He's an entertaining absolute tw*t. That's how he's managed to get as far as he has, and it's also why being so invisible may hurt him. People want entertaining.
Corbyn, dependent on LibDems and SNP, is going to be a strictly limited experiment for now. That shouldn't be the end of the world for the Tories - on the contrary, if it's as bad as they think, they will be elected back next time. Perhaps what they really worry about is that it won't be as bad as they predict?
The problem at the moment is that normal political rules - mess up and get thrown out on your ear - don't necessarily seem to apply because the polarisation of the electorate means that the voters have priorities other than competence.
So, from a Tory perspective the nightmare scenario is that Corbyn gets into power, it's really truly awful, but Corbyn finds enough wedge issues to keep his voters onside and stays in power.
What you're forgetting is if the Tories mess this up they're history. They get replaced by the Brexit Party
How can the Brexit Party win a seat like Esher and Walton, for example?
The LDs may win that one but Esher and Walton is in Elmbridge which voted 59.5% Remain, yet overall at least 62% of Conservative constituencies are in areas which voted Leave
That doesn't mean that they would vote Leave today, nor that the way to win them is to campaign on a Leave manifesto. For instance, there was that Focaldata analysis last year that suggested Johnson's constituency had moved from 43.6% to 51.4% Remain, whilst Gove's constituency had moved from 48% to 50.2% Remain.
Also I'd remind you that the Tories didn't get a majority in the last GE - they need to win more seats than in 2017 to gain a majority. Who do they take those extra seats from?
Over 400 constituencies voted for the Brexit Party in the European Parliament elections last month, the Tories currently only hold 318.
Both Hillingdon, containing Uxbridge and Surrey Heath voted for the Brexit Party
And Euro elections attract "kick the cat" protest votes on a low turnout. Compare with 2014 - Farage's UKIP topped the polls with 27% of the vote, but got half that in the 2015 GE and gained one seat. Farage got 30% of the vote in the 2019 Euros.
Yes, if there was a GE now I'd expect TBP to get around 15% ( a bit better than UKIP and get maybe a couple of seats). I'd expect the LibDems to beat that and obviously increase their seats, so that whichever of the others won most seats would be without a majority.
He's an entertaining absolute tw*t. That's how he's managed to get as far as he has, and it's also why being so invisible may hurt him. People want entertaining.
He wasn't entertaining last night. He was nervous, shifty, defensive, bumbling, and evidently had no master of his brief whatsoever. Laura.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
I'm not certain that giving (or selling???) the tape to the Guardian was the proper thing to do.
The Guardian doesn't pay for stories. All the ones complaining about the tape, do.
It’s now a reasonable inference that the row was serious. If it wasn’t, we’d surely have had a full explanation by now, if necessary with Boris Johnson doing his Hugh Grant “I did a bad thing” impression.
Do you think the Guardian are waiting for the right moment to release the tape?
They’re waiting to see if Boris Johnson provably lies when he eventually does give his explanation.
then broadcasting to the world...
Where can I hear it?
When was it broadcast?
AFAIK the Guardian have sat on it.
Do you think the newspapers now complaining about it (and would have paid handsomely for it) would have done the same?
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
I'm not certain that giving (or selling???) the tape to the Guardian was the proper thing to do.
The Guardian doesn't pay for stories. All the ones complaining about the tape, do.
That puts the neighbours' action in a better light. TBH. If our 'future PM' appears to be beating up his partner there is, I feel, some degree of public interest. After all, if, at a future date, she were to flounce out of 10 Downing Street screaming at him it would unquestionably be reported.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
I'm not certain that giving (or selling???) the tape to the Guardian was the proper thing to do.
The Guardian doesn't pay for stories. All the ones complaining about the tape, do.
That puts the neighbours' action in a better light.
Giving it to possibly the only paper that will sit on it, rather than selling it to the many who would cheerfully broadcast it.....but, but, but.....they're Remainers.....
Now we've got the Mail's finest on the job-and we haven't heard from Sarah yet-these stories will be coming thick and fast. The Lady Chatterley/Mellor photo seems a very odd decision. An invitation if ever there was one.Personally I'm looking forward to Marina Hyde's take.
I thought Boris came across quite well in his interview with Laura?
You're seeing something in Boris Johnson, that most of the Conservative Party membership also see in him. Which is why he will be elected.
I am baffled what it is ?
He is able to brush away any objection or challenge with a mix of confidence, bluster and distraction.
