politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » When I Grow Up I Wanna Be Famous

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » When I Grow Up I Wanna Be Famous

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Read the full story here

paulyork64

First?

HYUFD

Boris is the most effective Tory election winner since Thatcher, as shown by the fact that on December 12th he won the highest Tory voteshare since 1979 and the most Tory seats since 1987.

However he is more of a Churchill or Disraeli in his desire to unify the country (after delivering Brexit) whereas Thatcher was more driven by a desire for small Government and the defeat of socialism

ydoethur

The photograph shows a huge amount of bull...

...and a large male bovine.

TheScreamingEagles

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

Verulamius

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

TheScreamingEagles

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

RobD

TheScreamingEagles said:

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

You get to peek at the headers 36 hours in advance? ... you could have done us all a big favour on December 11th!

Endillion

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

And in 2024, the jury will vote to acquit, because they weren't watching and anyway isn't he funny?

Sandpit

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

TheScreamingEagles

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

You get to peek at the headers 36 hours in advance? ... you could have done us all a big favour on December 11th!

Oui.

Young Mr Corporeal sends me this articles to review before publication, I then upload the article onto the PB servers.

BluestBlue

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

Tories 365
Labour 202

ydoethur

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Has there been a rather sad tragedy involving a young mother in the past 24 hours, or do you mean ‘Laura Pidcock, late MP?’

TheScreamingEagles

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

ydoethur

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

A man who screwed up the CPS and Brexit negotiations with Theresa May, of all people, is credible?

It’s a view...

MarqueeMark

HYUFD said:

Boris is the most effective Tory election winner since Thatcher, as shown by the fact that on December 12th he won the highest Tory voteshare since 1979 and the most Tory seats since 1987.

However he is more of a Churchill or Disraeli in his desire to unify the country (after delivering Brexit) whereas Thatcher was more driven by a desire for small Government and the defeat of socialism

Boris is also very driven by a desire for the defeat of socialism - especially of the sort espoused by Corbyn and McDonnell.

TheScreamingEagles

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

A man who screwed up the CPS and Brexit negotiations with Theresa May, of all people, is credible?

It’s a view...

He can blame Tory 'austerity' for any issues at the CPS.

corporeal

TheScreamingEagles said:

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

I had quite a lot of fun writing this one. I actually thought it was the dead cat line you'd enjoy most.

Andrew

TheScreamingEagles said:

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 …..

Johnson got a higher % of the vote than Blair in 97 or 01 though :-)

BluestBlue

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

A man who screwed up the CPS and Brexit negotiations with Theresa May, of all people, is credible?

It’s a view...

He can blame Tory 'austerity' for any issues at the CPS.

TSE = Socialist

ydoethur

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

No he’s not.

Reigate is in South London.

Jonathan

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

TheScreamingEagles

corporeal said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

I had quite a lot of fun writing this one. I actually thought it was the dead cat line you'd enjoy most.

I liked that as well but the autobiography was my favourite.

Endillion

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is as insipid, vacuous and bland as any senior politician I can think of in recent history. I'm sure he's much more competent than many of the rest of the field, and I'd certainly be happier with him running (say) the Home Office than (say) Abbott, or Phillips, or frankly even Priti Patel. But leading an election campaign? He'd make Theresa May look like, er, Boris Johnson.

BluestBlue

ydoethur said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

No he’s not.

Reigate is in South London.

He represents Holborn & St. Pancras, not just in Parliament but in every sense of that verb...

TheScreamingEagles

Andrew said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 …..

Johnson got a higher % of the vote than Blair in 97 or 01 though :-)

True but I was focussing on the leadership ratings (and of course Boris Johnson has fewer MPs than Tony Blair, which gives him less shock absorbers for the next GE.)

Nigelb

Let’s see how he does in government.

