O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[cher1]

Careful lass, don't get in too deep.

I respect you because of your dad when you lived in BJ .... but you'd only be a young 'un then!

On the subject in hand, I'll apologise if you got offended by my post but if you care to Google the verb 'Servicing' pertaining to humans you will find it quite an acceptable word especially with the LGBT brigade. If we go a little further and accept that basically humans are of the animal gender, the mating of of mares with stallions and bitches with dogs is correctly called 'Servicing' especially by farmers and vets. So come on, lighten up a little on this subject, there's an awful lot more horrendous language used everyday by both men and women and always has been.

at 'the careful lass' warning, I've no idea what you are on about. ***ist tropes really are a thing of the past. Or at least they should be...

[Borg elite]

We're agreed on the bog roll jackal.😁

[i961pie]

Careful lass, don't get in too deep.

I respect you because of your dad when you lived in BJ .... but you'd only be a young 'un then!

Are you reading this patronising twaddle, Cher? As far as he's concerned you're a 'lass' and not worthy of the respect he'd accord a man.
And all that crap he spouts to excuse the expression 'servicing ladies'. Utter bollux. Like I said, I know of at least half a dozen powerful ladies who would take him apart in an argument.
Serious Pie is a s e x ist dinosaur who pretends to have manners and respect but he is a typical patronising Tory.

Lass is a common term for a female especially in your part of the world just like mate or pal is for a male. My wife's family are from Yorkshire and the males all call their partners or other girls lass. I don't know of any who take offence?

[Borg elite]

Bog roll and pebble dashing, everybody's talking **** on here... I'll get my coat.

[jackal2]

Bog roll and pebble dashing, everybody's talking **** on here... I'll get my coat.

You're right, it's getting dire 'ere.

[pingu_pie]

As 1961pie says above, a person’s take on these stories is likely to depend on their political leaning. I think they are ‘Westminster Village’ stories, but I can see that certain political and media elements are trying desperately hard to exaggerate them into the consciousness of a wider audience, for reasons which will be very much political rather than moral.

I do have reservations about Boris, because I prefer politicians to have more substance and ideological consistency, but those reservations don’t relate to these stories at all. I’m not going to suddenly stop voting Tory because of alleged technicalities around a flat renovation bill, or over an alleged intemperate remark in a private meeting that may or may not have been reported accurately by observers with particular grudges and motivations.

I get that ideologically you and I (maybe should substitute me with other leftists who post more often) are opposites, so we will likely never see most things through the same lens. However, regarding Johnson specifically, I cannot see what he has ever done politically that would make anyone want to support him.

The list of absolute idiocy that he has performed is ridiculously long, before he even got to number 10. I am yet to hear someone list something that he did - specifically him, his decision - that has provided an actual public service success. End of the day, politicians are there to serve and represent us, right? All I ever get when I ask this is "Got Brexit done", and if you count that, then, well...

Genuine question. What has he done?

PS. Second genuine question - why can't I hear Charlie and Stall on the website yet? I have a Tuesday night waiting to be ruined!!

[jackal2]

I get that ideologically you and I (maybe should substitute me with other leftists who post more often) are opposites, so we will likely never see most things through the same lens. However, regarding Johnson specifically, I cannot see what he has ever done politically that would make anyone want to support him.

Genuine question. What has he done?

He's done the thing that's most difficult to do. He's won two Mayoral elections in London, a hugely significant referendum, and a General Election.

That might sound like a sarcastic or trite response, but it genuinely isn't meant to be. Ask any political party or politician and this is the 'achievement' they crave more than any other. It's essential in order to get into a position to achieve anything else, irrespective of whether you go on to do something or nothing.

As I intimated above, Boris for me lacks a strong ideology and frequently during his career has flipped from one position to another. Many would indeed list "Getting Brexit done" as his single biggest achievement, but let's not forget he only decided which side of the argument he was going to support at the very last minute. But maybe therein lies his talent - when he decided to join the 'Leave' campaign it was seen as a massive boost for the 'Leave' side, and the final outcome only added to his reputation for either being or backing the winner. And by doing so, he effectively ended a historic rift in the Conservative Party and restored them as the only significant party on the right of British politics after years of infighting, and losing votes to UKIP/Brexit Party.

I think it was Jacob Rees-Mogg who described Boris as having that bit of electoral gold-dust that all politicians seek but many fail to ever master, and if you've got it, and have proved it repeatedly as Boris has to date, then all other skills/talents/achievements (or lack of them) are secondary considerations. I don't say this to blow smoke up Boris' ass, because I prefer politicians with more deep-rooted convictions, but his success in significant elections can't really be disputed. For a long time, Labour had something similar in Tony Blair, and that was equally baffling to some, but he put three General Election wins in the history books.

[magpie_mania]

He's done the thing that's most difficult to do. He's won two Mayoral elections in London, a hugely significant referendum, and a General Election.

That might sound like a sarcastic or trite response, but it genuinely isn't meant to be. Ask any political party or politician and this is the 'achievement' they crave more than any other. It's essential in order to get into a position to achieve anything else, irrespective of whether you go on to do something or nothing.

As I intimated above, Boris for me lacks a strong ideology and frequently during his career has flipped from one position to another. Many would indeed list "Getting Brexit done" as his single biggest achievement, but let's not forget he only decided which side of the argument he was going to support at the very last minute. But maybe therein lies his talent - when he decided to join the 'Leave' campaign it was seen as a massive boost for the 'Leave' side, and the final outcome only added to his reputation for either being or backing the winner. And by doing so, he effectively ended a historic rift in the Conservative Party and restored them as the only significant party on the right of British politics after years of infighting, and losing votes to UKIP/Brexit Party.

