- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3081 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
143 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 83382
Beleagured Theresa May 'to quit as Prime Minister on August 30, 2019 in a bid to stop a leadership challenge' - as she tries to calm rivals with a prosecco party at Chequers
Theresa May is said to have revealed the date she will quit as Prime Minister - giving herself two years to see Brexit through first.
She has chosen Friday August 30th 2019 as the day she will step down from 10 Downing Street, it has been reported.
It comes amid a major charm offensive by Mrs May in a bid to win the support of her MPs and avoid an awkward leadership challenge.
This man is going to become Prime Minister on 1st September 2019 and it's going to be fucking awesome.
|>>|| No. 86025
The other reviews talk about lefty snowflakes and Remainers being triggered by the Empire, so that is a masterpiece in comparison.
|>>|| No. 86027
If you're primarily a household name for reasons other than your literary output, yeah. It's top 20 hardback nonfiction. It's not setting the world on fire by any means, but it's also not the huge failure some appear to think. There's an article in the guardian about how this ought to make publishers more reluctant to publish books by politicians, but I have no doubt it's within the range Penguin were expecting.
Thrre are a handful of authors who can reliably sell a shitload of books, but outside of those (especially in nonfiction) the numbers are much lower than most assume.
|>>|| No. 86029
I almost want to buy it just to offer a neutral opinion since it seems everyone's using it as their own tedious sounding-board. Reminds me a bit of Empire by Niall Ferguson, a book I find interesting since it dares to diverge from the notion of 'the British Empire was unrelentingly and unequivocally horrible for everyone apart from a few English landowners who lined their pockets with the proceeds of slavery and unlike every other empire in history left absolutely no positive legacy'. Sadly, it too tends to be pilloried by the left or mythologised by the right when it deserves neither.
In any case I'm not going to bother, I doubt Mogg's musings are worth my attention.
|>>|| No. 86030
'Funny' reviews should all stay with the Box Canvas Print of Paul Ross and nowhere else.
|>>|| No. 86031
>>86029 I picked up a remaindered copy of one of his other books. Chapter 1 was standard libertarian fare, chapter two was worrying about Y2K, chapter 3 is fretting about the next ice age. It's hard going and not particularly fascinating, but I'm not giving it a fair run as it's my bog book. I'll probably finish it as it's sometimes worth reading stuff that's not my natural home.
|>>|| No. 86033
As a massive lefty myself, I find that typical self-flagellating display of shame regarding the empire to be cringeworthy. It's worth considering we wouldn't have been in any position to carry out the vast social reforms of the 50s and 60s without it. It's just the shipping forecast that you feel bad for all the horrible things in the past you have no connection to as a modern person.
|>>|| No. 86034
Where's the "I'm not really arsed" option? "Don't know" implies I'm unsure, but I'm positive that I don't feel pride or shame in things that had fuck all to do with me.
|>>|| No. 86035
>Where's the "I'm not really arsed" option?
It's available in every single poll, and you select it by not participating in the poll.
|>>|| No. 86036
But therein lies the problem, that poll now makes it look like you either have a strong opinion on Empire or are too thick to pick a side. You get the same problem in online "debates"; the people who are simply uninterested don't get represented. If you were having a conversation about the rights and wrongs of Empire in a cafe or a pub with some mates, the odds are it would be you and one other person going back and forth before everyone else politely asked you to shut up.
I know this is some hefty extrapolation, but I think this inability to not care, or the idea that not having an opinion is a moral failing, is one of the reasons political discussion can become so divisive currently
|>>|| No. 86037
>It's worth considering we wouldn't have been in any position to carry out the vast social reforms of the 50s and 60s without it.
I've never liked this position. Sweden took a much more radical direction than we did without any empire whatsoever, and New Zealand got about 95% of the way there while being a far-flung part of one that we used for sheep and recycling place names. It always seems like an excuse for communists to vaguely hint that Attlee and Wilson were actually bad and setting up a non-imperialist form of social democracy is impossible. You could take a very circular route and argue without the British Empire we wouldn't have won WW2 or would've won it in a way that didn't lead to radical social reforms, but that would be an uncommon and odd hypothetical.
|>>|| No. 86038
Both of those examples had much smaller populations, and therefore lower overheads. We were already up to the eyeballs in debt to the Yanks when we did it too; but our industrial and commercial base was large enough to carry us through, and that was unquestionably thanks, in part, to the prosperity we experienced as a major international power.
|>>|| No. 86039
Sweden got rich by trading with its imperial neighbours and staying out of the world wars. There's no Swedish social democracy without imperialism.
And those communists have a point, given Attlee fought a war in Malaya to keep a hold of the rubber trade, which post-WWII was generating more revenue than the entirety of British industrial manufacturing. The idea that a welfare state could have been set up just as easily without such imperial extraction is fantasy.
|>>|| No. 86151
We're definitely getting closer to that day, but I'm just not sure we're culturally there yet. I think one of the populist things that Boris/Jeremy will do though is legalise more of it; easy vote winner.
|>>|| No. 86154
Principally I think it makes sense to act contrite purely because drugs are illegal. It doesn't set a good precedent for a potential national leader to say they had fun breaking the law. I'm sure tearing down the road with a baseball bat smashing windscreens is a right lark, but I wouldn't admit to it when running for office.
