Skip to content

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

SystemSystem Posts: 12,647
edited December 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.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


«13

Comments

  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,507
    First?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,794
    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
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    The photograph shows a huge amount of bull...

    ...and a large male bovine.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,555
    Good article.

    What does this hypothesis mean for his opponents?

    Catch him out by detail, or win the vision?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,661
    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? :o... you could have done us all a big favour on December 11th! :p
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    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?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,619
    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.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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? :o... you could have done us all a big favour on December 11th! :p
    Oui.

    Young Mr Corporeal sends me this articles to review before publication, I then upload the article onto the PB servers.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,716
    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

    :innocent:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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?’
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,721
    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.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    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.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    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 :-)
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,716
    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 :lol:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Is it now time to watch Die Hard or too early?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    edited December 2019
    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.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,620
    Let’s see how he does in government.

    Everything else is just the bubble reputation.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,721
    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?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,619
    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?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,581
    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.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    Harry Styles was spotted saying F*ck the government and F*ck Boris.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,619
    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?
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    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.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    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.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,131
    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.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    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.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,418
    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.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    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.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,461
    Make it happen.

    https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1209222481237684224
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 3,905
    Jonathan said:

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

    Never too early.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    Jonathan said:

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

    Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,418
    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.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,418
    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.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    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.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,644
    edited December 2019
    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.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,644
    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.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    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_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,534
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Make it happen.

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

    And Lammy as leader
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Make it happen.

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

    She's missed a trick there. #DawnOfTheDeputy, surely?
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    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_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,534
    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?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    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.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    edited December 2019
    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.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    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.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    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_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,716
    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?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,644
    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.
    :)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,721
    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.....
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    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.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,562
    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
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,117
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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?
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

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

    Die Hard With A Vengeance > Die Hard.
    Home alone?
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • MangoMango Posts: 1,031
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    dodrade said:

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

    It's garbage tbh.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,562
    Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    @Luckyguy1983

    Maybe Harry thinks the same of the PM.

    He's also worth 50 times more.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    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?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,723
    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.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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 :wink:
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,551
    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.
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 814
    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.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,551
    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.
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    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 :wink:
    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?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,311
    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.
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    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?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,551
    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.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,418
    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. :)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,551
    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.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,551
    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.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    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.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,418
    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. :lol:
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,721
    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.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    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 :wink:
    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.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025