New Tory Leader

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

1 hour ago, ron obvious said:

In my opinion Starmer is as big a liar as Johnson. He wants to win the election & will say anything he thinks necessary to ensure that outcome.

The 'other candidates'  .... were who exactly? I mean who could effectively wield power?? Being 'honest but misguided' could be applied to many dictators throughout history. I'd rather have a buffoonish liar whose lies are easily seen through than any of those - or indeed rather than the sanctimonious holier-than-thou liar who is the present option.

Of course I'd rather have a competent, rational, humane leader than any of the above, but they're rare as rocking horse excrement, plus wouldn't want the job anyway since I would contend it is impossible to do the job without being prepared to lie; it's one of the problems with democracy as a form of government (which - was it Churchill who said it? - is still better than the alternatives). You have to please as many of the electorate as possible, & unfortunately giving them unearned money has proven to be a sure fire winner - & saying there are no consequences to doing so is one of the biggest lies of all.

And - fact, not hint - there are very, very few politicians who never lie, & those that don't lie are nowhere near power. How can it be otherwise? If you told everyone the truth to their face in everyday life you'd lead a very uncomfortable (& probably short) life. I think what you're saying is that you like to hear the lies some politicians come up with because they chime with your view of how the world ought to be.

Bingo - We have a winner.

'They're all as bad each other' defense of the indefensible.

I think there were about a 100 Tory ministers who resigned because of Johnson's (ongoing) lies. Not to mention the fine. Please don't smear them all even in the Tory party with the same brush as Johnson let alone the generally far more upstanding opposition parties, agree with their politics or not. That would be absurd.

If Johnson hadn't resigned his seat he would of been bounced out of the commons care of the 'privileges committee'.

[Herman 9,900]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Bingo - We have a winner.

'They're all as bad each other' defense of the indefensible.

I think there were about a 100 Tory ministers who resigned because of Johnson's (ongoing) lies. Not to mention the fine. Please don't smear them all even in the Tory party with the same brush as Johnson let alone the generally far more upstanding opposition parties, agree with their politics or not. That would be absurd.

If Johnson hadn't resigned his seat he would of been bounced out of the commons care of the 'privileges committee'.

Thank you. I can't quite understand that people, who saw the same Johnson as everyone else (oo-er), can put anyone in the same group as him. The grossest level of dishonesty anyone has seen in parliament, even worse that the man ran the country. Maybe Ron and others are trying to persuade themselves.....

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

19 minutes ago, Herman said:

Thank you. I can't quite understand that people, who saw the same Johnson as everyone else (oo-er), can put anyone in the same group as him. The grossest level of dishonesty anyone has seen in parliament, even worse that the man ran the country. Maybe Ron and others are trying to persuade themselves.....

Yes Herman - I can disagree politically with many but most are honest decent people. Indeed, I think I once noted on here a Tory MP candidate is a friend. I still recall the conversations we had about Johnson before his elevation ....(and no I won't embarrass anybody).

Frankly I think Ron and others are actually in denial - just trying to find excuses for their choices. 

What followed from 2016 onwards was of course the quite predictable fiasco.

[ron obvious 1,523]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Bingo - We have a winner.

'They're all as bad each other' defense of the indefensible.

I think there were about a 100 Tory ministers who resigned because of Johnson's (ongoing) lies. Not to mention the fine. Please don't smear them all even in the Tory party with the same brush as Johnson let alone the generally far more upstanding opposition parties, agree with their politics or not. That would be absurd.

If Johnson hadn't resigned his seat he would of been bounced out of the commons care of the 'privileges committee'.

No, they're not all as bad as each other. But Johnson's venality worries me much less than any of the alternatives then available as realistic Prime Ministerial candidates. Plus the array of pretty horrible MPs in the shadow cabinet.

And your sort of making my point for me. When someone like Johnson behaves as badly as he did then his own party will bounce him out. If Corbyn & his associates had got their hands on the levers of power my fear (amongst others) was they would never have relinquished them

If we were back in the days of Alan Johnson, Frank Field et al. then I might have felt differently. But they're long gone.