They hope he can magic away real world challenges in a similar fashion.
I can understand the theory. Conservative members want Johnson's optimism. Brexit, a highly unsuccessful project so far, needs to be sold. But he's not doing the selling.
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
It’s a shame this is paywalled. It is utterly superb. The Tory party - and therefore the country - is in the hands of 18 year-old public schoolboys with no serious connection to or understanding of real life. It’s all one, long, Oxford Union election campaign.
You are right, it is a very good read, and frightening how the key characteristics that have shaped our politics were all on display in the 80s by these bunch of students.
A key point is that ”But they were debaters, not policymakers. They couldn’t debate Brussels into submission, because the EU’s negotiators followed rules. ”
With part of the conclusion being a semi-humorous comparison with the Cambridge spies: ”Admittedly, the comparison between the Cambridge and Oxford sets isn’t entirely fair: though both betrayed Britain’s interests to the benefit of Moscow, the Brexiters didn’t mean to.”
and a nice self-deprecating finish by the author:“I deplore what my contemporaries are doing to Britain. But given that I too learnt at Oxford how to write and speak for a living without much knowledge, I can hardly talk.”
He's an entertaining absolute tw*t. That's how he's managed to get as far as he has, and it's also why being so invisible may hurt him. People want entertaining.
The crisis the country is facing doesn`t need entertaining. What is needs is concentration and problem-solving. Not that Johnson is entertaining anyway.
He's an entertaining absolute tw*t. That's how he's managed to get as far as he has, and it's also why being so invisible may hurt him. People want entertaining.
The crisis the country is facing doesn`t need entertaining. What is needs is concentration and problem-solving. Not that Johnson is entertaining anyway.
I agree with the first two sentences - and that is why I couldn't vote for a party led by him. As for your last one: that is very much in the eye of the beholder.
It’s a shame this is paywalled. It is utterly superb. The Tory party - and therefore the country - is in the hands of 18 year-old public schoolboys with no serious connection to or understanding of real life. It’s all one, long, Oxford Union election campaign.
You are right, it is a very good read, and frightening how the key characteristics that have shaped our politics were all on display in the 80s by these bunch of students.
A key point is that ”But they were debaters, not policymakers. They couldn’t debate Brussels into submission, because the EU’s negotiators followed rules. ”
With part of the conclusion being a semi-humorous comparison with the Cambridge spies: ”Admittedly, the comparison between the Cambridge and Oxford sets isn’t entirely fair: though both betrayed Britain’s interests to the benefit of Moscow, the Brexiters didn’t mean to.”
and a nice self-deprecating finish by the author:“I deplore what my contemporaries are doing to Britain. But given that I too learnt at Oxford how to write and speak for a living without much knowledge, I can hardly talk.”
Google one of the bits in italics and follow the link.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
Only 28% in favour of releasing the row to the press. The number of Tory voters let alone members in that lot will be close to zero.
But, a high number of #FBPE types and MSM journalists who would be keen to keep the story going.
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
I have not the slightest interest in those making the recording. If other people want to think that they have behaved badly, they are welcome to do so. Now, back to what the whole affair says about Boris Johnson, which is actually a matter of some public interest.
As someone else said somewhere, Boris seems to have hair which grows and shrinks overnight. In the pictures it looks longer than it did on the box last night. When were these pictures taken?
Incidentally I realise I may be duplicating other posts but I had an enjoyable day at Chelmsford yesterday watching Essex cricketers demolish those of Somerset.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
Only 28% in favour of releasing the row to the press. The number of Tory voters let alone members in that lot will be close to zero.
But, a high number of #FBPE types and MSM journalists who would be keen to keep the story going.
They need to be careful they don’t inadvertently make him more popular with those who actually have a vote in the leadership election.
See the US press and their demonisation of Trump for a recent example. There will be a complete meltdown of the MSM in the US if he’s re-elected.
I thought Boris came across quite well in his interview with Laura?
You're seeing something in Boris Johnson, that most of the Conservative Party membership also see in him. Which is why he will be elected.
I am baffled what it is ?
He is able to brush away any objection or challenge with a mix of confidence, bluster and distraction.
They hope he can magic away real world challenges in a similar fashion.
I can understand the theory. Conservative members want Johnson's optimism. Brexit, a highly unsuccessful project so far, needs to be sold. But he's not doing the selling.