It's also a generational thing. Plenty of older voters still hold a very dim view of narcotics, and of course there are the potential PR disasters that make me dream up scenes from The Thick of It. Politician says he had a great time on coke/ecstasy/third drug; journalists find some grieving parent whose teenager OD'd on it and who now admonishes the politician on telly; said politician is now forced to make the grovelling apology he probably should have just made in the first place. You get the picture.
We do need a serious reappraisal of how we handle drugs in this country, but it would require the sort of brave action you take when you're safely in office, not when you're running for it and creating a million ways to shoot your campaign in the foot.
|>>|| No. 86155
Seems like the Tories are tripping over themselves now to admit cocaine/weed use. But as you say, its still all "something I did twenty years ago and regret" rather than something they did regularly and enjoyed - the potential for misuse by political enemies and PR disasters is very high here.
Even The Sun has come out in favour of legislation for weed. ITZ COMING.
|>>|| No. 86156
The cynic in me suspects that's what it's about to begin with- If you come out and say you used to do a few lines in the past, your enemies can't smear you in the papers by making the shocking reveal about how you used to do a few lines in the past.
|>>|| No. 86157
I think you're exactly right - and some of it is being coordinated - let's get all the bad news out now.
|>>|| No. 86163
Regarding pic related; nae' clue, sorry mate.
Also I feel really vindicated in describing Tory MPs as overwhelmingly "nerdy" hours before all this unbearable "I smoked a joint but I did not inhale" nonsense. Honestly maybe the next PM needs a coke habit, get them a bit gee'd up in time for Brexit, or basically anything, as right now most of them appear to be taking this so casually you'd think it was an honourary post at a local rotary club. Actually I bet those places are bearpits, but you get the jist.
|>>|| No. 86164
It's interesting watching all the horrible ideas the candidates are coming out with in order to distinguish themselves from the pack. However, I've just learnt this is going to take until the end of July which is absolutely bonkers considering all the crap the country's got on, or maybe it doesn't matter because Parliament works on school time so nothing was going to happen anyway. Either way the Tory go slow is maddening, not least because none of them seem to know what they want out of it.
|>>|| No. 86166
What's the standard salary for an MP? Is it just below his proposed threshold?
|>>|| No. 86167
Yes, but it's clearly not aimed at them because a lot of Tory MPs have additional income from "consulting".
|>>|| No. 86169
I don't think he's doing it consiously, but Rory Stewart's pseudo-nomadic campaigning style is similar to the way in which many pre-modern monarchies governed, a fashion which might be in need of a comeback as a way of reengaging voters. Instead of the PM being at Westminster all the time they could just go back on Wednesdays and for important votes, then spend the rest of the time traveling the nation.
|>>|| No. 86173
Are these the same polls that said May had a 20+ point lead over Corbyn in 2017?
|>>|| No. 86174
Slight exaggeration. The average polling in 2017 had the Tories on 43.7% (they got 43.5%) and Labour on 35.8% (41%).
They were pretty much spot on with support for the Tories. The polling said more people were voting for the other parties, particularly UKIP, the Greens and nationalistic groups outside of England, who actually ended up supporting Labour.
|>>|| No. 86175
If Johnson wins any subsequent election is will undo and undermine three years of laughing in every American's face and I just think that can be allowed to happen.
|>>|| No. 86177
No, as has already been mentioned, he definitely looks more like the boss from PhoneShop.
|>>|| No. 86178
Give, Johnson or Hunt. Fucking hell.
Seriously, lads. Fucking hell.
|>>|| No. 86180
Would Johnson actually go for no deal, or does he just want the top job and once he's got it (and maybe a majority) he'll just take May's deal?
|>>|| No. 86276
Apparently some of Johnson's supporters voted for Hunt to ensure that Gove wouldn't make it into the final two.
I think I'd actually prefer Johnson over Hunt.
|>>|| No. 86282
As much as I loathe Hunt (the same way a miner would loathe Thatcher) even I have to admit. When you put him next to an ape like Johnson and that fucking snivelling deformed little twat Gove, he actually looks like a sensible candidate.
|>>|| No. 86293
Why doesn't Boris just say "it was a personal matter, a row that got out of hand and a noise complaint was made", it's the way he's dancing around the issue that's making a mountain out of a mole hill. Is my assumption that it's symptom of his upper-class background in which all personal matters are buried deep as deep goes and ignored forever baseless? Like when David Cameron started crying when someone mentioned his dad that one time? It's just so strange that he'd let something so seemingly minor foul up his campaign like this.
|>>|| No. 86294
>That's the Scottish Tory vote secured.
That one was never going to vote for Boris anyway.
|>>|| No. 86295
He isn't saying anything about it because the membership doesn't care — they're all unreformed old wealthy white men like him. It's the rest of the population that has a problem, hence him skipping out on the debate where Hunt could use it to attack him in front of them. Personally I think Sky would have done what C4 did and go ahead with an empty chair.
|>>|| No. 86296
Watching Scottish nationalists seethe over this has been a gift in itself. Of course he's going to have Scotland's other national drink on a trip, Buckfast is the Scotland people want to get away from.
I suspect he just wants the story to continue. A nosy neighbour recording a lovers quarrel doesn't make a credible attack but it does keep him in the news and makes those using it look like nutters.
|>>|| No. 86297
Is there any reason why Scots seem to hate Bojo more than the other candidates? Apart from the Old Etonian thing, I mean.
|>>|| No. 86298
Because he's obviously going to win making the others at least doubly irrelevant.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]