Everything else is just the bubble reputation.

ydoethur

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is as insipid, vacuous and bland as any senior politician I can think of in recent history. I'm sure he's much more competent than many of the rest of the field, and I'd certainly be happier with him running (say) the Home Office than (say) Abbott, or Phillips, or frankly even Priti Patel. But leading an election campaign? He'd make Theresa May look like, er, Boris Johnson.

Tristram Hunt, Caroline Spelman and Des Browne all spring to mind.

But I have to admit, not many others.

MarqueeMark

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

ydoethur

Andrew said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 …..

Johnson got a higher % of the vote than Blair in 97 or 01 though :-)

He got the second highest number of votes ever cast for a party in a general election. At 13,966,000 he just slipped ahead of Attlee in 1951 (13,948,000).

The one with the highest number of votes is however a distinctly unhappy precedent - John Major in 1992.

BluestBlue

MarqueeMark said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

I know, right?

https://twitter.com/JoelCornah/status/1208478483367780352

ydoethur

MarqueeMark said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

If they do, I’m sure their teachers will be blamed for not teaching them their spellings.

Sandpit

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is as insipid, vacuous and bland as any senior politician I can think of in recent history. I'm sure he's much more competent than many of the rest of the field, and I'd certainly be happier with him running (say) the Home Office than (say) Abbott, or Phillips, or frankly even Priti Patel. But leading an election campaign? He'd make Theresa May look like, er, Boris Johnson.

But the valid comparisons are to R L-B, Richard Burgon and David Lammy, who are also in the running.
I wonder if we see Stephen Kinnock or Hilary Benn run as the outsider?

MaxPB

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

A man who screwed up the CPS and Brexit negotiations with Theresa May, of all people, is credible?

It’s a view...

He can blame Tory 'austerity' for any issues at the CPS.

He can't, his term started under Labour.

TGOHF666

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

Starmer is Labour’s Phil Hammond.

With less jokes.

TheGreenMachine

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

Sandpit

MarqueeMark said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

I assume Hard Hat Man is working for KIER on their latest project?

corporeal

HYUFD said:

Boris is the most effective Tory election winner since Thatcher, as shown by the fact that on December 12th he won the highest Tory voteshare since 1979 and the most Tory seats since 1987.

However he is more of a Churchill or Disraeli in his desire to unify the country (after delivering Brexit) whereas Thatcher was more driven by a desire for small Government and the defeat of socialism

I think he had rather easier circumstances than, for an easy example, Hague in 2001.

High seats and high vote share is of course partially dependent on how other parties perform.

Endillion

Sandpit said:

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is as insipid, vacuous and bland as any senior politician I can think of in recent history. I'm sure he's much more competent than many of the rest of the field, and I'd certainly be happier with him running (say) the Home Office than (say) Abbott, or Phillips, or frankly even Priti Patel. But leading an election campaign? He'd make Theresa May look like, er, Boris Johnson.

But the valid comparisons are to R L-B, Richard Burgon and David Lammy, who are also in the running.
I wonder if we see Stephen Kinnock or Hilary Benn run as the outsider?

The one who gives me sleepless nights at present is Thornberry. Partially because she's really really annoying, and having her in the public eye for five years would grate horribly, but mostly because she is the only one of the contenders who has enough personality to cause Johnson problems.

I've heard Lammy speak, and he's not as bright as he thinks he is, but he's not bland either. Definitely has a story to tell that will resonate with a lot of people. Burgon also not bland, although he'd have a better shot if he was. Starmer? Pah.

ydoethur

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

kle4

I feel like I'm going to hear a lot about Disraeli in the next few years, it seems everyone is talking about Boris being like him, or inspired by him and so on.

Luckyguy1983

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

TheScreamingEagles

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

TheScreamingEagles

Make it happen.

https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1209222481237684224

AramintaMoonbeamQC

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Never too early.

kle4

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

Luckyguy1983

kle4 said:

I feel like I'm going to hear a lot about Disraeli in the next few years, it seems everyone is talking about Boris being like him, or inspired by him and so on.