[Well b back 3,340]

I’ve heard it all now.

Apparently the right wing are now hatching a plot to bring Boris back, with Farage as his right hand man.

I wouldn’t even watch I’m a Celebrity because that lying piece of dirt was in it, if he took over the country then well ‘ OMG ‘

Edited December 11, 2023 by Well b back

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

21 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I’ve heard it all now.

Apparently the right wing are now hatching a plot to bring Boris back, with Farage as his right hand man.

I wouldn’t even watch I’m a Celebrity because that lying piece of dirt was in it, if he took over the country then well ‘ OMG ‘

Whereas I agree with you WBB - Sadly the 'right wing' as you call it have discovered with Johnson that it doesn't matter anymore what blatant lies you tell - some people will still buy it as per Trump and it may yet be vote winner. A 'lovable' rogue etc. I know, impossible to believe in any serious country.

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

Will today or tomorrow be a red 53 letter day ?

[A Load of Squit 5,283]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

I’ve heard it all now.

Apparently the right wing are now hatching a plot to bring Boris back, with Farage as his right hand man.

I wouldn’t even watch I’m a Celebrity because that lying piece of dirt was in it, if he took over the country then well ‘ OMG ‘

Neither of these 2 are MP's & they would find it hard to find a couple of safe seats to parachute them into. It would take a new party leader to give them seats in the Lords so they'd have to get rid of Sunak & install a puppet leader to get them into the HOL & then put Johnson back in charge. What role would Farage do, he would want to be on equal footing with Johnson & I can't see Boris accepting that.

It's all a bit far fetched but then we are talking about the Tories.

[Well b back 3,340]

What role would Farage do, 
 

‘ The chief F***** up of the U.K.’ ( more than last time )

 

[Well b back 3,340]

6 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Neither of these 2 are MP's & they would find it hard to find a couple of safe seats to parachute them into. It would take a new party leader to give them seats in the Lords so they'd have to get rid of Sunak & install a puppet leader to get them into the HOL & then put Johnson back in charge. What role would Farage do, he would want to be on equal footing with Johnson & I can't see Boris accepting that.

It's all a bit far fetched but then we are talking about the Tories.

It is reported in a few places and got a mention on the BBC

[Barbe bleu 840]

8 hours ago, Well b back said:

I’ve heard it all now.

Apparently the right wing are now hatching a plot to bring Boris back, with Farage as his right hand man.

I wouldn’t even watch I’m a Celebrity because that lying piece of dirt was in it, if he took over the country then well ‘ OMG ‘

If we all ignore them they will go away.

[Fen Canary 934]

The Tories biggest problem is that they no longer stand for anything. They won a large majority on Johnson’s levelling up manifesto, then did a complete u turn with Truss’ Thatcherism and now have gone back to Cameron’s managerialism. Labour are going to win a huge majority largely by default, as I don’t see the same enthusiasm for Starmer as there was for Blair. Starmer always strikes me as about as trustworthy as Johnson (albeit a million times less brazen) and has changed direction more times than a wind sock, so if the Tories got their act together the election after the next one they would still have a reasonable chance but they need to actually decide what party they want to be.

The ghost of Thatcher needs to be buried, neoliberalism and the market knows best ideology simply isn’t a vote winner today. They need policies on reducing immigration (both legal and illegal) and policies to get young families into their own homes. Sort these out and they’d start to claw back some of the support they’ve been haemorrhaging.

[Herman 9,900]

2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

The Tories biggest problem is that they no longer stand for anything. They won a large majority on Johnson’s levelling up manifesto, then did a complete u turn with Truss’ Thatcherism and now have gone back to Cameron’s managerialism. Labour are going to win a huge majority largely by default, as I don’t see the same enthusiasm for Starmer as there was for Blair. Starmer always strikes me as about as trustworthy as Johnson (albeit a million times less brazen) and has changed direction more times than a wind sock, so if the Tories got their act together the election after the next one they would still have a reasonable chance but they need to actually decide what party they want to be.

