[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
politics

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 90436)
Message
File  []
close
bozzed.jpg
904369043690436
>> No. 90436 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 2:30 pm
90436 spacer
Rishi Sunak is going to be Prime Minister next year and it's going to be fucking awesome.
Expand all images.
>> No. 90437 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 2:36 pm
90437 spacer
>>90436
I think you're right. Can't see it being anyone else.
>> No. 90438 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 2:48 pm
90438 spacer

EdmcQiBX0AA10oV.png
904389043890438
>>90437
Polling earlier this year suggests it wouldn't even be close.
>> No. 90439 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 3:05 pm
90439 spacer
>>90438
Surprised at Penny Mordaunt numbers, she seems okay - I don't think it can be any of the others as they're too tainted by Brexit, etc.

It is starting to feel like the mid-Nineties again - I read an excellent article today which talked about Labour are successfully (and reasonably) pushing the "incompetence" line, as that allows people to change their vote (competence or incompetence being something that you discover after the fact, whereas policy/plans are before). It's a neat idea, and tallies up with what we've seen this year.

All we need now is some genuine sleaze or criminality and the government will fall - I wonder if/when we'll find out who the "rapist" is. Also, who on earth would want to be in charge of the UK during 2021? It's a poisoned chalice.
>> No. 90440 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 3:34 pm
90440 spacer

5a0462501c00003b00b34079.jpg
904409044090440
>>90439
I think with Mordaunt it's mainly an issue that she's quite unknown; just about everyone ahead of her has their name in the news more often.

I'd imagine any new PM would come in and announce that they've got a clean slate, setting up distance between them and the failings of the current government. If Brexit is out of the way, either 'oven ready' or no deal, then I don't think it'd be a bad time to be PM; just roll your sleeves up and give the impression that you'll do the best you can with the hand you've been dealt.
>> No. 90442 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 6:14 pm
90442 spacer
Aren't father-in-laws notorious for chatting shit? If you wanted to shit-stir you would be better off speculating on whether conference season is going ahead.

>>90438
It's weird to think of how everything has fallen into his lap. Almost as weird as any election debate will look on immigration.
>> No. 90443 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:04 pm
90443 spacer
>>90442
I can't even remember why Javid was ousted.

It's a pretty damming indictment of the Tory party that the only reason Sunak is the clear front-runner is because he's one of the few semi-competent cabinet members rather than just a sycophantic crony.
>> No. 90444 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:25 pm
90444 spacer
>>90443
Javid resigned, I recall, because he objected to the Johnson/Cummings plan for the Treasury to lose its independence from the Prime Minister's Office.

Which rather raises the question how Sunak is getting all the credit despite apparently being a puppet.
>> No. 90445 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:39 pm
90445 spacer

1526.gif
904459044590445
>>90444
>Which rather raises the question how Sunak is getting all the credit despite apparently being a puppet.

How indeed.
>> No. 90446 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:44 pm
90446 spacer
>>90444

Because a Tory chancellor spunking loads of money up the wall is revolutionary outside the box thinking. Whatever will he think of next, that cheeky young upstart? Universal basic income?

If you listen to the way the papers are talking about Sunak you'd think he was the Han fucking Solo of fiscal policy, for having the utter brass balls to do what someone like Gordon Brown might have done. Except with more corruption and cronyism.
>> No. 90447 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:49 pm
90447 spacer

Eca1S6wXgAAZhoZ.jpg_large.jpg
904479044790447
He's also kind of fit, hence the nickname 'Dishy Rishi'.
>> No. 90448 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 7:54 pm
90448 spacer
>>90447
Man looks like a Spitting Image version of himself.
>> No. 90449 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 8:16 pm
90449 spacer

PRI_155835853.jpg
904499044990449
>>90448
The bar isn't exactly high for attractiveness when it comes to male politicians.
>> No. 90452 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 10:49 pm
90452 spacer
>>90445
>>90446
So presumably neither of you believe Javid's reasons for resigning were credible, if all of the things Sunak is doing that are making him the most popular Tory are entirely of his own volition?
>> No. 90453 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 11:36 pm
90453 spacer
>>90452
While both are obviously clever and capable people, I think Sunak comes across as a bit more down-to-earth; I'm quite sure it's all a clever political trick, Sunak went to much posher school/university than Javid, but he somehow seems a bit friendlier is how I describe it. That poshness means he probably gets on a bit better with Boris.
>> No. 90455 Anonymous
26th August 2020
Wednesday 12:19 am
90455 spacer
>>90449
I'm not saying he's ugly, just that his facial features are all weirdly exaggerated in a way you'd expect of a caricature.
>> No. 90456 Anonymous
26th August 2020
Wednesday 7:44 am
90456 spacer
>>90455
Just say he's got a great big laplander nose and have done with it. You know you want to.
>> No. 90457 Anonymous
26th August 2020
Wednesday 10:02 am
90457 spacer
>>90456
His nose is about the last thing I was thinking of.
>> No. 91412 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 7:52 am
91412 spacer
Boris Johnson's adviser Lee Cain quits Downing Street role after revolt by Carrie Symonds

