Cummings did what he thought was best for his family. Everyone else was told to do what was best for the country. And that’s the problem right there.
Cummings’ fate is a bit irrelevant now unless you’ve money on it. It’s a breach in the Conservative Party that counts politically. Dom will undoubtedly stay but he, and by extension his sub, Mr BJ, are damaged goods in their own party (okay, Johnson’s Party). They have been shown not to walk on water - as evidenced by the email inboxes of the backbenchers this weekend, not to mention the Mail and ConHome. Everyone knows this was, charitably, a complete PR fiasco. That’s all that matters now.
If they'd come out with the full story on Friday night, and combined it with an actual (you know) apology, then we wouldn't be talking about this at all.
Just think the Proclaimers would have walked from London to Durham and back .Think about that for a minute
Irrelevant but cool fact: If you are on the International Space Station, and you play "I'm gonna be", you travel 1000 miles in the time it takes the song to play:
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
Boris was sacked twice for lying. Firstly, in 1988 when working as a journalist at the Times, and secondly in 2004 when he was in the Tory Shadow Cabinet.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
The old adage, don't interrupt your opponents when they are making a mistake. If they start to team up, its looks like Brexit blocking all over again and descends into party political stuff, he said, she said.
And of course Labour have had some lockdown breakers themselves. Tahir Ali for instance.
I would just let Boris continuing to look shit and leave it at that.
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.
Cummings’ fate is a bit irrelevant now unless you’ve money on it. It’s a breach in the Conservative Party that counts politically. Dom will undoubtedly stay but he, and by extension his sub, Mr BJ, are damaged goods in their own party (okay, Johnson’s Party). They have been shown not to walk on water - as evidenced by the email inboxes of the backbenchers this weekend, not to mention the Mail and ConHome. Everyone knows this was, charitably, a complete PR fiasco. That’s all that matters now.
Yep, Johnson and Cummings are both weaker - internally and externally - than they were this time last week.
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.
Dom's revenge will come when they can least cope with it
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.
If the Guardian valued their expert virtuous journalist so high, I have no idea how Carole Conspiracy is still employed by them. Her twitter rants are totally deranged, its left wing version of Alex Jones.
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
Don't forget (Dominic Cummings won't have done) about Cadwalladr's five consecutive Observer front pages regarding the referendum leave campaigns, data and funding - each one followed by a page 50 correction of material facts regarding the previous week's article.
If the Guardian valued their expert virtuous journalist so high, I have no idea how Carole Conspiracy is still employed by them. Her twitter rants are totally deranged, its left wing version of Alex Jones.
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
I know you’re a journalist yourself so you’ll probably shoot me down in flames here, but thing is, no one gives, or has ever really given, that much of a shit about the Guardian compared to most other papers and I say that as a former regular, and still occasional, reader. It has its place in the landscape certainly but it is not likely to bring down a government - occasional scoops like Jonathan Aitken aside. It’s survival is down to the Scott Trust Endowment. No one gave a monkeys about the police “speaking” to him. If the story had come out even without that it would still have traction as the facts of 260 mile trip in these circumstances are so striking.
The Mail, on the other hand has its finger on the pulse of Middle England, and that’s where elections are won.
I see Labour on manoeuvres in this cross party 'Get Boris' powow. Sadly I am not tactically minded enough to guess what they're up to, but it feels like that clever Mr. Starmer is up to something, and the nationalists should be wary - they aren't dealing with Corbyn anymore.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
The Guardian has form in this department. When they get a scoop they like to juice it up, at the start, with a massive lie that gets the ball rolling; by the time everyone realises they lied, then it is too late, the scoop is a thing
Remember this notorious Guardian apology
"On 13 December the following clarification was published: "An article about the investigation into the abduction and death of Milly Dowler (News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt, 5 July, page 1) stated that voicemail 'messages were deleted by [News of the World] journalists in the first few days after Milly's disappearance in order to free up space for more messages. As a result friends and relatives of Milly concluded wrongly that she might still be alive"
"Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails from the phone that caused her parents to have false hopes that she was alive"
They repeated the lie in THIRTY SEVEN articles until they finally retracted
It is quite a brutal and ruthless paper, as bad as the Mail, its eerie twin sister
I know you’re a journalist yourself so you’ll probably shoot me down in flames here, but thing is, no one gives, or has ever really given, that much of a shit about the Guardian compared to most other papers and I say that as a former regular, and still occasional, reader. It has its place in the landscape certainly but it is not likely to bring down a government - occasional scoops like Jonathan Aitken aside. It’s survival is down to the Scott Trust Endowment. No one gave a monkeys about the police “speaking” to him. If the story had come out even without that it would still have traction as the facts of 260 mile trip in these circumstances are so striking.
The Mail, on the other hand has its finger on the pulse of Middle England, and that’s where elections are won.