Historian Blake on Disraeli: “his mind was like a Catherine wheel shooting out sparks. Most fell on damp earth. But every now and then, one would reach the dry grass, set it ablaze and illuminate the night.”

Hence the comparison I suppose.

Luckyguy1983

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

Oops, apologies. I am sure X Factor churns out a much better class of f***wit.

matt

TheScreamingEagles said:

When Boris Johnson’s autobiography eventually (inevitably) comes out it will be one of the most fascinating political books of its time. Some of it might even be true.

Still chuckling at this line 36 hours after I first read it.

All autobiographies paint the world the author wants, now the world as it is. Nobody writes an autobiography unless they believe in their importance. However misplaced, as Hay-on-Wye evidences.

viewcode

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

The Johnny Comes Marching home scene is brilliant ("Fort Knox? Pah! It's for tourists!").
The first 60-odd% of Die Hard3 is an outstandingly good movie (roughly up to the point where the trucks leave the city). Then it just gets stupid. Die Hard is great from beginning to end.

viewcode

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Never too early.

Indeed. It's always a good day to Die Hard.

matt

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You overestimate the importance of lawyers. Although not the self-importance.

Big_G_NorthWales

TheScreamingEagles said:

Make it happen.

https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1209222481237684224

And Lammy as leader

Endillion

TheScreamingEagles said:

Make it happen.

https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1209222481237684224

She's missed a trick there. #DawnOfTheDeputy, surely?

dodrade

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

kle4

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

You could always switch over to BBC2 and *checks* "A life on Screen: Hugh Grant"

Big_G_NorthWales

Just a thought.

Does the country have enough popcorn for this leadership contest in march and Salmond's trial in Scotland at the same time?

Floater

Labour are insane - they give the job to a bloke who ignored warnings in the past?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7821153/Ex-Labour-MP-Laura-Pidcock-blames-Tony-Blair-election-defeat.html

Ed Miliband, who led Labour to general election defeat in 2015, will help spearhead a review into why the party was crushed at the ballot box in 2019.

kle4

viewcode said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

The Johnny Comes Marching home scene is brilliant ("Fort Knox? Pah! It's for tourists!").
The first 60-odd% of Die Hard3 is an outstandingly good movie (roughly up to the point where the trucks leave the city). Then it just gets stupid. Die Hard is great from beginning to end.

It's a fine movie, no question. Very good indeed. But if it was even a fraction as great as the number of people who insist it is great, it would be the most brilliant piece of art in human civilization.

kle4

I know it is not really fair to think so, but I cannot but feel a little that people who deliberately go for the deputy job are lacking in vision or ambition. Particularly when they don't know who will be leader, and who is leader is a rather significant factor in what the deputy leader can and should do.

Charles

MarqueeMark said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Starmer is a woke North London Remainiac who looks like he's always about to cry. He'd be lucky to mount a Kinnock-level performance against Boris in the current political landscape.

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

Hardie-ly

Sunil_Prasannan

Floater said:

Labour are insane - they give the job to a bloke who ignored warnings in the past?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7821153/Ex-Labour-MP-Laura-Pidcock-blames-Tony-Blair-election-defeat.html

Ed Miliband, who led Labour to general election defeat in 2015, will help spearhead a review into why the party was crushed at the ballot box in 2019.

An Ed Miliband-led inquiry?

viewcode

kle4 said:

viewcode said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

The Johnny Comes Marching home scene is brilliant ("Fort Knox? Pah! It's for tourists!").
The first 60-odd% of Die Hard3 is an outstandingly good movie (roughly up to the point where the trucks leave the city). Then it just gets stupid. Die Hard is great from beginning to end.

It's a fine movie, no question. Very good indeed. But if it was even a fraction as great as the number of people who insist it is great, it would be the most brilliant piece of art in human civilization.

MarqueeMark

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

Dickens seen through a Corbynista lens.....

corporeal

kle4 said:

I know it is not really fair to think so, but I cannot but feel a little that people who deliberately go for the deputy job are lacking in vision or ambition. Particularly when they don't know who will be leader, and who is leader is a rather significant factor in what the deputy leader can and should do.

