Jump to content

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)


blandy

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Yes. It’s a really hard thing to get right. He over did it. Stress. I’m sure he was told to do it, but he was frazzled. Do it right and it kind of sends the message of “I acknowledge you, recognise you as an professional doing your job and we have a connection in our roles and I respect you”. Overdo it and it seems fake and shallow and desperate and “please like me, I remembered your name”.

This time it also has the undertones of "You're in my lockdown breaking club too."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little reminder that it was literally four months ago that the headlines were about how Johnson was planning to spend the next decade as Prime Minister and be there for longer than Thatcher. Four months.

Quickest collapse in support in political history?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Not yet he’s not.

He’s not there yet, not for me. Not for someone that lived in a coal port town in the 80’s.

Ten years of that psycho bitch is going to take some beating.

 

Not a fan of Thatcher either, but at least she had a mild manner of responsibility for her position. BoJo is a raving populist who has lied, ruined the country (Brexit), and clearly thinks he's above the law on all manner of things. 

Thatcher inherited a broken economy, BoJo broke the economy.

Edited by magnkarl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ml1dch said:

Cheerio then f***-face. Two and a half years longer than he ever should have had. Let's hope he's poisoned their brand for a couple of generations. 

Bit premature, no? *If* there's 54 letters then there's a VONC, but to actually lose that there would need to 181 Tory MPs against him. Now, I'm sure it's true that there's a number somewhere between 54 and 180 that *actually* delineates workable control of the party, so I wouldn't expect him to be carrying on for long if there were, say, 175 no confidence votes. But there might not be many more than 54 either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mjmooney said:

Depends what you mean by 'worst'. He's certainly the least competent, possibly ever. Thatcher was an evil bitch, but she knew how to do her evil bitchcraft with ruthless efficiency. 

I think this is the point. Boris is easily the most incompetent prime minister we have had, certainly in living memory. He is lazy, work shy, indecisive, incoherent, self centred and pompous (amongst a lot of other things). If he was actually vaguely competent I suspect he would be able to cause a lot of damage and be in power for a much longer time and be comparable to Thatcher in regard to the long term damage to the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Depends what you mean by 'worst'. He's certainly the least competent, possibly ever. Thatcher was an evil bitch, but she knew how to do her evil bitchcraft with ruthless efficiency. 

By 'worst', I mean 'had the worst effect, on aggregate, on the country and the world'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Bit premature, no? *If* there's 54 letters then there's a VONC, but to actually lose that there would need to 181 Tory MPs against him. Now, I'm sure it's true that there's a number somewhere between 54 and 180 that *actually* delineates workable control of the party, so I wouldn't expect him to be carrying on for long if there were, say, 175 no confidence votes. But there might not be many more than 54 either.

Well yes, quite. I was going to post similar last night but forgot. The ideal scenario (for me) is that he wins the VONC and carries on for a while so its seen that the majority of Tory MPs supported him and it really sends them into a death spiral of public opinion

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Bit premature, no? *If* there's 54 letters then there's a VONC, but to actually lose that there would need to 181 Tory MPs against him. Now, I'm sure it's true that there's a number somewhere between 54 and 180 that *actually* delineates workable control of the party, so I wouldn't expect him to be carrying on for long if there were, say, 175 no confidence votes. But there might not be many more than 54 either.

If I were him I definitely wouldn't be confident about winning it. You're right that it's a big jump from 54 to 181, but it's also a lower mental bar to pass - the jump from wanting him to leave to the extent that you write to request it, and the choice of "him or somebody else" that you are forced to make means that there will be a lot of people in the latter camp but not necessarily the former. 

And I don't see where his support is coming from - he has no core of support or loyalty, and if you are only in place due to your popularity with the public then you have a problem when that seems to be lost. The three groups that you'd think are his best chance of support as I see it are (a) people he has put in Government, but a large chunk of them would probably prefer to be in a Sunak / Truss government anyway, or think they had a chance of running themselves; (b) newer MPs who wouldn't have their seat without him, but they seem to dislike him even more than the average Tory MP and appear to be one of the main groups plotting to get rid and (c) the quiet ones who never rock the boat. But if you want a quiet life, the way to get it right now is to be able to say to your angry constituents "yes, I voted to get rid of that bloke you now hate" without needing to poke your head out of the trench first. 

There could be enough in those groups to save him, but if your survival relies on those groups broadly holding firm - as I say, I'd be worried if I were him. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bickster said:

Well yes, quite. I was going to post similar last night but forgot. The ideal scenario (for me) is that he wins the VONC and carries on for a while so its seen that the majority of Tory MPs supported him and it really sends them into a death spiral of public opinion

Agreed. Do they still have that "no new VONC for a year" that kept May hanging on, or did they scrap it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Depends what you mean by 'worst'. He's certainly the least competent, possibly ever. Thatcher was an evil bitch, but she knew how to do her evil bitchcraft with ruthless efficiency. 

And most corrupt? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Depends what you mean by 'worst'. He's certainly the least competent, possibly ever. Thatcher was an evil bitch, but she knew how to do her evil bitchcraft with ruthless efficiency. 

This. At least Thatcher had some manner of intellect and decorum. BoJo is the most 'unpresidential' PM we've ever had, zero thought for anyone but himself to the point where he'd rather have an illegal garden party than actually try to do good for the country.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ml1dch said:

Little reminder that it was literally four months ago that the headlines were about how Johnson was planning to spend the next decade as Prime Minister and be there for longer than Thatcher. Four months.

Quickest collapse in support in political history?

People forget that Brown had a high poll rating at the start of his premiership- until he chickened our of calling an election he could have won, and then the credit crunch happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Delyth Miles is a right old hag, isn't she? On newsnight yesterday she managed to say '38% want Boris gone, that's less than a third really!" No Delyth, that is over a third, you old plonker. I'd suggest that those beads around your neck is not a necklace, but rather something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â