It's early days but it feels like Boris's credibility is disappearing at a rate previously unimaginable in a senior politician. Possibly Jeffrey Archer during his mayor of London period. Even the normally courteous Laura K couldn't stop herself patronising him. I'm struggling to see how he gets out of this.
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
I have not the slightest interest in those making the recording. If other people want to think that they have behaved badly, they are welcome to do so. Now, back to what the whole affair says about Boris Johnson, which is actually a matter of some public interest.
I'm glad you are on board with the whole "they are sitting the the recording until Boris verifiable lies" theory. I'm suprised the existence of the recording was made public so early.
Centre core was travelling at 11000 km hr when released; I wonder if a landing is even possible with that much PE. They'll get the next one because the mission profile won't be as demanding as the US Defence demands from a commercial customer
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
I have not the slightest interest in those making the recording. If other people want to think that they have behaved badly, they are welcome to do so. Now, back to what the whole affair says about Boris Johnson, which is actually a matter of some public interest.
'When the wise man points at the moon only the fool looks at the finger'
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
Only 28% in favour of releasing the row to the press. The number of Tory voters let alone members in that lot will be close to zero.
But, a high number of #FBPE types and MSM journalists who would be keen to keep the story going.
51% of Labour voters vs 19% of Tory voters, 22% Other made up the 28% who approved going to the press in the Yougov Daily.
It's early days but it feels like Boris's credibility is disappearing at a rate previously unimaginable in a senior politician. Possibly Jeffrey Archer during his mayor of London period. Even the normally courteous Laura K couldn't stop herself patronising him. I'm struggling to see how he gets out of this.
His strength has always been his ability to get people laughing along with him.
If it switches such that most people are laughing at him, this is terminal for a politician.
Rees-Mogg really has revealed himself to be a big old crybaby, hasn't he? I remember when his mask slipped after the no confidence vote in May and he started inventing constitutional norms and whinging about the result (whether one thinks the result was a positive one or not), and now he acts like how dare people try to stop the destined prophet of Brexit from doing what he wants. I've no time for left wing hate mobs (or right wing hate mobs for that matter), but given how he and those like him have been among the most difficult in all of this, have shot themselves inthe foot repeatedly, he really comes off as more than a little pathetic.
Boris has more dignity than Rees-Mogg - there's a reason the former actually managed to make it to high office, for however long. Like him or loathe him there's more to him than a posh accent and an ill fitting suit.
Seriously are you pissed?
I don't drink. I'm not saying Boris is dignified or has much substance, but over the past year Rees-Mogg has revealed himself to be pretty empty.
Centre core was travelling at 11000 km hr when released; I wonder if a landing is even possible with that much PE. They'll get the next one because the mission profile won't be as demanding as the US Defence demands from a commercial customer
They said that centre core was the most difficult landing they ever attempted, and they got it pretty close.
The synchronised landings of the first two rockets are like 2-second F1 pitstops - I could quite happily watch them all day, in slow motion or in real time. They’ve not crashed a land-back rocket for a couple of years now, amazing achievement.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
Only 28% in favour of releasing the row to the press. The number of Tory voters let alone members in that lot will be close to zero.
But, a high number of #FBPE types and MSM journalists who would be keen to keep the story going.
They need to be careful they don’t inadvertently make him more popular with those who actually have a vote in the leadership election.
See the US press and their demonisation of Trump for a recent example. There will be a complete meltdown of the MSM in the US if he’s re-elected.
NB As the thread header notes, winning the Conservative leadership is not all that he is trying to do. If by his evasiveness he further alienates doubting Conservative MPs, he's not doing himself any favours.
I thought Boris came across quite well in his interview with Laura?
You're seeing something in Boris Johnson, that most of the Conservative Party membership also see in him. Which is why he will be elected.
I am baffled what it is ?
He is able to brush away any objection or challenge with a mix of confidence, bluster and distraction.
They hope he can magic away real world challenges in a similar fashion.
I can understand the theory. Conservative members want Johnson's optimism. Brexit, a highly unsuccessful project so far, needs to be sold. But he's not doing the selling.
It's early days but it feels like Boris's credibility is disappearing at a rate previously unimaginable in a senior politician. Possibly Jeffrey Archer during his mayor of London period. Even the normally courteous Laura K couldn't stop herself patronising him. I'm struggling to see how he gets out of this.
Boris in his interview appears to have dreamed up a 'no deal' exit that requires a deal?
Actually what he was bumbling towards was Mrs Mays Deal. Citizens tick, money tick, implementation period tick, FTA tick, even allowing time for border technology to emerge in something sounding suspiciously like an Irish Backstop...
