I'm as confused as to why you posted that as I am about HYUFD's objection to women who twerk?
From that article Braverman comes across as calm, measured and reasonable while Thornberry comes across as a fool who knew she was asking questions that can't be answered and had to get chided by the Deputy Speaker.
Where did I object to women who twerk? That was Leon
Where did I object to twerking per se? I did not
Now I'm even more confused by your objection.
So women twerking is fine. Is it black women twerking that represents the fall of civilisation?
Maybe twerking with relation to abortion is the problem? If you believe it's a sober subject, which I think most people in this country believe it is, on both sides.
That makes no sense.
If a dance move at a protest can draw so much ire that its a debasing fall of civilisation, I wonder how much worse things could get?
Next week, the horror as its revealed that Democrats are stooping to doing the Robot while demanding that guns aren't brought into schools.
To top it off with the Moonwalk for protecting the First Amendment. Its like Sodom and Gomorrah come to life.
How about twerking against an ambulance as victims of a shooting are being loaded into it?
There’s a brilliant Spanish guy in the thread below that, expressing his bewilderment
“Why Black Americans do that wiggle of buttocks.. what does it mean? what does that mean in their culture?”
“Well look .. Thanks for the contribution .. We always see that they buttocks move like this .. more the Africans but at the same time it must have a meaning, sometimes they do it in response to something, What do they mean by that dance? really many people ignore it.”
You just know Durham police are going to intervene over the next few days although even that can’t save the clown . Starmer resigning over an issue of integrity will hardly help Johnson’s cause .
Unless the UK is attacked or we get London Bridge it’s hard to see a way out for Johnson .
So with all this talk about when rather than if Johnson goes, has anyone got any tips for next leader?
I don't think anyone has much idea frankly. Sunak shot his bolt earlier this year, other figures like Mordaunt are unknown blank canvasses, and anyone and their dog will probably put themselves forward.
Bound to be some value to be had once a contest begins, but I honestly haven't a clue who might win. Last time it was obvious, Boris was going to win, nice and easy.
I would be interested to hear what @MarqueeMark thinks of a May caretakership if he still up.
To oversee the period of hustings and member voting - say to mid August? Yeah, I don't see that as a problem. She knows her way around Whitehall.
Ok cool, thanks.
I think it’s a distinct possibility at this stage, since Boris seems to be providing the 22 with evidence that he cannot be trusted to continue even after a resignation.
So with all this talk about when rather than if Johnson goes, has anyone got any tips for next leader?
I don't think anyone has much idea frankly. Sunak shot his bolt earlier this year, other figures like Mordaunt are unknown blank canvasses, and anyone and their dog will probably put themselves forward.
Bound to be some value to be had once a contest begins, but I honestly haven't a clue who might win. Last time it was obvious, Boris was going to win, nice and easy.
Given the lack of attention he has been getting in the last day, and that ConHome (I think) poll of various contenders, I assume Hunt is no longer in the running, though he may not realise it.
You just know Durham police are going to intervene over the next few days although even that can’t save the clown . Starmer resigning over an issue of integrity will hardly help Johnson’s cause .
Unless the UK is attacked or we get London Bridge it’s hard to see a way out for Johnson .
Her Maj looked very bright and perky at her Holyroodhouse and other Jock events.
So with all this talk about when rather than if Johnson goes, has anyone got any tips for next leader?
I don't think anyone has much idea frankly. Sunak shot his bolt earlier this year, other figures like Mordaunt are unknown blank canvasses, and anyone and their dog will probably put themselves forward.
Bound to be some value to be had once a contest begins, but I honestly haven't a clue who might win. Last time it was obvious, Boris was going to win, nice and easy.
The Saj!!
John O, suspect that YOU are PB's pick to succeed BJ as Leader of CUP & UK.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
So with all this talk about when rather than if Johnson goes, has anyone got any tips for next leader?
I don't think anyone has much idea frankly. Sunak shot his bolt earlier this year, other figures like Mordaunt are unknown blank canvasses, and anyone and their dog will probably put themselves forward.
Bound to be some value to be had once a contest begins, but I honestly haven't a clue who might win. Last time it was obvious, Boris was going to win, nice and easy.
The Saj!!
John O, suspect that YOU are PB's pick to succeed BJ as Leader of CUP & UK.
Modesty prevents…but of course you’re absolutely right.
Given the lack of attention he has been getting in the last day, and that ConHome (I think) poll of various contenders, I assume Hunt is no longer in the running, though he may not realise it.