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/11/lee-cain-resigns-boris-johnsons-director-communications/

Can someone please explain to me how and why Boris Johnson's fiancée is in a position to block his Director of Communications from becoming his Chief of Staff?
>> No. 91413 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 8:43 am
91413 spacer
>>91412
I suppose it's for the same reasons anyone listens to what Dominic Cummings has to say.
>> No. 91414 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 8:51 am
91414 spacer
>>91412
Isn't it obvious? BogJob is a male bimbo and a weak leader.
>> No. 91422 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 7:24 pm
91422 spacer
>>90447
Rishi Sunak is a tiny little man, like 5'5'' or something. I've seen him drive a cosy coupe down Whitehall I swear.
>> No. 91426 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 9:21 pm
91426 spacer
>>91412
The media have been reporting this wrongly due to a typo.
There wasn't a revolt by Carrie Symonds, Lee Cain was revolted by Carrie Symonds.
>> No. 91427 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 9:55 pm
91427 spacer
>>91422
Boris is also smaller than you expect, in the flesh. 5'8" max.
>> No. 91428 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 10:09 pm
91428 spacer
>>90440
Please not Mordaunt, I don't think I'd make it through four years of otherlad horny posting.
>> No. 91429 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 11:20 pm
91429 spacer
>>91428
Oh come on, she is attractive though.
>> No. 91430 Anonymous
12th November 2020
Thursday 11:50 pm
91430 spacer
>>90456

He has a hint of Ed Miliband about him, which might be his undoing. Rishi is obviously massively popular given that we only ever see him when he's shaking the magic money tree, but his nerdiness might undermine his appeal over the course of a leadership campaign.

Timing is crucial - Rishi is a shoo-in if there's a rushed contest early next year, but he'll be a heck of a lot less popular in a couple of years when the bill for furlough comes due.




>> No. 91433 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 1:52 am
91433 spacer
>>91430

So this was Labour's plan all along. They have simply developed a more convincing skin for their T-1000 and they've deployed it at the heart of the Conservative party.
>> No. 91434 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 2:26 am
91434 spacer
>>91430
British politics is a joke.

>>91433
T-800 or death.
>> No. 91435 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 7:28 am
91435 spacer
>The government is poised to reach a settlement with an aide who was marched out of Downing Street by armed police after being sacked by Dominic Cummings. Government sources said that Sonia Khan, a former special adviser to the then chancellor Sajid Javid, will receive a settlement worth between £50,000 and £100,000.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/settlement-for-sonia-khan-adviser-marched-out-of-no-10-gkt56d6jn

>Dominic Cummings 'to leave Downing Street role by Christmas'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/12/boris-johnson-on-last-chance-say-tory-mps-after-lee-cain-row
>> No. 91436 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 9:19 am
91436 spacer
>>91430
I've never noticed before how similar he is to Miliband. Yet one was a North London geeknerd and the other is the dishy PM-in-waiting.

I hate everything.
>> No. 91438 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 9:24 am
91438 spacer
>>91436
It's the elephant features.
>> No. 91452 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 2:04 pm
91452 spacer
>>91434
I google for a saville terminator image, on the offchance that such a thing existed and found this.


>> No. 91453 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 2:29 pm
91453 spacer
>>91452

I find this kind of propaganda facinating, it pretends like it is satire poking fun of a politician and actually isn't.

I find it insidious.

Thick people probably share and it boosts their profile.

Got to play to the proles in the cheep seats who mistake it for punching up.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4SBb465bF0
>> No. 91454 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 4:02 pm
91454 spacer
>>91453
> it pretends like it is satire poking fun of a politician and actually isn't.
U wot m8. It seems to be fully supportive of him.
>> No. 91455 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:01 pm
91455 spacer
>>91454

I know it is. But it has the affectation of satire. don't it m8.
>> No. 91456 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:13 pm
91456 spacer
>>91455
Not really. Arnie is the good guy and has come to kick some arse. So put Saville's face on makes him the good guy too. Although maybe the T2 audience doesn't know that Arnie is the good guy on first viewing, but everyone knows it now so that's probably moot.
>> No. 91457 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:28 pm
91457 spacer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54938050

Cummings has gone.
>> No. 91459 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:51 pm
91459 spacer
>>91457
There does something off about his "I said I'd be leaving at the end of the year all along" message, like a pre-emptive excuse if it all goes tits up.
>> No. 91461 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:53 pm
91461 spacer

importedImage218842_header.jpg
914619146191461
>>91428
Mate, she's just so fit though.
>> No. 91462 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:54 pm
91462 spacer
>>91457
>Laura Kuenssberg said his departure had been brought forward given the "upset in the team" in Downing Street, for which she said it had been a "difficult week".