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
I have not the slightest interest in those making the recording. If other people want to think that they have behaved badly, they are welcome to do so. Now, back to what the whole affair says about Boris Johnson, which is actually a matter of some public interest.
'When the wise man points at the moon only the fool looks at the finger'
Out of interest, and apropos of nothing in particular, where should we look when a complete moron points at the moon?
"It was good that they called the police when they overheard the conspirators loudly plotting a murder but it was beyond the pale that they recorded the conversation that they could hear in their own home."
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
I have not the slightest interest in those making the recording. If other people want to think that they have behaved badly, they are welcome to do so. Now, back to what the whole affair says about Boris Johnson, which is actually a matter of some public interest.
'When the wise man points at the moon only the fool looks at the finger'
Out of interest, and apropos of nothing in particular, where should we look when a complete moron points at the moon?
Interesting question. I'll get on the blower to Confucius.......
Mr. B2, Kuenssberg did ask him about that, but didn't press home the point quite enough, perhaps.
His idea requires a transition, which requires a deal. But he doesn't want the deal. He wants to take some bits of the deal. Which requires the EU to agree.
Odds on that seem eminently long. And what does he do if they say no?
I thought he came across as a complete ****ing idiot, but then, I don't have a vote.
Rees-Mogg really has revealed himself to be a big old crybaby, hasn't he? I remember when his mask slipped after the no confidence vote in May and he started inventing constitutional norms and whinging about the result (whether one thinks the result was a positive one or not), and now he acts like how dare people try to stop the destined prophet of Brexit from doing what he wants. I've no time for left wing hate mobs (or right wing hate mobs for that matter), but given how he and those like him have been among the most difficult in all of this, have shot themselves inthe foot repeatedly, he really comes off as more than a little pathetic.
Boris has more dignity than Rees-Mogg - there's a reason the former actually managed to make it to high office, for however long. Like him or loathe him there's more to him than a posh accent and an ill fitting suit.
Seriously are you pissed?
I don't drink. I'm not saying Boris is dignified or has much substance, but over the past year Rees-Mogg has revealed himself to be pretty empty.
But also one of the best lays PB'ers have ever had.
a) The neighbours were right to tape the row and should publish as a public interest matter. b) They are curtain twitching busybodies c) Neither d) Both e) Don't know f) Don't care
It is said that there is a difference between what is in the public interest, and what the public may find interesting.
As others have speculated, the known existence of the tape is the reason why Boris is saying nothing, in case he says something that directly contradicts what’s on the tape.
Sure, my office colleagues would plump for b) though. And I suspect everyone with #FBPE behind their name on twitter go for a). But that's anecdotal and my own thoughts. I'd like to see some polling on it.
I’d have thought the Great British Public would go for d).
Only 28% in favour of releasing the row to the press. The number of Tory voters let alone members in that lot will be close to zero.
But, a high number of #FBPE types and MSM journalists who would be keen to keep the story going.
They need to be careful they don’t inadvertently make him more popular with those who actually have a vote in the leadership election.
See the US press and their demonisation of Trump for a recent example. There will be a complete meltdown of the MSM in the US if he’s re-elected.
NB As the thread header notes, winning the Conservative leadership is not all that he is trying to do. If by his evasiveness he further alienates doubting Conservative MPs, he's not doing himself any favours.
Oh indeed. Most of the media are just waking up to this, but we’ve been discussing it here for months.
September election is 12 on Betfair, and October election is 6.2. If Boris is the next Con leader I find it difficult see how we avoid an election. Corbyn PM after Theresa May at 65 is also probably worth a couple of quid.
Mr. B2, Kuenssberg did ask him about that, but didn't press home the point quite enough, perhaps.
His idea requires a transition, which requires a deal. But he doesn't want the deal. He wants to take some bits of the deal. Which requires the EU to agree.
Odds on that seem eminently long. And what does he do if they say no?
I thought he came across as a complete ****ing idiot, but then, I don't have a vote.
And we probably know far too much about Brexit than (what is good for us) 99% of those people who have a vote
Its notable to me that even Guido was suggesting yesterday that they couldn't see the no comment approach from Boris lasting, and that the mystique only drives the story. Even as someone who thinks the story has run its course Boris is almost keeping it around it seems to me.