I think it was Jacob Rees-Mogg who described Boris as having that bit of electoral gold-dust that all politicians seek but many fail to ever master, and if you've got it, and have proved it repeatedly as Boris has to date, then all other skills/talents/achievements (or lack of them) are secondary considerations. I don't say this to blow smoke up Boris' ass, because I prefer politicians with more deep-rooted convictions, but his success in significant elections can't really be disputed. For a long time, Labour had something similar in Tony Blair, and that was equally baffling to some, but he put three General Election wins in the history books.

Agree with a lot of that.

However, I am not sure that the GE win was that amazing. He (or more probably one of his advisors) relied solely on 'Get Brexit done' with an opposition of Corbyn who never came out with a clear policy.

If he did say what he has been alleged to about piles of dead bodies though, that is at best a terrible mistake, and if Starmer had said it I am certain there would be calls for him to go. I think they are waiting for him to fall on his own sword ...... but will he?

[sidders]

He's done the thing that's most difficult to do. He's won two Mayoral elections in London, a hugely significant referendum, and a General Election.

That might sound like a sarcastic or trite response, but it genuinely isn't meant to be. Ask any political party or politician and this is the 'achievement' they crave more than any other. It's essential in order to get into a position to achieve anything else, irrespective of whether you go on to do something or nothing.

As I intimated above, Boris for me lacks a strong ideology and frequently during his career has flipped from one position to another. Many would indeed list "Getting Brexit done" as his single biggest achievement, but let's not forget he only decided which side of the argument he was going to support at the very last minute. But maybe therein lies his talent - when he decided to join the 'Leave' campaign it was seen as a massive boost for the 'Leave' side, and the final outcome only added to his reputation for either being or backing the winner. And by doing so, he effectively ended a historic rift in the Conservative Party and restored them as the only significant party on the right of British politics after years of infighting, and losing votes to UKIP/Brexit Party.

I think it was Jacob Rees-Mogg who described Boris as having that bit of electoral gold-dust that all politicians seek but many fail to ever master, and if you've got it, and have proved it repeatedly as Boris has to date, then all other skills/talents/achievements (or lack of them) are secondary considerations. I don't say this to blow smoke up Boris' ass, because I prefer politicians with more deep-rooted convictions, but his success in significant elections can't really be disputed. For a long time, Labour had something similar in Tony Blair, and that was equally baffling to some, but he put three General Election wins in the history books.

And Blair won 3 general elections for Labour on top of being called out for mistakes in Iraq. Does he have gold dust too?

[jackal2]

And Blair won 3 general elections for Labour on top of being called out for mistakes in Iraq. Does he have gold dust too?

That's exactly what I meant by the last line of my post. Whether you liked or loathed Blair, you cannot question his record for winning elections.

[pingu_pie]

He's done the thing that's most difficult to do. He's won two Mayoral elections in London, a hugely significant referendum, and a General Election.

That might sound like a sarcastic or trite response, but it genuinely isn't meant to be. Ask any political party or politician and this is the 'achievement' they crave more than any other. It's essential in order to get into a position to achieve anything else, irrespective of whether you go on to do something or nothing.

As I intimated above, Boris for me lacks a strong ideology and frequently during his career has flipped from one position to another. Many would indeed list "Getting Brexit done" as his single biggest achievement, but let's not forget he only decided which side of the argument he was going to support at the very last minute. But maybe therein lies his talent - when he decided to join the 'Leave' campaign it was seen as a massive boost for the 'Leave' side, and the final outcome only added to his reputation for either being or backing the winner. And by doing so, he effectively ended a historic rift in the Conservative Party and restored them as the only significant party on the right of British politics after years of infighting, and losing votes to UKIP/Brexit Party.

I think it was Jacob Rees-Mogg who described Boris as having that bit of electoral gold-dust that all politicians seek but many fail to ever master, and if you've got it, and have proved it repeatedly as Boris has to date, then all other skills/talents/achievements (or lack of them) are secondary considerations. I don't say this to blow smoke up Boris' ass, because I prefer politicians with more deep-rooted convictions, but his success in significant elections can't really be disputed. For a long time, Labour had something similar in Tony Blair, and that was equally baffling to some, but he put three General Election wins in the history books.

I take your point. I think, however, that the fact both of those won and why is why the whole system is so completely ****ed.

Essentially what you're boiling it down to is "they toadied to Murdoch".

Edit - and yes I'm replying to this as it's a pleasant diversion of headbutting my desk listening to this

[BigFatPie]

As 1961pie says above, a person’s take on these stories is likely to depend on their political leaning. I think they are ‘Westminster Village’ stories, but I can see that certain political and media elements are trying desperately hard to exaggerate them into the consciousness of a wider audience, for reasons which will be very much political rather than moral.
.

They really aren’t.

[i961pie]

They really aren’t.

You mean you hope they aren't.

[i961pie]

That's exactly what I meant by the last line of my post. Whether you liked or loathed Blair, you cannot question his record for winning elections.

Thatcher also

[BigFatPie]

You mean you hope they aren't.

No, they’re really not. There’s a desire to find out who has bought and paid for the prime minister and other senior politicians. There’s a desire that those politicians should stick to both electoral law and the ministerial code. More so in the light of corruption related to covid contracts, even more so in the light of Johnson giving public money to the woman he was having s e x with on the side whilst mayor.

Both you and jackal seem to view politics like football. You pick a side and cheer them on regardless of what they do or how they affect people’s lives.

Breaking news, politics isn’t football.