll for the Sundays of 2019 Tory deserters and whether removing Boris would make them reconsider........
    They could save money.
    Most of them are on here.
    Yes its not much of a holy mystery is it
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 21,046
    Cookie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
    There's also the question of whether that was typical also.
    One of that intake is in Labour now, for example.
    They also aren't the majority. Nor are they the influential ones.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 5,965
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.

    A point of order Mr Speaker - your scenario is impossible thanks to the 1949 Common Travel Area Act which allows Irish or British citizens to reside in each others countries, so an Irish person would not have to make an asylum/refugee claim.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,752
    Alistair said:

    Nigelb said:

    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    For @Leon

    DALLE-2 has a secret language.
    "Apoploe vesrreaitais" means birds.
    "Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" means bugs or pests.

    The prompt: "Apoploe vesrreaitais eating Contarra ccetnxniams luryca tanniounons" gives images of birds eating bugs.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/giannis_daras/status/1531693093040230402

    This gave me a shudder, I don't mind telling you.
    You should hear what it says about @Leon
    DALLE-2 must be stopped
    https://twitter.com/JanelleCShane/status/1531662143489294345
    I don’t know… Irn Bruin has potential.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513
    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    Whilst I do think he would win a VONC (May won hers after all), for one that might not save him (it did not save her after all), and for another I think it is true that there will inevitably be plenty of people unwilling to send letters who do not like him, and in a forced choice of 'Do I really back this man?' will vote against him. And as you noted MPs as a group did not select him until they felt they had no choice - if they already think they might struggle, counter intuitively that may mean less need to pay the price of having him as Leader (not without benefits though it was).
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
    Butter the steps. Butter them hourly.
    Say you are coming downstairs then as you slip on the first one you probably get so much momentum with the additional butter you'll glide down the stairs like they re a slide.

    I think you need to alternate between butter and sandpaper.
    Butter, honey, glue, large hungry bear with an itchy bum. In that order.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    Looking at the picture more carefully unless the wood panelling is of wildly varying width I think it looks like the risers are variable height already!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.

    A point of order Mr Speaker - your scenario is impossible thanks to the 1949 Common Travel Area Act which allows Irish or British citizens to reside in each others countries, so an Irish person would not have to make an asylum/refugee claim.
    Fair point, and indeed it goes back even further, in that Irish citizens are not considered alien in the UK.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,896
    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The VONC will be a bit like the Brexit vote. People will take their chance to make the change. If it gets to 54 Boris is toast. That's why team Boris tried so hard to prevent it last time and are bribing MPs with junior government roles this time. They know the game is up the moment Brady announces the vote.

    Additionally, I don't see how Rishi can go for the leadership he's badly damaged by receiving a FPN and would also be faced with a pretty sharp resignation of Starmer has to resign. Even without team Boris stabbing him in the back he'd be terminally damaged by the FPN.

    The next leader will have to come from someone who is completely clean wrt partygate, Ben Wallace would be my bet. He speaks to the selectorate in a way that other candidates don't.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
    Talking about Norway and off-shore in the same post conjures up an image of sending people to oil rigs.
    Not a bad use for any currently unused off-shore drilling platforms.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 15,988
    edited May 31
    fitalass said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later.






    It won't be a good look for Labour.

    However if Starmer goes down for something Johnson insists in his own case and on a far grander scale was wholly legal and the Met agreed with him would be very odd.

    If after Johnson's Met. adjudication, Starmer and Rayner get FPNs, I will remove the noose, button up my shirt and roll down my trouser leg!

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,452

    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    I initially was thinking of adding a crocodile on every step but that effectively increased the step depth making it vastly safer
    Butter the steps. Butter them hourly.
    Say you are coming downstairs then as you slip on the first one you probably get so much momentum with the additional butter you'll glide down the stairs like they re a slide.