Hunt's main flaw seems to be that he is the first choice principally of those who would never consider voting Tory anyway.
I rather want to see it happen though, simply for the potential for limericks, puns and convenient slip-ups by interviewers and news anchors. A new Hunt-led government could even be referred to as the 'Hunta'.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Am thinking that BJx2 may well think that remaining in HoC following said humiliation, would validate his (absurb) notion he is 21st-century version of WSC.
Who famously smoldered, erupted and blasted from his perch on the backbenches, alternately ridiculous (India) and sublime (Germany).
Seriously doubt (for obvious reasons) that Johnson has anywhere near Churchill's amazing range, esp - looking forward, not back - on the plus side of the register.
BUT that surely would NOT stop him from hurling bombs and brickbats about in classic BoJo style, with plenty of time for extra-parliamentary activities AND amble opportunity to discomfort, discombobulate and maybe even destroy ministers, prime ministers and governments, left, right or center.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Am thinking that BJx2 may well think that remaining in HoC following said humiliation, would validate his (absurb) notion he is 21st-century version of WSC.
Who famously smoldered, erupted and blasted from his perch on the backbenches, alternately ridiculous (India) and sublime (Germany).
Seriously doubt (for obvious reasons) that Johnson has anywhere near Churchill's amazing range, esp - looking forward, not back - on the plus side of the register.
BUT that surely would NOT stop him from hurling bombs and brickbats about in classic BoJo style, with plenty of time for extra-parliamentary activities AND amble opportunity to discomfort, discombobulate and maybe even destroy ministers, prime ministers and governments, left, right or center.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
There's another option which is to keep taking the money and not actually show up.
Given the lack of attention he has been getting in the last day, and that ConHome (I think) poll of various contenders, I assume Hunt is no longer in the running, though he may not realise it.
Hunt's main flaw seems to be that he is the first choice principally of those who would never consider voting Tory anyway.
I rather want to see it happen though, simply for the potential for limericks, puns and convenient slip-ups by interviewers and news anchors. A new Hunt-led government could even be referred to as the 'Hunta'.
Do you really think he's first choice of people who wouldn't vote Tory anyway?
He was a rather unpopular Health Secretary for those on the left and centre left (even by the standard of Conservative health secretaries).
He's redeemed himself in their eyes, to a limited extent, by not serving in Johnson's administration. But he's eclipsed by Javid for his rather impressive resignation speech (and fact that he's got a decent back story etc). People who'd not be Tory would also "back" various infeasible "candidates" like Rory Stewart (who clearly isn't eligible to stand).
Hunt is a credible enough candidate - not favourite but part of a pack of plausible runners (rather than daft ones like Braverman). He's held one of the great offices of state, is reasonably competent (if rather dull), and isn't killing his campaign like those now remaining in the Cabinet - indeed, he has never been in Johnson's cabinet and has something of a USP in that respect. "Boring" and "managerial" aren't necessarily going to be disadvantages in this leadership election as they were in 2019. He's also been running for leader from the backbenches for a while so presumably have a core of support.
It's credible he makes the last two and, if he does, he's probably not favourite but he's one of the horses in a two horse race... and it rather depends who the other one is, whether they have problems and so on. And ConHome is interesting enough but is a subset of the rank and file which isn't all that reliable as an indicator of wider feeling in the Tory Party.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
There's another option which is to keep taking the money and not actually show up.
You would accuse the Rt Honourable Member of such a lack of integrity? For shame, sir.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
There's another option which is to keep taking the money and not actually show up.
Now that sounds like a job more in line with The Oaf’s capabilities.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
There's another option which is to keep taking the money and not actually show up.
I know people talk about Johnson's financial difficulties. But the reality is that a lot of those go away when he's ex-PM.
His memoirs will be extremely marketable (they will be total fantasy of course, but that's him). He will be gold dust on the speaker circuit. He writes well. He will have offers from businesses, benefactors and so on.
An MP's (pretty modest) salary for a couple of years - with the transparency obligations over other income, the news stories, the fact he WILL need to come in for some votes... it's just not worth it.
Plus, by standing down, he will cause a headache for the bastard who replaces him, and he'll thoroughly enjoy that. Well worth it for the sake of the money he'll get from a couple of speeches.
I genuinely feel really sorry for decent, hard-working, party members and followers who must be gutted by what is going on.