I was a big fan of Game of Thrones and I finally got round to watching series seven. I stopped after episode six, where the dead hand of Hollywood made it unwatchable. It's now a cartoon series
It was formulaic to the nth degree. We've had a soppy love story, a buddy movie, and characters making long speeches about motherhood and apple pie.
When it stayed close to the George Martin book (which rambled at times), we had treachery gaining the upper hand, the goody-goodys meeting horrible ends, and unexpected twists. When someone was in immense peril, it was often fatal.
I will have to wait for the film of Bojo, I suppose, as long as Hollywood writers don't interfere with it.
Edit there's no way the current writers would have allowed the Scouse wedding scene where the Starks got their come-uppance.
Boris in his interview appears to have dreamed up a 'no deal' exit that requires a deal?
Actually what he was bumbling towards was Mrs Mays Deal. Citizens tick, money tick, implementation period tick, FTA tick, even allowing time for border technology to emerge in something sounding suspiciously like an Irish Backstop...
Grieve is already going down history as facilitating no deal. He hasn't voted for it, but his refusal to compromise has kept it on the table. His self righteousness cannot be allowed to stand, he is not one of the reasonable ones.
Boris in his interview appears to have dreamed up a 'no deal' exit that requires a deal?
Actually what he was bumbling towards was Mrs Mays Deal. Citizens tick, money tick, implementation period tick, FTA tick, even allowing time for border technology to emerge in something sounding suspiciously like an Irish Backstop...
So are you agreeing with him or disagreeing?
Neither. He is a buffoon who doesn't understand the issues.
He objects to the Deal then plans the same. Not going to stay popular with the ERG for long.
Grieve is already going down history as facilitating no deal. He hasn't voted for it, but his refusal to compromise has kept it on the table. His self righteousness cannot be allowed to stand, he is not one of the reasonable ones.
Absolutely if Grieve, Soubry and others really wanted no deal off the table they have had three votes to do that. They voted every single time to keep no deal on the table.
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Prediction - he comes out of it well if there are lots of questions about his personal life.
One can't help thinking 'older man has tiff with trophy-wife-to-be' is an effective smokescreen to deflect from his utterly hopeless programme for Brexit.
Boris in his interview appears to have dreamed up a 'no deal' exit that requires a deal?
Actually what he was bumbling towards was Mrs Mays Deal. Citizens tick, money tick, implementation period tick, FTA tick, even allowing time for border technology to emerge in something sounding suspiciously like an Irish Backstop...
So are you agreeing with him or disagreeing?
Neither. He is a buffoon who doesn't understand the issues.
He objects to the Deal then plans the same. Not going to stay popular with the ERG for long.
The bulk of the deal is fine. If he can do something about the backstop no reason the rest of the deal shouldn't pass.
I thought Boris came across quite well in his interview with Laura?
You're seeing something in Boris Johnson, that most of the Conservative Party membership also see in him. Which is why he will be elected.
I am baffled what it is ?
He is able to brush away any objection or challenge with a mix of confidence, bluster and distraction.
They hope he can magic away real world challenges in a similar fashion.
I can understand the theory. Conservative members want Johnson's optimism. Brexit, a highly unsuccessful project so far, needs to be sold. But he's not doing the selling.
It's early days but it feels like Boris's credibility is disappearing at a rate previously unimaginable in a senior politician. Possibly Jeffrey Archer during his mayor of London period. Even the normally courteous Laura K couldn't stop herself patronising him. I'm struggling to see how he gets out of this.
Boris' credibility is only disappearing with diehard Remainers, with Leavers it is still very high
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
But the Guardian has not published the recording. That's what I object to in all of this. Let us hear it for ourselves, we can make our own minds up and then move on.
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Because of the subject getting recorded was not in the public interest. Couple has argument over split wine is not equivalent to corruption or antisemitism or a plethora of other things secretly recorded.
I thought Boris came across quite well in his interview with Laura?
You're seeing something in Boris Johnson, that most of the Conservative Party membership also see in him. Which is why he will be elected.
I am baffled what it is ?
He is able to brush away any objection or challenge with a mix of confidence, bluster and distraction.
They hope he can magic away real world challenges in a similar fashion.
I can understand the theory. Conservative members want Johnson's optimism. Brexit, a highly unsuccessful project so far, needs to be sold. But he's not doing the selling.
It's early days but it feels like Boris's credibility is disappearing at a rate previously unimaginable in a senior politician. Possibly Jeffrey Archer during his mayor of London period. Even the normally courteous Laura K couldn't stop herself patronising him. I'm struggling to see how he gets out of this.