    I think you need to alternate between butter and sandpaper.
    Butter, honey, glue, large hungry bear with an itchy bum. In that order.
    You see, adding a bear makes them look too dangerous and then people just wouldn't use them, making them safer.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,607
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
    Yes, but here we're talking about the same thing. Arrivals in the UK under the system I am proposing would be gathered up and taken to an overseas centre. Because some would still arrive here in the way you suggest. Besides, there would be transport bringing the successful applicants back, so you'd have empty transport heading out there.

    Yes, I am sure that your system would work, but it goes against our freedom loving ways! :smiley:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513
    Cookie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
    I'm sure some were very grateful to him personally. They should have been, for all he is denigrated I think it slightly absurd to think he had nothing whatsoever to do with winning quite as big as they did.

    But gratitude does not last in politics. They might have been true Borisites then, but if they look like going down under his leadership now?

    If they follow the example he sets, they would not have much loyalty toward him when the winds change.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 7,958
    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    Angle the steps.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,281
    fitalass said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later

    Conservative mps should not be distracted by Starmer and Rayner's problems but concentrate entirely on removing Boris

    Of course Starmer was foolish to promise to resign and even if he does not receive a FPN he has raised the bar on his own honestly which could cause him unforeseen problems in the future

    However for me Boris out of office is all that matters right now
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    You have clearly missed your calling as a professional saboteur.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    There's nothing remotely ridiculous about a man who routinely betrays wives, mistresses, employers, party leaders, voters, colleagues, constituents & anyone else you can think of demanding loyalty from MPs...
    https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1531723372895379457
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 21,046
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    Whilst I do think he would win a VONC (May won hers after all), for one that might not save him (it did not save her after all), and for another I think it is true that there will inevitably be plenty of people unwilling to send letters who do not like him, and in a forced choice of 'Do I really back this man?' will vote against him. And as you noted MPs as a group did not select him until they felt they had no choice - if they already think they might struggle, counter intuitively that may mean less need to pay the price of having him as Leader (not without benefits though it was).
    Yeah. I'm not saying he'll definitely lose.
    Just pushing back at the assumption, in some quarters, that of course he'd win. (Fraser Nelson seems not to have considered it).
    Like you say. If they think they're heading for lost seat a dice roll is rational.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 21,007
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
    Talking about Norway and off-shore in the same post conjures up an image of sending people to oil rigs.
    Not a bad use for any currently unused off-shore drilling platforms.
    I would imagine very expensive versus an unused cruise ship.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    'Boris Johnson has the confidence of the country.'

    Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries says Tory MPs need to get behind the prime minister as "people don't vote for divided parties."


    Latest: https://trib.al/3LxKy7s

    📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1531726823817609219/video/1



    ... no he fucking doesn't...
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 5,877

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The reason i disagree with you, once it gets to the vonc it changes the current question - rather than is Boris weak enough, his ratings bad enough, his crimes bad enough, his speech and commons performances bad enough, it becomes is he strong enough, his performances and record strong enough to expect a recovery. It swings round to needing Boris positives, reasons to believe, that he can turn round a losing position, reasons to believe it’s better to carry on with partygate, that’s far from over, stick with Boris bad ratings, that are truly bad, rather than twist on a fresh hand of cards.

    Once it gets to the vonc the Boris team have to change their approach, fear won’t work if you are about to be out of power, they are the team that starts on zero needing to get to 180 by filling the electors with hope, positives, and reasons to believe in a fight back.
    Anyone seriously thinking of running could always commission a poll for the Sundays of 2019 Tory deserters and whether removing Boris would make them reconsider........
    No it doesn’t work like that Woolie. 🙂

    In politics once someone is wearing a crown they look different, and are considered in a different way.

    Politics is more professional than you give it credit for. This moment isn’t about listening to voters, but plotting the chess moves way ahead of the voters, which new King or Queen has that lustre wearing the crown you know the current wearer will never achieve from now.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,797
    Scott_xP said:

    'Boris Johnson has the confidence of the country.'

    Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries says Tory MPs need to get behind the prime minister as "people don't vote for divided parties."