If this was Corbyn's chief advisor quitting, I've no doubt the rhetoric would be about the team being "at each others throats", "sheer chaos", the team "disintegrating around the PM's ears", etc.

Sage for give it a rest already.
>> No. 91463 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 5:59 pm
91463 spacer
>>91457
Another casualty of the end of furlough right before Christmas. This would've never been allowed to happen under Corbyn.

I wonder what will change with Cummings out of the picture. I'd say the backbenches have pulled off a coup but Vote Leave are the backbenchers.
>> No. 91467 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 6:24 pm
91467 spacer

nintchdbpict000063237443.jpg
914679146791467
>>91461
She is clever and fit.
>> No. 91469 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 6:45 pm
91469 spacer
>>91463
They seemed to do fuck all when he was there apart from u-turn or leak ideas to the press to gauge the public response to them, so I imagine Boris will continue to do fuck all whilst he's gone.
>> No. 91470 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 7:10 pm
91470 spacer
>>91459
I reckon that was Cummings trying to buy himself time.

Honestly I'm not sure what's caused his departure. I know there's been loads of cock-ups, but the spotlight wasn't especially on him at the moment, so I'm assuming it's almost entirely court intrigue.

>>91461
I don't deny it, I just don't want to hear about her tits the morning after she's sent specially equiped water cannon drone tanks to crush protesters in Isolation Camp 493 (formally Wigan).
>> No. 91471 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 7:56 pm
91471 spacer
>>91469
My understand is that Cummings was at least seen as someone keen on investing in the North. Maybe the dust-up was a revolt of the Conservative parties more libertarian leanings who're howling over the deficit.
>> No. 91472 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 8:07 pm
91472 spacer
>>91471
Apparently the power struggle against him was led by Carrie Symonds and Javid is in line to be Boris' #2.
>> No. 91473 Anonymous
13th November 2020
Friday 8:15 pm
91473 spacer
>>91472
>Apparently the power struggle against him was led by Carrie Symonds
This seems out of the blue to me and as a result I'm skeptical. probably too skeptical.
>> No. 91480 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 7:43 am
91480 spacer

35664976-0-image-m-5_1605337792503.jpg
914809148091480
>>91473
He's said to have been given the heave-ho after Johnson confronted him with texts showing that he'd been briefing against Symonds.
>> No. 91481 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 11:59 am
91481 spacer
Cripes lads. Is there really not going to be another General Election until late 2024?

It seems almost certain that Boris will quit after the Public start to really feel the detrimental effects of Brexit, and given the precedent set by the current Cabinet and culture of the Conservative Party I cant see his replacement being any more competent or magnanimous.

The Conservative Party holds 56% of seats in the House of Commons, so bar unprecedented swathes of MPs in the House leave the Party we're stuck with the current lot at the time of arguably the greatest Crisis the UK has faced since WWII.

Has there been any comparable situation to this in the UK Historically that I can read up on to get a better handle on what's about to occur in the coming years?
>> No. 91482 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 12:20 pm
91482 spacer
>>91481
Maybe 383-410?
>> No. 91483 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 12:38 pm
91483 spacer
>Mr Cummings’ decision to walk out of Number 10 after what one official called “a day of tantrums” raised concerns that the adviser might turn against Mr Johnson and lift the lid on a chaotic administration. One government insider said: “I won’t be surprised if there’s an explosive stunt between now and Christmas.” A colleague of Mr Cummings said: “It’s not Dom’s style just to quietly drift away.”

>Mr Johnson held a 45-minute meeting with Mr Cummings and Mr Cain on Friday to discuss their “general behaviour” this week, according to individuals with knowledge of the conversation. In tense exchanges, Mr Johnson accused his aides of briefing against him and his partner Carrie Symonds and criticised them for destabilising the government in the midst of tense Brexit negotiations. Mr Johnson showed the aides text messages that had been forwarded to Ms Symonds, who opposed Mr Cain’s appointment as chief of staff, to show they had briefed against her. He told them to get out and never return.

https://ft.com/content/6f0fc7a4-becc-474a-9924-57d9c8419551
>> No. 91484 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 1:23 pm
91484 spacer

Untitled.png
914849148491484
I wonder where he will go next.

>>91481
>arguably the greatest Crisis the UK has faced since WWII

Come off it. Nobody will die because of Brexit and we don't even have the paralysis of the May parliament.