I think you're quite wrong. The Guardian is massively influential because it has become the Paper of Record for The Blob: the left wing commentariat, the BBC, academics, charities, educators, Labour, Libs, common purpose, all that malarkey
This is aided by its being free online (which may prove a masterstroke in the end). Its website is hugely popular
I'd say there are only three or four papers in the country that still have real if dwindling influence: the Mail, the Guardian, the Times, and - perhaps, perhaps not - the Sun.
Of those there's a good case for saying the Guardian is the most potent
Interesting view. I suppose my perspective comes from moving in such circles, left wing metropolitan elitist as I have been, and listening to it being mocked mercilessly by its own readership.
I see Labour on manoeuvres in this cross party 'Get Boris' powow. Sadly I am not tactically minded enough to guess what they're up to, but it feels like that clever Mr. Starmer is up to something, and the nationalists should be wary - they aren't dealing with Corbyn anymore.
The sensible thing for them to do is something Parliamentary at the first Opposition Day debate - make the Tory MPs walk through the lobbies to oppose a motion censuring the PM for the conduct of his advisor. To be immediately followed by a letter-writing campaign to all the Tory MPs from "their constituents" about how upset/annoyed/furious they are that their MP doesn't hate Cummings as much as they do.
I imagine that getting everyone active for an opposition party in a Tory seat to write an individual letter, with their own sad story, at the same time, might have something of an affect on the MP's mailbox.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Wow, I expected the heat to go out of this fairly quickly, but today's Cummings-Boris one-two punch was the equivalent of putting out a forest fire in a day.
For the love of God, please let's not go insane every time a scandal or bad headline pops up, or any other effervescent mélange of ephemeral froth.
And yes, that goes for good Tory headlines and for Labour stumbles as well. Very few things ever really merit the intensity of the immediate reaction.
So why can’t cafes and restaurants reopen if shops can?
Becauase none of this has been thought through properly and there is no strategy in place to keep us safe whilst out and about, save 'stay alert'. Coronavirus policy is evolving on Boris' whim or the next required act of political expediency. It is a shambles.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
Sure thing. I'll remember that when you make more predictions
1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case. 2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant. 3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB. 4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math. 5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong. 6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten. 7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Your voice of sanity has been much missed indeed. Welcome back!
1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case. 2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant. 3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB. 4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math. 5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong. 6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten. 7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.
Good night all.
To be mentioned so many times in one post, what an honour!
My Labour backers will be thrilled, a raise for me!
The most worrying point about this saga is the fact that almost noone seems to understand the difference between quarantine and lockdown.
Can't we have an English word - One is French and the other probably American ! Maybe a suggestion would be a Refrain!
Quarantine is derived Venetian, not French. It refers to the 40 days crew had to wait on ships before they could disembark when they arrived in Venice.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
Sure thing. I'll remember that when you make more predictions
He did say yesterday afternoon that Cummings was gone, so at least he's keeping his repertoire fresh
Wow, I expected the heat to go out of this fairly quickly, but today's Cummings-Boris one-two punch was the equivalent of putting out a forest fire in a day.
For the love of God, please let's not go insane every time a scandal or bad headline pops up, or any other effervescent mélange of ephemeral froth.
And yes, that goes for good Tory headlines and for Labour stumbles as well. Very few things ever really merit the intensity of the immediate reaction.
Why did it require such an intervention to take the heat out of it (if that is what it has done) if it had not cut through?
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
Sure thing. I'll remember that when you make more predictions
He did say yesterday afternoon that Cummings was gone, so at least he's keeping his repertoire fresh
I've still got a 60% success rate on predictions, I am very happy with that.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
Sure thing. I'll remember that when you make more predictions
He did say yesterday afternoon that Cummings was gone, so at least he's keeping his repertoire fresh
I've still got a 60% success rate on predictions, I am very happy with that.
Ah, it's all right. The bits where you 'pretend' to be Keir Starmer etc are so funny they almost make up for the irritation you cause at other times.
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
Sorry I can hold no longer. returning to post after a while. CHB was hysterically off-beat during the GE and I see nothing has changed.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
Thank you for your kind words, welcome back
Many thanks. I do, often, re-read your vehement assertions from the campaign that there would be a hung parliament. And then read your posts just after the Exit poll.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
Yes, I got the HP wrong - I hope we can move on now as it's quite boring having to apologise for getting one of my predictions wrong.
Sure thing. I'll remember that when you make more predictions
He did say yesterday afternoon that Cummings was gone, so at least he's keeping his repertoire fresh
I've still got a 60% success rate on predictions, I am very happy with that.
Ah, it's all right. The bits where you 'pretend' to be Keir Starmer etc almost make up for the irritation you cause at other times.
Over the years, Boris has been sacked twice for lying:
In 1988, Boris was sacked from his job at The Times newspaper over allegations he fabricated a quote from his godfather, the historian Colin Lucas, for a front-page article about the discovery of Edward II’s Rose Palace.