The ghost of Thatcher needs to be buried, neoliberalism and the market knows best ideology simply isn’t a vote winner today. They need policies on reducing immigration (both legal and illegal) and policies to get young families into their own homes. Sort these out and they’d start to claw back some of the support they’ve been haemorrhaging.

Starmer's major problem is keeping the real villains in this country, the right wing press, at bay. He's tiptoeing around trying not to upset Murdoch and Rothermere. He can't give these any ammunition which means he doesn't say anything that may rock the boat. This comes across as dishonesty and upsets a lot of people on his own side, but he's seen how they can easily destroy non-Tory leaders if they scare the horses. Look at how Kinnock and Miliband were treated and that's what Starmer is trying to avoid.

[Fen Canary 934]

18 minutes ago, Herman said:

Starmer's major problem is keeping the real villains in this country, the right wing press, at bay. He's tiptoeing around trying not to upset Murdoch and Rothermere. He can't give these any ammunition which means he doesn't say anything that may rock the boat. This comes across as dishonesty and upsets a lot of people on his own side, but he's seen how they can easily destroy non-Tory leaders if they scare the horses. Look at how Kinnock and Miliband were treated and that's what Starmer is trying to avoid.

I always think this right wing press argument is a cop out personally. The media in the UK is fairly mixed, for every Mail there’s the Guardian, for the Sun there’s the Mirror, Telegraph/Independent etc. Even on telly for GB News you have Channel 4 at the opposite end of the spectrum.

I can understand Starmers tactic of simply saying nothing and letting the Tories implosion give him the election by default, but I still personally don’t believe he actually stands for anything at all, which is still more than the Tories currently manage 

Edited December 12, 2023 by Fen Canary

[TheGunnShow 6,195]

It's almost like some particularly pathetic pant-****ting elements in the country haven't got over the Zinoviev letter yet. Or indeed realised that it's accepted nowadays as being a forgery.

Edited December 12, 2023 by TheGunnShow

[PurpleCanary 5,633]

2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I always think this right wing press argument is a cop out personally. The media in the UK is fairly mixed, for every Mail there’s the Guardian, for the Sun there’s the Mirror, Telegraph/Independent etc. Even on telly for GB News you have Channel 4 at the opposite end of the spectrum.

I can understand Starmers tactic of simply saying nothing and letting the Tories implosion give him the election by default, but I still personally don’t believe he actually stands for anything at all, which is still more than the Tories currently manage 

In that case why do Labour would-be PMs have to court the right-wing press in a way no Tory would-be PM ever feels the need to do with the left-wing press? Starmer has felt forced to wrote a piece for the Daily Telegraph.

And back in 1995 Blair actually went to a News Corp conference on an Australian island to try to sweet-talk Murdoch into getting his UK papers to if not actively support Labour then to at least not savage the party before the next election.

And it worked. The Sun switched to Labour in 1997, while the Times stopped endorsing the Tories for that election, without backing Labour, but thern did so in 2001.

 

[Fen Canary 934]

7 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

In that case why do Labour would-be PMs have to court the right-wing press in a way no Tory would-be PM ever feels the need to do with the left-wing press? Starmer has felt forced to wrote a piece for the Daily Telegraph.

And back in 1995 Blair actually went to a News Corp conference on an Australian island to try to sweet-talk Murdoch into getting his UK papers to if not actively support Labour then to at least not savage the party before the next election.

And it worked. The Sun switched to Labour in 1997, while the Times stopped endorsing the Tories for that election, without backing Labour, but thern did so in 2001.

 

Blair and Starmer obviously think it’s advantageous to do so. I’d wager a reader of the Sun is much more likely to switch their vote from Tory to Labour than a Guardian reader doing the opposite.

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

Did wonder this morning if Rishi would of invited the righties to a meeting on the 'Rwanda' plane on the runway at Brize Norton for a photo shoot.

When they are all onboard Rishi, says sorry can't make it but off you go...... 

Problem sorted. It was nice dream.  