Fuck him, he voted for this prick
He didn't. If I recall correctly, he lost his nerve, contemplated resigning, then after the leadership votes were over he seemed to tacitly support BJ indirectly by defending BJ's policies when people criticised them.
Recently he has claimed that he want Boris gone
General election, 2019. Every single one of you who voted Conservative is complicit in this and should apologise.
Labour gave us the choice of Boris or Corbyn after Corbyn had already been rejected once. Should Labour apologise for sending Corbyn out to bat again?
The attempts to blame Labour for this are plain weird. If you didn’t like Boris and Corbyn there were other choices such as spoiling the ballot.
If you voted Conservative you own part of this.
Nah. We didn't dare vote Monster Raving Loony or, more obscurely, LibDem and thereby let Corbyn into No. 10.
Tonight that attitude has proven to be foolish.
Not at all. I couldn't countenance Corbyn being PM of the UK. As @biggles said, knowing all that has happened (and not knowing how everyone else might vote, @Farooq ) I would vote the same way again.
Boris cited his mandate tonight as the reason to stay. That means you.
Yes and he is of course wrong.
Can’t be much fun being part of Boris’ figleaf.
Interesting to note that you, as well as @HYUFD, are choosing to believe what Boris says.
At least I never voted for the bugger. He was demonstrably unsuited to be pm.
OF COURSE HE WAS DEMONSTRABLY UNSUITED TO BE PM.
But he wasn't Corbyn.
Go back to my earliest posts on the subject and you will find me violently agreeing with you.
But he wasn't Corbyn so I voted for him.
Foolish.
Corbyn would let Ukraine twist in the wind.
Voting for anybody supporting THAT would have been foolish.
That's simply untrue. Corbyn would have supplied weapons and stood up against the real aggressor: the US's scrooge, Ukraine.
Corbyn demanded stronger sanctions against Russia, and earlier.
I genuinely feel really sorry for decent, hard-working, party members and followers who must be gutted by what is going on.
Fuck him, he voted for this prick
He didn't. If I recall correctly, he lost his nerve, contemplated resigning, then after the leadership votes were over he seemed to tacitly support BJ indirectly by defending BJ's policies when people criticised them.
Recently he has claimed that he want Boris gone
General election, 2019. Every single one of you who voted Conservative is complicit in this and should apologise.
Labour gave us the choice of Boris or Corbyn after Corbyn had already been rejected once. Should Labour apologise for sending Corbyn out to bat again?
The attempts to blame Labour for this are plain weird. If you didn’t like Boris and Corbyn there were other choices such as spoiling the ballot.
If you voted Conservative you own part of this.
Nah. We didn't dare vote Monster Raving Loony or, more obscurely, LibDem and thereby let Corbyn into No. 10.
Tonight that attitude has proven to be foolish.
Not at all. I couldn't countenance Corbyn being PM of the UK. As @biggles said, knowing all that has happened (and not knowing how everyone else might vote, @Farooq ) I would vote the same way again.
Boris cited his mandate tonight as the reason to stay. That means you.
Yes and he is of course wrong.
Can’t be much fun being part of Boris’ figleaf.
Interesting to note that you, as well as @HYUFD, are choosing to believe what Boris says.
At least I never voted for the bugger. He was demonstrably unsuited to be pm.
OF COURSE HE WAS DEMONSTRABLY UNSUITED TO BE PM.
But he wasn't Corbyn.
Go back to my earliest posts on the subject and you will find me violently agreeing with you.
But he wasn't Corbyn so I voted for him.
Foolish.
Corbyn would let Ukraine twist in the wind.
Voting for anybody supporting THAT would have been foolish.
That's simply untrue. Corbyn would have supplied weapons and stood up against the real aggressor: the US's scrooge, Ukraine.
Corbyn demanded stronger sanctions against Russia, and earlier.
Only when they were attacking people within the Russian Federation in Cechnya. He's much more ambivalent about them attacking people outside Russia, because he can't avoid seeing American imperialism on whatever side they're fighting against.
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Even without the humiliation is he the sort happy to plod along on the backbenches, throwing himself into constituency work?
There's another option which is to keep taking the money and not actually show up.
I know people talk about Johnson's financial difficulties. But the reality is that a lot of those go away when he's ex-PM.
His memoirs will be extremely marketable (they will be total fantasy of course, but that's him). He will be gold dust on the speaker circuit. He writes well. He will have offers from businesses, benefactors and so on.