Boris' credibility is only disappearing with diehard Remainers, with Leavers it is still very high
Boris had no credibility with diehard Remainers so even there it is no change.
I give up. The Tories are going to have a 4-week campaign and then some of their MPs are going to say that the chosen leader is an arse in whom they don't have any confidence. And then we'll have yet another GE and waste more time and probably end up with another messy hung Parliament and still won't be any closer to having done any of the practical stuff needed actually to leave the EU on any sort of basis.
And then, presumably, panic and ask for an extension or maybe not but leave without any relevant legislation into some sort of legal no-man's land two months before Xmas when all the warehouses will be full of Chinese tat to cheer us all up at the likelihood that the only veg available at reasonable prices will be turnips while the days get short and dark and, oh, probably, we'll have a hard winter as well.
And if we do get an extension the Tories will burst into flames and Farage will be PM with Anne Widdecombe as Minister for Squashing Diversity and Annunziata handing out food parcels to the poor like a heroine in a Victorian novel. While Mr Corbyn thinks about doing something possibly, maybe, once a committee has been held.
This is all going to go so terribly well, isn't it?
Scene opens with exhausted peasants pushing a cart through the mud
[clang]. Bring out your dead! Bring out your dead! [clang]
Mr. B2, Kuenssberg did ask him about that, but didn't press home the point quite enough, perhaps.
His idea requires a transition, which requires a deal. But he doesn't want the deal. He wants to take some bits of the deal. Which requires the EU to agree.
Odds on that seem eminently long. And what does he do if they say no?
I thought he came across as a complete ****ing idiot, but then, I don't have a vote.
His latest stoodge and another BJ on Newsnight was pressed a little on this. Apparently the EU will be desperate for a deal as they sell us more than we sell them, and we will collect more tariffs than they will. It's a while since we've heard these old chestnuts but little BJ is nothing if not unoriginal.
I see Hunt is shaking the fantasy magic money tree to fund more worldwide posturing.
Meanwhile what to do about student debt and what will be done when the next recession arrives are not to be mentioned.
Boris polled better than Hunt with 18 to 34s in that Sky Data poll yesterday, though Hunt led narrowly with over 55s
Are you the same HY that kept telling us it was no good Rory appealing to people who weren't going to vote Conservative?
Boris also led Hunt with 34 to 55s without whom the Tories cannot win the election.
Over 55s will vote Tory anyway regardless of whether Hunt or Boris is leader provided they don't abandon Brexit.
Boris also led Hunt strongly in the South, the Tory heartland and led Hunt in the North and the Midlands and Wales too where most of the marginal seats are. Hunt led Boris in London and narrowly in Scotland
Betfair's leader and PM markets have diverged slightly under the influence of pb. Note before taking any arb, remember you may lose money on standard commission rates.
You can lay Nigel Farage as next PM at 200, which might tempt one or two with money already tied up in that market.
Next PM Boris 1.21 Hunt 6.8 Corbyn 65 (if May hangs on because the premise of this thread is correct, then HMG can be no-confidenced)
Next leader Boris 1.9 Hunt 6.2 Gove 230 (presumably on the theory that if Boris withdraws, Gove will replace him)
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Because of the subject getting recorded was not in the public interest. Couple has argument over split wine is not equivalent to corruption or antisemitism or a plethora of other things secretly recorded.
Really? Can you remember the fuss when Prince Charles was recorded with a directional mike saying that he didn't like a royal reporter? And there have been many other cases as well.
Mr. HYUFD, I don't think Boris has a shred of credibility. Wouldn't class myself as a diehard Remainer, though...
snap Mr Dancer
the bland argument that we need to see Boris to judge his charcater is simply daft. we already have a view of him as he has been scutinised more than any of the other runners, only Gove comes anywhere close. His character is what it is you either ignore his faults or emphasise them, he isnt going to change.
More important is what is he planning to do ? So far this has received little scrutiny and it really needs to, beyond his waffle on Brexit there really isnt much of a programme bar bribe rich Londoners.
I see Hunt is shaking the fantasy magic money tree to fund more worldwide posturing.
Meanwhile what to do about student debt and what will be done when the next recession arrives are not to be mentioned.
Boris polled better than Hunt with 18 to 34s in that Sky Data poll yesterday, though Hunt led narrowly with over 55s
Are you the same HY that kept telling us it was no good Rory appealing to people who weren't going to vote Conservative?
Boris also led Hunt with 34 to 55s without whom the Tories cannot win the election.