Edited December 12, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[Worthy Nigelton 1,100]

4 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I always think this right wing press argument is a cop out personally. The media in the UK is fairly mixed, for every Mail there’s the Guardian, for the Sun there’s the Mirror, Telegraph/Independent etc. Even on telly for GB News you have Channel 4 at the opposite end of the spectrum.

I can understand Starmers tactic of simply saying nothing and letting the Tories implosion give him the election by default, but I still personally don’t believe he actually stands for anything at all, which is still more than the Tories currently manage 

What about the Express, Evening Standard, Spectator, The Times, FT? Also, Sky News, Talk TV? Not to mention that the Daily Mail is the most read paper and The Sun is second.

The fact that always sticks in my mind is that Rupert Murdoch's papers have endorsed the winner of every single general election and referendum since 1979. So they're either brilliant at judging the public mood, or they're influencing it. More interesting is that Liverpool was one of the biggest remain voting places in the country and has been Labour since 1979 - the one place where Murdoch can't sell a single paper. It's either a massive coincidence or his papers have had the biggest influence on our democracy we've ever seen.

Edited December 12, 2023 by Worthy Nigelton

[Fen Canary 934]

6 hours ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

What about the Express, Evening Standard, Spectator, The Times, FT? Also, Sky News, Talk TV? Not to mention that the Daily Mail is the most read paper and The Sun is second.

The fact that always sticks in my mind is that Rupert Murdoch's papers have endorsed the winner of every single general election and referendum since 1979. So they're either brilliant at judging the public mood, or they're influencing it. More interesting is that Liverpool was one of the biggest remain voting places in the country and has been Labour since 1979 - the one place where Murdoch can't sell a single paper. It's either a massive coincidence or his papers have had the biggest influence on our democracy we've ever seen.

Murdochs papers don’t always back the same party in elections so how can they all have picked the winner every time? Since 79 Labour has only won 3 elections, so it stands to reason Tory supporting papers would have been right most of the time in that period. It wasn’t the media that caused Labour to lose heavily through the 80’s and early 90’s, it was the fact Labour was racked with infighting, splitting off into various factions which made them appear largely unelectable (much like the Tories now).

Liverpool has always been much more militantly left wing. They have an undeserved sense of exceptionalism that means they will vote that way for the rest of time 

[Herman 9,900]

Tories bottled it. All mouth and no trousers.

[Daz Sparks 1,226]

15 minutes ago, Herman said:

Tories bottled it. All mouth and no trousers.

Yes, but I'm not surprised, they are clinging on to power til the death.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

10 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

In that case why do Labour would-be PMs have to court the right-wing press in a way no Tory would-be PM ever feels the need to do with the left-wing press? Starmer has felt forced to wrote a piece for the Daily Telegraph.

And back in 1995 Blair actually went to a News Corp conference on an Australian island to try to sweet-talk Murdoch into getting his UK papers to if not actively support Labour then to at least not savage the party before the next election.

And it worked. The Sun switched to Labour in 1997, while the Times stopped endorsing the Tories for that election, without backing Labour, but thern did so in 2001.

 

I think your last paragraph answers your question

[Worthy Nigelton 1,100]

4 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Murdochs papers don’t always back the same party in elections so how can they all have picked the winner every time? Since 79 Labour has only won 3 elections, so it stands to reason Tory supporting papers would have been right most of the time in that period. It wasn’t the media that caused Labour to lose heavily through the 80’s and early 90’s, it was the fact Labour was racked with infighting, splitting off into various factions which made them appear largely unelectable (much like the Tories now).

Liverpool has always been much more militantly left wing. They have an undeserved sense of exceptionalism that means they will vote that way for the rest of time 

Wrong on both counts. Murdoch backed Blair's Labour for all three of their election victories and Liverpool voted Tory plenty of times in the earlier part of the 20th century.

[Barbe bleu 840]

23 minutes ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

Wrong on both counts. Murdoch backed Blair's Labour for all three of their election victories and Liverpool voted Tory plenty of times in the earlier part of the 20th century.