An MP's (pretty modest) salary for a couple of years - with the transparency obligations over other income, the news stories, the fact he WILL need to come in for some votes... it's just not worth it.
Plus, by standing down, he will cause a headache for the bastard who replaces him, and he'll thoroughly enjoy that. Well worth it for the sake of the money he'll get from a couple of speeches.
HIs vanity will be a close second, like Trump he will already be building his `betrayal' narrative will be harped on endlessly and I suspect he will be paint himself as the great victim. I bet he cant wait to get on the US TV/speaking circuit
I'm as confused as to why you posted that as I am about HYUFD's objection to women who twerk?
From that article Braverman comes across as calm, measured and reasonable while Thornberry comes across as a fool who knew she was asking questions that can't be answered and had to get chided by the Deputy Speaker.
Where did I object to women who twerk? That was Leon
It will be a very interesting one, and I think rather likely to happen as I struggle to see Johnson remaining in Parliament as a backbencher sat with colleagues who humiliated him.
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
Am thinking that BJx2 may well think that remaining in HoC following said humiliation, would validate his (absurb) notion he is 21st-century version of WSC.
Who famously smoldered, erupted and blasted from his perch on the backbenches, alternately ridiculous (India) and sublime (Germany).
Seriously doubt (for obvious reasons) that Johnson has anywhere near Churchill's amazing range, esp - looking forward, not back - on the plus side of the register.
BUT that surely would NOT stop him from hurling bombs and brickbats about in classic BoJo style, with plenty of time for extra-parliamentary activities AND amble opportunity to discomfort, discombobulate and maybe even destroy ministers, prime ministers and governments, left, right or center.
An English nationalist Heath.
British Putinist, I think. But yes.
Saw Ted Heath in action (so to speak) couple times, from the Strangers Gallery of House of Commons. Didn't hear him speaking, but did see him fuming.
Perhaps it was just his commentary on the immediate proceedings? Believe that TH was a real (as opposed to "true" parliamentarian with an deep respect and appreciation for the HofC.
Boris Johnson? Not so much. Which is why may NOT linger long on the backbenches after all. Esp. as he could always (in theory anyway) get re-elected at some future date if & when it suited him & the electors (assuming 21st-century Very British Coup is out of the frame).
I genuinely feel really sorry for decent, hard-working, party members and followers who must be gutted by what is going on.
Fuck him, he voted for this prick
He didn't. If I recall correctly, he lost his nerve, contemplated resigning, then after the leadership votes were over he seemed to tacitly support BJ indirectly by defending BJ's policies when people criticised them.
Recently he has claimed that he want Boris gone
General election, 2019. Every single one of you who voted Conservative is complicit in this and should apologise.
Labour gave us the choice of Boris or Corbyn after Corbyn had already been rejected once. Should Labour apologise for sending Corbyn out to bat again?
The attempts to blame Labour for this are plain weird. If you didn’t like Boris and Corbyn there were other choices such as spoiling the ballot.
If you voted Conservative you own part of this.
Nah. We didn't dare vote Monster Raving Loony or, more obscurely, LibDem and thereby let Corbyn into No. 10.
Tonight that attitude has proven to be foolish.
Not at all. I couldn't countenance Corbyn being PM of the UK. As @biggles said, knowing all that has happened (and not knowing how everyone else might vote, @Farooq ) I would vote the same way again.
Boris cited his mandate tonight as the reason to stay. That means you.
Yes and he is of course wrong.
Can’t be much fun being part of Boris’ figleaf.
Interesting to note that you, as well as @HYUFD, are choosing to believe what Boris says.
At least I never voted for the bugger. He was demonstrably unsuited to be pm.
OF COURSE HE WAS DEMONSTRABLY UNSUITED TO BE PM.
But he wasn't Corbyn.
Go back to my earliest posts on the subject and you will find me violently agreeing with you.
But he wasn't Corbyn so I voted for him.
Foolish.
Corbyn would let Ukraine twist in the wind.
Voting for anybody supporting THAT would have been foolish.
That's simply untrue. Corbyn would have supplied weapons and stood up against the real aggressor: the US's scrooge, Ukraine.
Corbyn demanded stronger sanctions against Russia, and earlier.
Only when they were attacking people within the Russian Federation in Cechnya. He's much more ambivalent about them attacking people outside Russia, because he can't avoid seeing American imperialism on whatever side they're fighting against.
And, if you want to be cynical, probably because Russians were funding the Conservative Party, something which has not happened since *checks notes* the week before last.