    Latest: https://trib.al/3LxKy7s

    📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1531726823817609219/video/1



    ... no he fucking doesn't...

    She's called Mad Nad for a reason.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    The reality is that even if we get to 54 there is no way at all we are currently going to get anywhere near 180 to vote him out, not least because no one has a scoobie as to what comes next. When Rishi was nailed on as his successor it might have been possible but the torpedoing of his own Chancellor makes Big Dog pretty much untouchable before an election.

    The VONC will be a bit like the Brexit vote. People will take their chance to make the change. If it gets to 54 Boris is toast. That's why team Boris tried so hard to prevent it last time and are bribing MPs with junior government roles this time. They know the game is up the moment Brady announces the vote.

    Additionally, I don't see how Rishi can go for the leadership he's badly damaged by receiving a FPN and would also be faced with a pretty sharp resignation of Starmer has to resign. Even without team Boris stabbing him in the back he'd be terminally damaged by the FPN.

    The next leader will have to come from someone who is completely clean wrt partygate, Ben Wallace would be my bet. He speaks to the selectorate in a way that other candidates don't.
    Well, who stands?

    I think the following are certs:
    Liz Truss

    The following are likely:
    Priti Patel
    Ben Wallace
    Sajiv Javid
    Jeremy Hunt
    Tom Tugendhat
    Penny Mordaunt

    I think the following are unlikely:
    Rishi Sunak
    Kwasi Kwarteng
    Dominic Raab
    Michael Gove

    Of those, my tips would be Patel (because she's so long... no, not short at all... sorry), Wallace, and Morduant.

  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 3,053
    edited May 31
    Cookie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it.
    Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election.
    Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not.
    And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be.
    And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade.
    It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.

    That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
    As late as Hartlepool and even Batley he had something that certainly worked in the red wall. Then partygate and the lies and the obfuscation and the laughing about it all with the lads in the '22 room. And suddenly hes not our pal anymore he's an absolute betraying shit who let us all down. Its just not over the issue that made people flock to him, over the other big issue that arrived after his win.
    Thats the real problem, a lot of people invested belief in him and he betrayed it with cake and estrella and Abba and being a shit and lying about it like a twat.
    He's a thoroughly worthless fool on whom weve wasted three years.
    Go. Just fucking go.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 6,041

    fitalass said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo has to pray that Beergate doesn't finish off the LoTO

    According to the Guardian the questionnaires when returned by all those attending will be compared and considered

    The Guardian does not expect a decision before the end of June, even into July so hopefully Boris will have gone before then
    What happens if Conservative MPs get rid of Boris, then it turns out that Starmer and Rayner have been issued with fines? I think if that were to happen it could be a real danger point for Labour, it might not be the win they think it is to remove Boris at this point, whereas its vital for the Conservative party that he goes sooner rather than later.






    It won't be a good look for Labour.

    However if Starmer goes down for something Johnson insists in his own case and on a far grander scale was wholly legal and the Met agreed with him would be very odd.

    If after Johnson's Met. adjudication, Starmer and Rayner get FPNs, I will remove the noose, button up my shirt and roll down my trouser leg!

    Don't feel you have to. In that situation, I think we should all take our pleasures however we can.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 2,209
    edited May 31
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    a bead curtain halfway up

    come on, you aren't even trying
    Paint them and the floor with Vantablack?

    I suspect they are not finished. Glass treads and risers??
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,513
    Scott_xP said:

    'Boris Johnson has the confidence of the country.'

    Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries says Tory MPs need to get behind the prime minister as "people don't vote for divided parties."


    Latest: https://trib.al/3LxKy7s

    📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1531726823817609219/video/1

    ... no he fucking doesn't...

    I always love the 'get behind X' desperation argument. It essentially amounts to saying 'You may think X is terrible, but back them anyway'.