Over 55s will l vote Tory anyway regardless of whether Hunt or Boris is leader provided they don't abandon Brexit.
Boris also led Hunt strongly in the South, the Tory heartland and led Hunt in the North and the Midlands and Wales too where most of the marginal seats are. Hunt led Boris in London and narrowly in Scotland
Have you ever considered that the majority of PB posters are by and large Tory voters and almost to a man/woman, remainer or leaver they are frustrated by Johnson's behaviour and lack of clarity over Brexit?
If this frustration translates to enough voting Tory members he could be in trouble.
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Because of the subject getting recorded was not in the public interest. Couple has argument over split wine is not equivalent to corruption or antisemitism or a plethora of other things secretly recorded.
Really? Can you remember the fuss when Prince Charles was recorded with a directional mike saying that he didn't like a royal reporter? And there have been many other cases as well.
Prince Charles saying he didn't like a reporter whose job was to LITERALLY report on Prince Charles is not the same as a lovers tiff.
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
One is a couple having an argument about wine spilt on a sofa in their own home. One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
Of course I see a difference. But I don't think that difference matters. 'Journalists' (and that word is becoming increasingly hazy in these days of t'Internet) have been secretly recording people for many years, and releasing those stories where it is to their advantage. I don't see why a private member of the public should get censured for recording something from within his own home.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Because of the subject getting recorded was not in the public interest. Couple has argument over split wine is not equivalent to corruption or antisemitism or a plethora of other things secretly recorded.
Really? Can you remember the fuss when Prince Charles was recorded with a directional mike saying that he didn't like a royal reporter? And there have been many other cases as well.
Prince Charles saying he didn't like a reporter whose job was to LITERALLY report on Prince Charles is not the same as a lovers tiff.
No. few things exactly are the same as other things. I'd argue the substance - the important things - are broadly the same.
But to get back on-topic: I have zero problem with the couple having recorded the argument, and don't see a problem with them having done so from their own home.
(I'd argue differently if, as some had claimed, they'd recorded it using special equipment. That's evidently not the case.)
Betfair's leader and PM markets have diverged slightly under the influence of pb. Note before taking any arb, remember you may lose money on standard commission rates.
You can lay Nigel Farage as next PM at 200, which might tempt one or two with money already tied up in that market.
Next PM Boris 1.21 Hunt 6.8 Corbyn 65 (if May hangs on because the premise of this thread is correct, then HMG can be no-confidenced)
Next leader Boris 1.9 Hunt 6.2 Gove 230 (presumably on the theory that if Boris withdraws, Gove will replace him)
Hunt wins by default if Boris withdraws (precedent 2016). For Gove to become leader there would have to be an entirely new election.
I see Hunt is shaking the fantasy magic money tree to fund more worldwide posturing.
Meanwhile what to do about student debt and what will be done when the next recession arrives are not to be mentioned.
Boris polled better than Hunt with 18 to 34s in that Sky Data poll yesterday, though Hunt led narrowly with over 55s
Are you the same HY that kept telling us it was no good Rory appealing to people who weren't going to vote Conservative?
Boris also led Hunt with 34 to 55s without whom the Tories cannot win the election.
Over 55s will l vote Tory anyway regardless of whether Hunt or Boris is leader provided they don't abandon Brexit.
Boris also led Hunt strongly in the South, the Tory heartland and led Hunt in the North and the Midlands and Wales too where most of the marginal seats are. Hunt led Boris in London and narrowly in Scotland
Have you ever considered that the majority of PB posters are by and large Tory voters and almost to a man/woman, remainer or leaver they are frustrated by Johnson's behaviour and lack of clarity over Brexit?
If this frustration translates to enough voting Tory members he could be in trouble.
The majority of PB posters are Remainers, even most PB Tories.
Comments
God help us.
When was it broadcast?
AFAIK the Guardian have sat on it.
Do you think the newspapers now complaining about it (and would have paid handsomely for it) would have done the same?
A Falcon Heavy rocket is hopefully about to launch in a couple of minutes:
https://www.spacex.com/webcast
After all, if, at a future date, she were to flounce out of 10 Downing Street screaming at him it would unquestionably be reported.
https://twitter.com/missie17/status/1143315230942007296
Just listen to yourself. The faux outrage that someone recorded evidence of a potential crime is mind boggling.
You are right, it is a very good read, and frightening how the key characteristics that have shaped our politics were all on display in the 80s by these bunch of students.