"Desperate Boris could 'go nuclear' and drag Queen into his shameless battle to remain as PM by asking her for snap General Election - but critics brand move 'deluded madness' that would spark constitutional crisis if Monarch says no"
The more I think about, the more I see the need for a medical intervention on Johnson. It is not healthy to be operating under such delusions. And there is no way that he is acting rationally at the moment.
We are beyond the men in grey suits now. But nice doctors in white coats might be the appropriate response.
Enough is enough. He has lost the right to determine how he leaves office.
A sane man would have taken the hint and quit this evening. Only a man who has lost control of reason would believe he had a future in politics.
The more I think about, the more I see the need for a medical intervention on Johnson. It is not healthy to be operating under such delusions. And there is no way that he is acting rationally at the moment.
We are beyond the men in grey suits now. But nice doctors in white coats might be the appropriate response.
Enough is enough. He has lost the right to determine how he leaves office.
A sane man would have taken the hint and quit this evening. Only a man who has lost control of reason would believe he had a future in politics.
I agree, maybe the medical card provides a face saving way out - he looks blxxdy terrible. I wonder how long Carrie stays with him
The more I think about, the more I see the need for a medical intervention on Johnson. It is not healthy to be operating under such delusions. And there is no way that he is acting rationally at the moment.
We are beyond the men in grey suits now. But nice doctors in white coats might be the appropriate response.
Enough is enough. He has lost the right to determine how he leaves office.
A sane man would have taken the hint and quit this evening. Only a man who has lost control of reason would believe he had a future in politics.
Perhaps Boris will see sense in the morning, after some time for reflection that was barely possible on a day of relentless new developments.
On April 11, 1829, [then Tennessee Governor] Sam Houston and his bride of eleven weeks, Eliza Allen, abruptly ended their marriage. Neither would speak publicly of the cause for the rest of their lives. Eliza returned to her parents’ home in Sumner County. Sam fled to Arkansas territory to live among the Cherokee, after resigning as governor of Tennessee. . . . .
In 1829, at age forty-one, former Major General and now Governor Sam Houston stood poised for a national career, as many saw him as the successor to his mentor, President Jackson. But his personal demons worked against his ambition – he was legendary for his drinking, his melodrama, and his renegade spirit.
Perhaps to overcome his reputation, perhaps for love, . . . [o]n January 22, 1829, Sam married the 19 year old Eliza Allen at her home near Gallatin [TN].
The honeymoon soured within two days of the wedding. . . . Some say she confessed to Sam that she had been in love with a young terminally consumptive attorney, William Tyree, but she married Sam to please her parents. . . . Their marriage unofficially ended on April 11, 1829.
The scandal of the Houstons’ separation spread like wildfire . . . A week later, on April 23, Sam fled from Nashville. “I am sorry for him and more sorry for the young lady he has left [a friend wrote]. I know nothing that can be relied on as true… Oh, what a fall for a major general, a member of congress, and a Governor.”
Sam retreated to the home of his friend Oolooteka, also known as John Jolly, in Arkansas Territory. Before long his grief must have eased – he entered into a Cherokee marriage with Tiana Rogers Gentry in May 1830. But he left Tiana behind to go to Texas in December 1832....
Eliza never pursued a divorce, although it would have been allowed under Tennessee law to a deserted wife. But Sam first tried for a divorce in 1833 in the Mexican State of Coahuilla and Texas – the grounds were that “a separation took place between your said petitioner and his said wife and that they have never since that time, nor can they ever, meet again.”
Sam was more successful when he became president of the new Republic of Texas in October 1836. By April 1837, he achieved his divorce by asking for a hearing before a district court judge, an exception to the law that would have required an act of divorce by the Texas Congress.... Sam married 21 year old Margaret Lea on May 9, 1840, and the couple would have eight children.
Eliza eventually got word of the divorce. On November 8, 1840, she married 42 year old Dr. Elmore Douglass, a widower with three young girls. Elmore was the first cousin of her sister-in-law, Louisa Douglass Allen. Together Eliza and Elmore had three daughters and a son, only one of whom lived to adulthood. . . .
I'm as confused as to why you posted that as I am about HYUFD's objection to women who twerk?
From that article Braverman comes across as calm, measured and reasonable while Thornberry comes across as a fool who knew she was asking questions that can't be answered and had to get chided by the Deputy Speaker.