    People don't like divided parties, but they also dislike poor leadership, once it starts affecting them. Parroting messages of support that are not sincere no more persuades people than asking a shark nicely not to bite your leg off persuades them.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 6,700
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    For goodness sake that headline could have been written any day for the last 6 months at least.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,452

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    We need to be sending people to Rwanda for it to discourage anyone from getting on a dinghy and setting sail for our rainy haven. This is welcome news therefore.

    I quite like the Government being in desperation mode. It would be nice if they were so desperate to placate the voting public all the time.

    I'm all in favour of the government building a proper offshore processing facility, and prioritising those who go there directly, rather than trekking across the Med and Europe to get to the UK, and then submitting an asylum request.

    I am more sceptical of us just dumping a small number of people in Rwanda, and then not actually doing any processing. It seems more like it's designed for tabloid headlines than to actually solve the problem.
    Yes, 4 offshore processing facilities would be good, and the successful applicants should then be brought to Britain. But not prioritising those who go there directly - ONLY processing claims there.
    Hang on there:

    If the asylum seeker is an Irish citizen coming from Ireland, because they fear persecution from the Irish government, then you want them to go to Rwanda?

    Yeah, yeah, I know my scenario is unlikely, but that's not the point. I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask people to go to the nearest/most convenient place, but it's entirely possible that place will be the UK.
    No, I'd have one in Europe; I was thinking Romania.
    I don't have a problem with us saying "your duty is to go to the nearest/easiest" point (and indeed, the generally accepted view is that you should claim asylum in the first safe place you reach). In some cases, that will be the UK. I have no problem with people being transported to off-shore processing, but it is clearly wrong to deny people the ability to claim in the first safe place they can reach, if that place is the UK.
    Ireland has a common travel area with the UK. Clearly people could flee to the North and over the Irish Sea if they wished.

    But the point of a rule being a rule is that there aren't exceptions. For it to work, four centres, well-placed - better placed than the UK itself in relation to world trouble spots, would be the established hubs, and that would eliminate assylum being used as a route to economic migration completely. It might actually result in more successful claimants than before, but that would be fine.
    The easiest way to get rid of economic migration is to make it impossible to work in the UK without proper authorisation, as happens in (for example) Norway.

    If everyone is sent for off-shore processing, irrespective of where they claimed, that would also eliminate the economic pull argument.
    Yes, but here we're talking about the same thing. Arrivals in the UK under the system I am proposing would be gathered up and taken to an overseas centre. Because some would still arrive here in the way you suggest. Besides, there would be transport bringing the successful applicants back, so you'd have empty transport heading out there.

    Yes, I am sure that your system would work, but it goes against our freedom loving ways! :smiley:
    Ah, I misunderstood you, and you me.

    I was suggesting that all claims would be processed off-shore, but those who chose to go to the off-shore center instead of arriving in the UK (assuming they weren't coming from Ireland etc.) would see their claims assessed first. I thought you were suggesting that we simply wouldn't process the claims of those who claimed in the UK.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,970

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Your challenge, find a way to make this "staircase" more dangerous. Everything I've tried manages to make it safer

    https://twitter.com/rottengirl/status/1531385871454416897

    round the corners
    dazzle camouflage
    paint the floor underneath with stripes to disorient someone ascending
    vary the riser length between each step

    This is easy! I could think of 20 ways
    a bead curtain halfway up

    come on, you aren't even trying
    Paint them and the floor with Vantablack?

    I suspect they are not finished. Glass treads and risers??
    Ho! make them and the floor mirrored
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,258
    kle4 said:

    I always love the 'get behind X' desperation argument. It essentially amounts to saying 'You may think X is terrible, but back them anyway'.

    People don't like divided parties, but they also dislike poor leadership, once it starts affecting them. Parroting messages of support that are not sincere no more persuades people than asking a shark nicely not to bite your leg off persuades them.

    For Tory MPs contemplating the significance of Boris Johnson no longer being the electoral asset he once was, this from Bertold Brecht: "There are many elements to a campaign. Leadership is number one. Everything else is number two."
    https://twitter.com/PigsAndPolling/status/1531612227966578688
This discussion has been closed.