Eh, can be a launching pad for a long-term ambitious type I think.

nunu2

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

And then lose to him in 2024

squareroot2

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is as insipid, vacuous and bland as any senior politician I can think of in recent history. I'm sure he's much more competent than many of the rest of the field, and I'd certainly be happier with him running (say) the Home Office than (say) Abbott, or Phillips, or frankly even Priti Patel. But leading an election campaign? He'd make Theresa May look like, er, Boris Johnson.

But the valid comparisons are to R L-B, Richard Burgon and David Lammy, who are also in the running.
I wonder if we see Stephen Kinnock or Hilary Benn run as the outsider?

The one who gives me sleepless nights at present is Thornberry. Partially because she's really really annoying, and having her in the public eye for five years would grate horribly, but mostly because she is the only one of the contenders who has enough personality to cause Johnson problems.

I've heard Lammy speak, and he's not as bright as he thinks he is, but he's not bland either. Definitely has a story to tell that will resonate with a lot of people. Burgon also not bland, although he'd have a better shot if he was. Starmer? Pah.

The tendency to try and focus on the poor background state school, no money , did it the hard way, is what MP's try to do, look at the MP Wrong Daily, pretending she was alive(she was 2) when the last of the Salford docks was closed and how much it hurt her father, Emily Thornberry in 2017 and so on and so forth

https://metro.co.uk/2019/12/22/labour-hopeful-rebecca-long-bailey-accused-lying-upbringing-11949514/

Not sure voters are impressed by this as much as MP's think.

TheGreenMachine

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

He'll probably be executed after that.

TheGreenMachine

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

X factor?

TheGreenMachine

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

Home alone?

TheGreenMachine

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

Correct.

TheGreenMachine

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

Oops, apologies. I am sure X Factor churns out a much better class of f***wit.

There's also the reason harry is more well liked than the PM is.

Fact, not opinion.

Mango

MarqueeMark said:

What the hell does Keir Starmer offer the voters of Mansfield? You really think Hard Hat Man is going to put up signs saying WE ❤ KIER?

What the hell do the Tories offer them?

* NB This question does not imply that Sir Keir does offer anything.

TheGreenMachine

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

nunu2

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

TheGreenMachine

nunu2 said:

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

Is the human rights act bad?

kle4

TheGreenMachine said:

kle4 said:

Jonathan said:

Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?

Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.

Home alone?

Not seen it in quite some time, not sure how well it holds up

squareroot2 said:

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

Endillion said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

But Labour supporters on Twitter all think that R L-B or the late Laura Pidcock MP would be the real challengers, and Tories are just saying Starmer's name to try and get them to pick someone else.

The ONLY chance Labour have of winning in 2024, is to go with someone who looks and sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting. Right now, the most obvious candidate is Kier Starmer.

Starmer is ae, er, Boris Johnson.

But the valid comparisons are to R L-B, Richard Burgon and David Lammy, who are also in the running.
I wonder if we see Stephen Kinnock or Hilary Benn run as the outsider?

The ormer? Pah.

The tendency to try and focus on the poor background state school, no money , did it the hard way, is what MP's try to do, look at the MP Wrong Daily, pretending she was alive(she was 2) when the last of the Salford docks was closed and how much it hurt her father, Emily Thornberry in 2017 and so on and so forth

https://metro.co.uk/2019/12/22/labour-hopeful-rebecca-long-bailey-accused-lying-upbringing-11949514/

Not sure voters are impressed by this as much as MP's think.

They definitely are not and MPs should not embellish, whatever level of deprivation or hardship or whatever can be engaging enough on its own, or overcome with good enough ideas or personality.

TheGreenMachine

@Luckyguy1983

Maybe Harry thinks the same of the PM.

He's also worth 50 times more.

Endillion

TheGreenMachine said:

nunu2 said:

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

Is the human rights act bad?