Where did I object to women who twerk? That was Leon
Where did I object to twerking per se? I did not
Now I'm even more confused by your objection.
So women twerking is fine. Is it black women twerking that represents the fall of civilisation?
Maybe twerking with relation to abortion is the problem? If you believe it's a sober subject, which I think most people in this country believe it is, on both sides.
As No10 went into meltdown today, SNP has been busy behind the scenes... threatening the victim (a party staffer) of sex pest MP Patrick Grady with misconduct action & having his work email account locked after he sent an email to MPs/staff criticising SNP response to the scandal
I genuinely feel really sorry for decent, hard-working, party members and followers who must be gutted by what is going on.
Fuck him, he voted for this prick
He didn't. If I recall correctly, he lost his nerve, contemplated resigning, then after the leadership votes were over he seemed to tacitly support BJ indirectly by defending BJ's policies when people criticised them.
Recently he has claimed that he want Boris gone
General election, 2019. Every single one of you who voted Conservative is complicit in this and should apologise.
Labour gave us the choice of Boris or Corbyn after Corbyn had already been rejected once. Should Labour apologise for sending Corbyn out to bat again?
The attempts to blame Labour for this are plain weird. If you didn’t like Boris and Corbyn there were other choices such as spoiling the ballot.
If you voted Conservative you own part of this.
Nah. We didn't dare vote Monster Raving Loony or, more obscurely, LibDem and thereby let Corbyn into No. 10.
Tonight that attitude has proven to be foolish.
Not at all. I couldn't countenance Corbyn being PM of the UK. As @biggles said, knowing all that has happened (and not knowing how everyone else might vote, @Farooq ) I would vote the same way again.
Boris cited his mandate tonight as the reason to stay. That means you.
Yes and he is of course wrong.
Can’t be much fun being part of Boris’ figleaf.
Interesting to note that you, as well as @HYUFD, are choosing to believe what Boris says.
At least I never voted for the bugger. He was demonstrably unsuited to be pm.
OF COURSE HE WAS DEMONSTRABLY UNSUITED TO BE PM.
But he wasn't Corbyn.
Go back to my earliest posts on the subject and you will find me violently agreeing with you.
But he wasn't Corbyn so I voted for him.
Foolish.
Corbyn would let Ukraine twist in the wind.
Voting for anybody supporting THAT would have been foolish.
That's simply untrue. Corbyn would have supplied weapons and stood up against the real aggressor: the US's scrooge, Ukraine.
Corbyn demanded stronger sanctions against Russia, and earlier.
Just yesterday, Corbyn stood up in parliament and asked what the government was doing to facilitate a ceasefire. Any ceasefire atm would be to Russia's advantage and to the detriment of Ukraine - especially as Russia is still coming out with the rubbish about wanting a whole lot of Eastern Europe under its thumb.
Worse, such calls (and people who agree with them) are helping to demolish the consensus that is helping Ukraine.
So yeah, Corbyn wants to help Russia - unless you say he's too thick or naive to understand the implications of what he is calling for?
- Can't see Javid or Sunak getting it. Having an ex-banker - both of whom take a fiscally conservative line - as PM when we are in such a cost of living crisis (which is about to get worse) isn't going to cut it with the voters.
- Zahawi has proved himself a total c*nt with his actions over the past 72 hours so discount him.
- Raab is probably out due to concerns over his seat. I don't think Truss will be seen as heavyweight enough given the domestic / foreign crisis we are in.
- Wallace would be a good bet. Solid, dependable, would be good for the Ukraine crisis and would probably satisfy both the Blue and Red Wall MPs.
- If you want an outside bet, I personally don't think Baker will stand but I do think he is making these statements to get someone on that wing of the party to do so. Could be Barclay but I've mentioned as a (really) outside bet before McVey - stood before, strong influence in the RW section of the party as well as the Brexit part.
- If you want an outside bet, I personally don't think Baker will stand but I do think he is making these statements to get someone on that wing of the party to do so. Could be Barclay but I've mentioned as a (really) outside bet before McVey - stood before, strong influence in the RW section of the party as well as the Brexit part.
I forgot she was still an MP. She's been very quiet recently.
Comments
It is simultaneously disarming and unanswerable, and should save me multiple times
And with that triumph ensured, I bid thee goodnight
Unless the UK is attacked or we get London Bridge it’s hard to see a way out for Johnson .
Bound to be some value to be had once a contest begins, but I honestly haven't a clue who might win. Last time it was obvious, Boris was going to win, nice and easy.