After becoming leader of the Conservatives in 2003, Michael Howard gave Boris two new jobs – party vice-chairman and shadow arts minister. Boris was sacked from both positions in November 2004 after assuring Mr Howard that tabloid reports of his affair with Spectator columnist Petronella Wyatt were false and an “inverted pyramid of piffle”. When the story was found to be true, he refused to resign.
Comments
https://twitter.com/lookner/status/1264806143907545089
In my humble opinion it is a horrid, hateful, bigoted, nasty, authoritarian rag that makes its trade on spewing hate.
And it wouldn't surprise me if many of those gleefully sharing it now not so secretly normally hold that opinion too.
If you are on the International Space Station, and you play "I'm gonna be", you travel 1000 miles in the time it takes the song to play:
https://what-if.xkcd.com/58/
Ouch. Not a smart thing to do.
It's a good thing no-one on this board has the power to retroactively change posts and comments. (Bwahahahahaha...)
I wonder if this might not be a tactical mistake, or the beginnings of an anti-Tory alliance?
And of course Labour have had some lockdown breakers themselves. Tahir Ali for instance.
I would just let Boris continuing to look shit and leave it at that.
Dom still has a vice like grip on BoZo's nads, and none of the cabinet blinked.
EDIT: And Dom has 19 new names for his shitlist.
Bring back John Major and his cones hotline....seriously all is forgiven....
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52800611
Seems like a big call.
The Mail, on the other hand has its finger on the pulse of Middle England, and that’s where elections are won.
The claim is correct - just checked it.
The only query is whether he did it somewhere else.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-from-the-uk-australia-and-canada-on-hong-kong
I wonder if this is the shape of British foreign policy post-Brexit. Not as large a club as the EU, but perhaps easier to coordinate for that reason.
Tactical mistake - obviously. Anti-Tory alliance? They're opposition for goodness sake - they're anti-tory by definition. Alliance? Thought that's what opposition parties tended to be.
Oh and in case no one's being paying attention, the Tories have 80 more MP's than this "alliance" combined. What can they do exactly? Great to hear it.
You're acting as if there was a GE next week, not four years (!) away. If Blair could manage to get a comfortable majority in 2005 after his "illegal" war then I'm sure this fluff with Cummings will have the following impact in GE 24: None.
I imagine that getting everyone active for an opposition party in a Tory seat to write an individual letter, with their own sad story, at the same time, might have something of an affect on the MP's mailbox.
I don't know why I'm giving them advice though.
It was good to see you back, posting whilst I was lurking, after your self-imposed exile.
No idea beyond that
For the love of God, please let's not go insane every time a scandal or bad headline pops up, or any other effervescent mélange of ephemeral froth.
And yes, that goes for good Tory headlines and for Labour stumbles as well. Very few things ever really merit the intensity of the immediate reaction.
The Plan (Stage 3) talks about 4 July but this is a Sat - I don't think they will bring the change in on a Sat.
1. You've lost the argument if you start citing fuel tank capacity and the bladder capacity of a 4 year old to support your case.
2. Hatred of Cummings blinds some. The Guardian clearly rushed to judgment before checking all the facts. CHB clearly failed to understand the significance of the statement by Durham Police before rushing to judge that it was crucifying, prior to asking what it meant.
3. Those who pronounced their verdict before hearing all the evidence displayed their liberal left pro-EU prejudice (The Bishops), their panic (a few Tory MPs) or their trolling (CHB), or were JHB.
4. 20 Tory MPs calling for Cummings to go suggests 345 Tory MPs did not feel strongly enough to agree, for whatever reason. Do the math.
5. Boris will not take the easy option if he thinks doing so is wrong. He thinks dumping Cummings would have been unfair, or would damage the government or both. Those who think he just wants to be popular are just plain wrong.
6. The next GE will almost certainly not be for another 4 years. By the time the voters deliver their verdict, Cummings' trip to Durham will be long forgotten.
7. Big G is correct, the next GE will be depend on how well the voters think the government handles the economy. Unless of course the Corbynite wing leaves Labour and we get a re-run of 1983.
Good night all.
My Labour backers will be thrilled, a raise for me!
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/25/richard-hoare-obituary
In 1988, Boris was sacked from his job at The Times newspaper over allegations he fabricated a quote from his godfather, the historian Colin Lucas, for a front-page article about the discovery of Edward II’s Rose Palace.
After becoming leader of the Conservatives in 2003, Michael Howard gave Boris two new jobs – party vice-chairman and shadow arts minister. Boris was sacked from both positions in November 2004 after assuring Mr Howard that tabloid reports of his affair with Spectator columnist Petronella Wyatt were false and an “inverted pyramid of piffle”. When the story was found to be true, he refused to resign.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-lies-conservative-leader-candidate-list-times-banana-brexit-bus-a8929076.html