Must be, if Grievous Bodily Starmer's a defender of it.

TheGreenMachine

Endillion said:

TheGreenMachine said:

nunu2 said:

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

Is the human rights act bad?

Must be, if Grievous Bodily Starmer's a defender of it.

Every little thing will be alright.

GideonWise

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?

Foxy

TheGreenMachine said:

nunu2 said:

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

Is the human rights act bad?

Human rights are the problem. They get in the way of capitalism.

BluestBlue

GideonWise said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?

It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose

rottenborough

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

Monkeys

TheGreenMachine said:

nunu2 said:

Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.

Is the human rights act bad?

Every party dislikes the ECHR, and therefore the Human Rights Act, in some way. Labour dislike it because of Protocol 1, Article 1, the right to property. It makes nationalising a bit difficult, and bootlegging patented pharmaceuticals difficult too.

rottenborough

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Floater said:

Labour are insane - they give the job to a bloke who ignored warnings in the past?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7821153/Ex-Labour-MP-Laura-Pidcock-blames-Tony-Blair-election-defeat.html

Ed Miliband, who led Labour to general election defeat in 2015, will help spearhead a review into why the party was crushed at the ballot box in 2019.

An Ed Miliband-led inquiry?

The summary will be that the failure to offer free owls cost them dearly.

GideonWise

BluestBlue said:

GideonWise said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?

It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose

It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?

kle4

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.

GideonWise

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

The Guardian loved it, so I can imagine its counter culture in some way?

rottenborough

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.

I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.

Luckyguy1983

TheGreenMachine said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

Oops, apologies. I am sure X Factor churns out a much better class of f***wit.

There's also the reason harry is more well liked than the PM is.

Fact, not opinion.

As far as I recall, Harry Styles lost his public vote.

rottenborough

GideonWise said:

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

The Guardian loved it, so I can imagine its counter culture in some way?

Of course. How could I miss it? Oh, I know, because I couldn't understand a bloody word they were saying.

rottenborough

Not sure why everyone is having a go at Ed Milliband doing a review of GE.

I'm surprise the Corbynista didn't put Williamson in charge with support from Ken Livingston.

TGOHF666

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

That parable about the dreadful miser eventually repenting - it’s just not woke enough .

Won’t be surprised if there is no happy ending and Scrooge simply is told he can never make up for his colonial past and is therefore cancelled on Twitter.

TheGreenMachine

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

Absolutely, without doubt.

BBC are useless.

Luckyguy1983

GideonWise said:

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

The Guardian loved it, so I can imagine its counter culture in some way?

A bit like that disastrous Hercule Poirot last year where every other character was a horrible Brexit party supporter.

TheGreenMachine

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

ydoethur said:

TheGreenMachine said:

Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.

He’s got no chance on the latter, he’s not a young blonde woman.

The idea he has got that anyone gives a flying **** about the political views of a contestant on Britain's Got Talent speaks of deep delusion.

Harry Styles was on X Factor not Britain's Got Talent.

Harry Styles also starred in the film Dunkirk which makes many Brexiteers tumescent.

Oops, apologies. I am sure X Factor churns out a much better class of f***wit.

There's also the reason harry is more well liked than the PM is.

Fact, not opinion.

As far as I recall, Harry Styles lost his public vote.

Good man, i liked that one.

They still done better than the winner and runner-up whoever they were that year.

BluestBlue

GideonWise said:

BluestBlue said:

GideonWise said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BluestBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Verulamius said:

Good article.

What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?

That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.

You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?

Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.

Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?

It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose

It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?

They are, but fairly limp and soggy ones. I actually think that Boris' big win does a great deal to cement Cameron's legacy and historical reputation, and the public evidence we have so far suggests that Cameron himself acknowledges that.

MarqueeMark

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

TheGreenMachine said:

dodrade said:

I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.

It's garbage tbh.

As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?

If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.

I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.

Their Jamaica Inn was notoriously mumbly.