I think it’s a distinct possibility at this stage, since Boris seems to be providing the 22 with evidence that he cannot be trusted to continue even after a resignation.
It's almost credible.
2022 1.02
2023 30
2024 or later 38
7k (15%) majority, so not an ultra-marginal but well within Wakefield swing. However, there will be a new Tory leader hoping for a honeymoon. So a hold will be, at least, a sign of Conservative progress, while a loss will look like a quick end to the honeymoon and moving towards a Tory General Election flop.
If I were Labour, I'd be setting up the HQ right now and bussing the activists in this weekend.
2024 1.36
2023 5.6
2022 10
I rather want to see it happen though, simply for the potential for limericks, puns and convenient slip-ups by interviewers and news anchors. A new Hunt-led government could even be referred to as the 'Hunta'.
Mordaunt 5
Sunak 7.5
Wallace 9
Truss 9.6
Javid 10.5
Zahawi 12
Hunt 13.5
Tugendhat 15
Eustice 21
Gove 23
Raab 40
Braverman 44
51 bar
Male 1.29
Female 3.05
Female 1.54
Male 2.22
Who famously smoldered, erupted and blasted from his perch on the backbenches, alternately ridiculous (India) and sublime (Germany).
Seriously doubt (for obvious reasons) that Johnson has anywhere near Churchill's amazing range, esp - looking forward, not back - on the plus side of the register.
BUT that surely would NOT stop him from hurling bombs and brickbats about in classic BoJo style, with plenty of time for extra-parliamentary activities AND amble opportunity to discomfort, discombobulate and maybe even destroy ministers, prime ministers and governments, left, right or center.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_government_crisis
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Pincher_scandal
Good for petrol prices (it’ll take a couple of weeks to feed through to the forecourts), but bad news for the global economy.
He was a rather unpopular Health Secretary for those on the left and centre left (even by the standard of Conservative health secretaries).
He's redeemed himself in their eyes, to a limited extent, by not serving in Johnson's administration. But he's eclipsed by Javid for his rather impressive resignation speech (and fact that he's got a decent back story etc). People who'd not be Tory would also "back" various infeasible "candidates" like Rory Stewart (who clearly isn't eligible to stand).
Hunt is a credible enough candidate - not favourite but part of a pack of plausible runners (rather than daft ones like Braverman). He's held one of the great offices of state, is reasonably competent (if rather dull), and isn't killing his campaign like those now remaining in the Cabinet - indeed, he has never been in Johnson's cabinet and has something of a USP in that respect. "Boring" and "managerial" aren't necessarily going to be disadvantages in this leadership election as they were in 2019. He's also been running for leader from the backbenches for a while so presumably have a core of support.
It's credible he makes the last two and, if he does, he's probably not favourite but he's one of the horses in a two horse race... and it rather depends who the other one is, whether they have problems and so on. And ConHome is interesting enough but is a subset of the rank and file which isn't all that reliable as an indicator of wider feeling in the Tory Party.
His memoirs will be extremely marketable (they will be total fantasy of course, but that's him). He will be gold dust on the speaker circuit. He writes well. He will have offers from businesses, benefactors and so on.
An MP's (pretty modest) salary for a couple of years - with the transparency obligations over other income, the news stories, the fact he WILL need to come in for some votes... it's just not worth it.
Plus, by standing down, he will cause a headache for the bastard who replaces him, and he'll thoroughly enjoy that. Well worth it for the sake of the money he'll get from a couple of speeches.
Saw Ted Heath in action (so to speak) couple times, from the Strangers Gallery of House of Commons. Didn't hear him speaking, but did see him fuming.
Perhaps it was just his commentary on the immediate proceedings? Believe that TH was a real (as opposed to "true" parliamentarian with an deep respect and appreciation for the HofC.
Boris Johnson? Not so much. Which is why may NOT linger long on the backbenches after all. Esp. as he could always (in theory anyway) get re-elected at some future date if & when it suited him & the electors (assuming 21st-century Very British Coup is out of the frame).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10989569/Desperate-Boris-nuclear-drag-Queen-shameless-battle-stay-PM.html
We are beyond the men in grey suits now. But nice doctors in white coats might be the appropriate response.
Enough is enough. He has lost the right to determine how he leaves office.
A sane man would have taken the hint and quit this evening. Only a man who has lost control of reason would believe he had a future in politics.