Does anyone actually read papers anymore?  Isn't it far more important to look at what opinions are formed on websites and social media than in print that ceased to be relevant at some point after 2010?

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

Rwanda vote. A pyrhic victory if there ever was one.

The circus carries on into the New Year. The winner is of course SKS who can't believe his lucky stars.

[sonyc 5,542]

27 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Does anyone actually read papers anymore?  Isn't it far more important to look at what opinions are formed on websites and social media than in print that ceased to be relevant at some point after 2010?

The papers are online though, that's how they are mainly consumed.

The Mail online is the font of all right wing populist knowledge. It's the go to site for many of that persuasion. It spins its hate daily and there's plenty of takers. If you read them you find that many points end up in these threads (and in the football side). Platforms like X amplify all the echo chambers.

It's why you occasionally read stuff like "an undeserved sense of exceptionalism" (sorry Fen) ....it's not a fact but probably an opinion influenced by papers like The Mail and The Sun. Liverpool is reviled by a few posters - has been the case for years. Such posters tarnish a whole city and everyone living in it - it's shallow as well as cheap. Bradford is another city selected for jokes (Jools used to take a pop to give one example...yet he probably knows little about Bradford. And if I was to say I thought Luton was a bad place - which I wouldn't - it would be poor form). And you already know what I think about Cleverly and Stockton (mustn't forget the 'On Tees'). 

Edited December 12, 2023 by sonyc

[sonyc 5,542]

1 minute ago, Yellow Fever said:

Rwanda vote. A pyrhic victory if there ever was one.

The circus carries on into the New Year. The winner is of course SKS who can't believe his lucky stars.

This affair has kind of exposed the Tory Brexit splits yet again. How right can one go. Yet, don't sort out the problem. 

£290 billion to deport maybe 200 people? And thousands arriving. It makes you despair.

Sunak made a mistake with his "Stop the Boats" campaign...because actually he can't. Unless there are serious policies and actions to improve the asylum system.

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

5 minutes ago, sonyc said:

This affair has kind of exposed the Tory Brexit splits yet again. How right can one go. Yet, don't sort out the problem. 

£290 billion to deport maybe 200 people? And thousands arriving. It makes you despair.

Sunak made a mistake with his "Stop the Boats" campaign...because actually he can't. Unless there are serious policies and actions to improve the asylum system.

I actually thought SKS made an excellent point on this. Save the money and go after the supplier chains of the cheap boats in France. No boats, no boat crossings.

Going after the boats is a far more manageable problem.

[Fen Canary 934]

4 hours ago, sonyc said:

The papers are online though, that's how they are mainly consumed.

The Mail online is the font of all right wing populist knowledge. It's the go to site for many of that persuasion. It spins its hate daily and there's plenty of takers. If you read them you find that many points end up in these threads (and in the football side). Platforms like X amplify all the echo chambers.

It's why you occasionally read stuff like "an undeserved sense of exceptionalism" (sorry Fen) ....it's not a fact but probably an opinion influenced by papers like The Mail and The Sun. Liverpool is reviled by a few posters - has been the case for years. Such posters tarnish a whole city and everyone living in it - it's shallow as well as cheap. Bradford is another city selected for jokes (Jools used to take a pop to give one example...yet he probably knows little about Bradford. And if I was to say I thought Luton was a bad place - which I wouldn't - it would be poor form). And you already know what I think about Cleverly and Stockton (mustn't forget the 'On Tees'). 

I don’t read the Times or Sun, but an undeserved sense of exceptionalism is an apt description for that city. Scouse not English attitudes, blaming everybody but themselves for various football disasters, blaming the government for every fault in the city, even blasting UNESCO for revoking the heritage status on their docks due to their own massive redevelopment of the area. There’s always been an underlying arrogance amongst the ones I’ve worked with down the years, I can assure you my opinion on the place stems entirely from my own experiences rather than what big bad Rupert has told me to think.

Likewise with Luton, I’ve worked there on numerous occasions as well as sitting training courses for work there. I’d rather be camping in Yemen to be honest it’s an absolute dump.

Rant over