Mailwatch(ed) Forum

I think Johnson will survive North Shropshire, if they lose it. Not like Mrs Thatcher losing Poll Tax by elections where there was an obvious solution.

Boiler wrote: ↑Tue Dec 14, 2021 10:05 pm
Abers, do you really think at least 54 Tory MPs would write to Brady to trigger a no confidence vote in Johnson?

I think it’s possible. The rumour is that Graham Brady has received a fair few letters already, and of course 98 of them staged a rebellion on the pretext of opposition to the “Plan B” measures tonight. Bodger will be eviscerated again by Starmer at PMQs tomorrow, and then on Thursday if North Shropshire is lost or even if the Tory majority/vote share is decimated, then it could certainly happen.

The key is that Johnson’s sole redeeming quality (he has no real political friends and none that can be described as personally loyal to him), is that he is an election winner. If he is perceived in fact to have become the opposite - an election liability - you can be sure that the Tories will act. Unlike Labour (alas), they waste no time at all in defenestrating duff leaders that are perceived to have become a liability (Thatcher, IDS, May), so yes, I do think it could happen.

Chamberlain resigned when 38 Tory MPs voted against him. Just saying...

Samanfur wrote: ↑Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:45 pm Cheers, but if we're giving credit where it's due, DavidJay said it first. I just repeated it, and expanded it a bit.

Thanks, but while we're playing pass the parcel I just copied it from someone else. I think it was off here but I'm certainly not clever enough to have been the orginator.

Miriam Cates is another hardline evangelical, this time slightly more in the mould of that woman who did the bizarre prayer session for Trump. TERFer as well. And forced foodbanks to buy her app. How very fucking Christian of her.

Abers - isn't the Fat Cunt on paternity leave this week? Oh goody, Wor Anje screwing up R-ah-b's day.

I’m guessing Miriam’s one of those white people who feels discriminated against because she can’t say n**** when black rappers can

Iain Banks had this nailed almost 30 years ago (The Crow Road, 1992). To a Tory, freedom means one thing - money.

Freedom of choice - money to afford better.
Freedom of movement - money to travel.
Freedom of speech - money to silence your critics.
Freedom of conscience - money to sic your lawyers on anyone trying to stop you.

It's a very brutal worldview - a bit like those lists of what's acceptable if you're rich but not if you're poor, and it all boils down to one line - everything. And it doesn't necessarily mean spending money - just having money is enough to get you into the goodie room.

So what she means by freedom or liberty is that if she has the money to do something, she should be able to do it. But if that's available to anybody, that devalues her privilege. Why should poor people have access to something that she thinks they should pay for?

Of course, that misses out the fact that she has almost certainly benefited from universal rights. But now she thinks it's time to limit them, which rather goes against the concept of rights.

Still never heard an honest answer to the question 'and how is a lack of money not an affront to liberty, then?'.

One of the reasons why neocons lose their shit over parks and public art. To them, it's all about unit cost. A painting costs X million pounds. Entry to its gallery is Y pounds. After [x/y] visits, the painting has paid for itself. Public art though? How does that work? Just there for anyone passing to enjoy? Same as homeless people on benches.

It's similar to the Sky TV argument I've made - what you're buying is exclusivity. The chance to see premier league footy or Game of Thrones or whatever before that git from next door does.

Same with public parks. So what if it's available to everyone? If poor people are lounging around they're avoiding opportunities to make money. They're taking up a bench space some richer person earned and paid for. That running track might help out one potential Olympic champion, but if it's dug up and the area sold to a polo club who will use it for a few weekends a year, that's a guaranteed return (and this actually happened).

Increasingly, economists are talking about what they call the social quotient - hard to calculate, but basically the knock-on effects and gains (to society) of free at point of use resources. So for example a youth club might reduce crime and lower insurance rates. A library might help people develop skills and get back into work. But all a little too complex for the hard capitalists who only see the bottom line.

In other words: the ideologues who don't even have the grace or savvy to know they're ideologues, AND/OR the lack of shame to give a fuck anyway.

Some very odd parental leave going on, he skipped Cobra for a second time and yet can do PMQs (and why he would want to that is anyones guess).

davidjay wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 1:24 am

Samanfur wrote: ↑Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:45 pm Cheers, but if we're giving credit where it's due, DavidJay said it first. I just repeated it, and expanded it a bit.

Thanks, but while we're playing pass the parcel I just copied it from someone else. I think it was off here but I'm certainly not clever enough to have been the orginator.

Look, if no one is claiming ownership, I will. Anything to make me look clever like

Johnson loses it and rants like a lunatic at PMQs. More of this needling from Starmer, please. Not the look of a PM in control.

Another PPB, sorry, press conference this evening at 5. And no speaker to tell him off again for not announcing things in parliament.

What's coming this time, I wonder?

“With a heavy heart, and what I believe is best for the country….” And then I woke up!

Youngian wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 12:32 pm Johnson loses it and rants like a lunatic at PMQs. More of this needling from Starmer, please. Not the look of a PM in control.

I didn't see it, but let me guess: am I correct that Johnson quickly resorted to jabbing his finger in the general direction of the Labour frontbench and angrily accuse them of "playing politics" by any chance?

You’ve got it. He also mentioned the booster vaccination about 800 times.

Did he fall back on "Captain Hindsight" too?

Boiler wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 1:57 pm What's coming this time, I wonder?

If I had to guess, vaccine waffle, plus a sort of "final warning" that if things don't improve drastically by say Monday, further curbs may well have to be considered. He won't go as far as Sturgeon did yesterday, especially after last night.

As things clearly are not going to improve drastically in five days, he's got to choose between his career and the well being of the public.

We're fucked, then.