Note, the Mail is still, even after yesterday's demolition derby, supporting Boris Johnson:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10989609/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-truth-Mr-Johnson-stands-head-shoulders-assassins.html
Sam Houston and Eliza Allen: “Ten Thousand Imputed Slanders”
https://tennesseehistory.org/sam-houston-eliza-allen-ten-thousand-imputed-slanders/
On April 11, 1829, [then Tennessee Governor] Sam Houston and his bride of eleven weeks, Eliza Allen, abruptly ended their marriage. Neither would speak publicly of the cause for the rest of their lives. Eliza returned to her parents’ home in Sumner County. Sam fled to Arkansas territory to live among the Cherokee, after resigning as governor of Tennessee. . . . .
In 1829, at age forty-one, former Major General and now Governor Sam Houston stood poised for a national career, as many saw him as the successor to his mentor, President Jackson. But his personal demons worked against his ambition – he was legendary for his drinking, his melodrama, and his renegade spirit.
Perhaps to overcome his reputation, perhaps for love, . . . [o]n January 22, 1829, Sam married the 19 year old Eliza Allen at her home near Gallatin [TN].
The honeymoon soured within two days of the wedding. . . . Some say she confessed to Sam that she had been in love with a young terminally consumptive attorney, William Tyree, but she married Sam to please her parents. . . . Their marriage unofficially ended on April 11, 1829.
The scandal of the Houstons’ separation spread like wildfire . . . A week later, on April 23, Sam fled from Nashville. “I am sorry for him and more sorry for the young lady he has left [a friend wrote]. I know nothing that can be relied on as true… Oh, what a fall for a major general, a member of congress, and a Governor.”
Sam retreated to the home of his friend Oolooteka, also known as John Jolly, in Arkansas Territory. Before long his grief must have eased – he entered into a Cherokee marriage with Tiana Rogers Gentry in May 1830. But he left Tiana behind to go to Texas in December 1832....
Eliza never pursued a divorce, although it would have been allowed under Tennessee law to a deserted wife. But Sam first tried for a divorce in 1833 in the Mexican State of Coahuilla and Texas – the grounds were that “a separation took place between your said petitioner and his said wife and that they have never since that time, nor can they ever, meet again.”
Sam was more successful when he became president of the new Republic of Texas in October 1836. By April 1837, he achieved his divorce by asking for a hearing before a district court judge, an exception to the law that would have required an act of divorce by the Texas Congress.... Sam married 21 year old Margaret Lea on May 9, 1840, and the couple would have eight children.
Eliza eventually got word of the divorce. On November 8, 1840, she married 42 year old Dr. Elmore Douglass, a widower with three young girls. Elmore was the first cousin of her sister-in-law, Louisa Douglass Allen. Together Eliza and Elmore had three daughters and a son, only one of whom lived to adulthood. . . .
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2022/07/07/the-front-pages-on-bojos-desperate-attempt-to-survive/
Comments not yet open
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/1f7d6322-7f63-4053-85dd-8355cb451c71
As No10 went into meltdown today, SNP has been busy behind the scenes... threatening the victim (a party staffer) of sex pest MP Patrick Grady with misconduct action & having his work email account locked after he sent an email to MPs/staff criticising SNP response to the scandal
https://twitter.com/chrismusson/status/1544780591190757377
Appointing a sex-pest to the Whips office is a resigning matter, isn’t it?
They seem to have usurped the Sun in terms of 72 point pithy political commentary.
Worse, such calls (and people who agree with them) are helping to demolish the consensus that is helping Ukraine.
So yeah, Corbyn wants to help Russia - unless you say he's too thick or naive to understand the implications of what he is calling for?
- Can't see Javid or Sunak getting it. Having an ex-banker - both of whom take a fiscally conservative line - as PM when we are in such a cost of living crisis (which is about to get worse) isn't going to cut it with the voters.
- Zahawi has proved himself a total c*nt with his actions over the past 72 hours so discount him.
- Raab is probably out due to concerns over his seat. I don't think Truss will be seen as heavyweight enough given the domestic / foreign crisis we are in.
- Wallace would be a good bet. Solid, dependable, would be good for the Ukraine crisis and would probably satisfy both the Blue and Red Wall MPs.
- If you want an outside bet, I personally don't think Baker will stand but I do think he is making these statements to get someone on that wing of the party to do so. Could be Barclay but I've mentioned as a (really) outside bet before McVey - stood before, strong influence in the RW section of the party as well as the Brexit part.