A key point is that ”But they were debaters, not policymakers. They couldn’t debate Brussels into submission, because the EU’s negotiators followed rules. ”
With part of the conclusion being a semi-humorous comparison with the Cambridge spies: ”Admittedly, the comparison between the Cambridge and Oxford sets isn’t entirely fair: though both betrayed Britain’s interests to the benefit of Moscow, the Brexiters didn’t mean to.”
and a nice self-deprecating finish by the author:“I deplore what my contemporaries are doing to Britain. But given that I too learnt at Oxford how to write and speak for a living without much knowledge, I can hardly talk.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47924025
Or any of the other similar stories there have been over the years.
When were these pictures taken?
Incidentally I realise I may be duplicating other posts but I had an enjoyable day at Chelmsford yesterday watching Essex cricketers demolish those of Somerset.
See the US press and their demonisation of Trump for a recent example. There will be a complete meltdown of the MSM in the US if he’s re-elected.
Other issues mabe.
If it switches such that most people are laughing at him, this is terminal for a politician.
The synchronised landings of the first two rockets are like 2-second F1 pitstops - I could quite happily watch them all day, in slow motion or in real time. They’ve not crashed a land-back rocket for a couple of years now, amazing achievement.
His idea requires a transition, which requires a deal. But he doesn't want the deal. He wants to take some bits of the deal. Which requires the EU to agree.
Odds on that seem eminently long. And what does he do if they say no?
I thought he came across as a complete ****ing idiot, but then, I don't have a vote.
One is two politicians having a conversation about antisemitism.
You don't see a difference?
September election is 12 on Betfair, and October election is 6.2. If Boris is the next Con leader I find it difficult see how we avoid an election. Corbyn PM after Theresa May at 65 is also probably worth a couple of quid.
It was formulaic to the nth degree. We've had a soppy love story, a buddy movie, and characters making long speeches about motherhood and apple pie.
When it stayed close to the George Martin book (which rambled at times), we had treachery gaining the upper hand, the goody-goodys meeting horrible ends, and unexpected twists. When someone was in immense peril, it was often fatal.
I will have to wait for the film of Bojo, I suppose, as long as Hollywood writers don't interfere with it.
Edit there's no way the current writers would have allowed the Scouse wedding scene where the Starks got their come-uppance.
Meanwhile what to do about student debt and what will be done when the next recession arrives are not to be mentioned.
Trump got 46.1% of the vote
Romney got 47.2%
Which is the one that was popular again?
He objects to the Deal then plans the same. Not going to stay popular with the ERG for long.
(And BTW, virtually all cases are different; the fact they are does not make the commonalities irrelevant.)
Dad's Army caused Brexit and should be banned as it makes us look back to past glories
says the woman who earns her living producing Victoria
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7177007/TV-writer-Daisy-Goodwin-blames-Dads-Army-Brexit-wants-sitcom-BANNED-screens.html
Over 55s will vote Tory anyway regardless of whether Hunt or Boris is leader provided they don't abandon Brexit.
Boris also led Hunt strongly in the South, the Tory heartland and led Hunt in the North and the Midlands and Wales too where most of the marginal seats are. Hunt led Boris in London and narrowly in Scotland
You can lay Nigel Farage as next PM at 200, which might tempt one or two with money already tied up in that market.
Next PM
Boris 1.21
Hunt 6.8
Corbyn 65 (if May hangs on because the premise of this thread is correct, then HMG can be no-confidenced)
Next leader
Boris 1.9
Hunt 6.2
Gove 230 (presumably on the theory that if Boris withdraws, Gove will replace him)
the bland argument that we need to see Boris to judge his charcater is simply daft. we already have a view of him as he has been scutinised more than any of the other runners, only Gove comes anywhere close. His character is what it is you either ignore his faults or emphasise them, he isnt going to change.
More important is what is he planning to do ? So far this has received little scrutiny and it really needs to, beyond his waffle on Brexit there really isnt much of a programme bar bribe rich Londoners.
If this frustration translates to enough voting Tory members he could be in trouble.
Johnson or Corbyn
No, neither thank you very much they are as bad for the country as each other.
Feel the surge of populism.
But to get back on-topic: I have zero problem with the couple having recorded the argument, and don't see a problem with them having done so from their own home.
(I'd argue differently if, as some had claimed, they'd recorded it using special equipment. That's evidently not the case.)
gone to hide in Sussex
The majority of Tory members are Leavers