>>91483
Why is Boris, as the 4kids say, such a simp? He seem quite incapable of separating his work and private life.
>> No. 91485 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 1:47 pm
91485 spacer
>>91484

>Nobody will die because of Brexit

The government's own planning documents say otherwise, and that was before COVID.
>> No. 91486 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 1:56 pm
91486 spacer
>>91484
What would you, then, say is the greatest crisis the UK has faced since the Second World War (titled correctly because I'm not a septic)?
>> No. 91487 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 2:00 pm
91487 spacer
>>91484
>Why is Boris, as the 4kids say, such a simp? He seem quite incapable of separating his work and private life.

I think what gets often overlooked is that Symonds isn't a stranger to politics. She's been involved in the Tory party for over 10 years, working as a press officer and a special adviser.

That and she's probably got a bit of leverage over him from his alleged affair with a violinist.
>> No. 91489 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 2:10 pm
91489 spacer
>>91485
And if you actually believe that then you're grasping at straws.

>>91486
Politically it's Suez and if we're talking domestically then a tie between 1974 and 1976. Obviously the greatest crisis generally was Cuba but we had little say in the affair.
>> No. 91490 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 2:21 pm
91490 spacer
>>91489
>And if you actually believe that then you're grasping at straws
I look forward to your next paper, professor.
>> No. 91491 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 2:27 pm
91491 spacer
I love these spads who get lucky in a big way and decide they've cracked it, they know how to do politics and no one can stop them, until they go and do something as stupid as briefing against their own sodding boss and his wife. The arrogance is truly a sight to behold. He may have played a sizable role in the Brexit referendum, but right-wing print media and government ineptitude were more of a factor. He may have helped the Tories win big in 2019, but Labour's campaign was about as agile and dynamic as Han Solo frozen in carbonite. I don't even particularly care that he's gone, but I do think it's funny, really rather funny.

>>91484
>I wonder where he will go next.
The Spectator, he seems like exactly the kind of arsehole they love. He could have a bit too much self-respect to become an opinion monkey right away, so he might end up at a think tank for a while, wiling away his time pretending to think.
>> No. 91492 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 2:43 pm
91492 spacer
https://www.ippr.org/media-item/watch-dominic-cummings-hollow-men-lecture-2014

This lecture is interesting to watch given everything we know about Cumming's tenure at no. 10 and everything that has transpired since 2016 (especially this year).

While the critiques of the Civil Service may be valid it seems like these Consultancies being used are just a lame horse of a different (and more expensive) colour.
>> No. 91493 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 3:03 pm
91493 spacer
>>91489

>And if you actually believe that then you're grasping at straws.

The NHS is absolutely on the ragged edge in much of the country, particularly the North West. We've got huge staff shortages and constant issues with distribution of essential supplies. The big hope for ending the pandemic is the new vaccine; that vaccine is extremely temperature-sensitive and must be stored at colder temperatures than any existing drug or vaccine, so nobody is entirely sure how to manage the logistics. Our supply will come from Pfizer's advanced biologics facility in Belgium.

I don't see how the biggest disruption to our border logistics since the Second World War could possibly exacerbate that situation with fatal consequences. /s
>> No. 91494 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 3:18 pm
91494 spacer
>>91493
It'll be gammon that voted for Brexit that are more likely to do so it's alright.
>> No. 91495 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 4:57 pm
91495 spacer
>>91493

> that vaccine is extremely temperature-sensitive and must be stored at colder temperatures than any existing drug or vaccine, so nobody is entirely sure how to manage the logistics.

I've read that, and it's apparently going to be a major limiting factor in delivering the vaccine especially to poor third-world countries in warmer climates.

Probably good news though for companies that make industrial freezing appliances.
>> No. 91496 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 7:30 pm
91496 spacer
>>91493
>We've got huge staff shortages and constant issues with distribution of essential supplies

This is news?

>I don't see how the biggest disruption to our border logistics since the Second World War could possibly exacerbate that situation with fatal consequences. /s

And the fix to importing essential drugs in such an emergency would involve a hand-wave. You can even prop up the airline industry right now by booking flights to deliver the stuff. It'll be expensive if the border turns into a traffic jam but people won't die.
>> No. 91497 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 8:29 pm
91497 spacer
>>91496

The government have no interest in paying airlines to do medical imports - we have tried to tender that contract already. Hopefully that will change when they get more desperate, but then again, an RAF Globemaster has a fair bit more cargo space than I can allocate a 738.
>> No. 91498 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 8:30 pm
91498 spacer
>>91496
>This is news?
Well, you seemed unaware.

>And the fix to importing essential drugs in such an emergency would involve a hand-wave.
Oh, wow, you're actually a cabinet minister.
>> No. 91504 Anonymous
14th November 2020
Saturday 11:30 pm
91504 spacer

-1x-1.png
915049150491504
>The catalyst for Cummings’s eventual departure was his fury at Johnson’s refusal to give their friend Cain the job of chief of staff. Johnson had discussed the idea, while Cummings and Cain pushed hard to support the move.

>But their lobbying finally went too far. When Cain’s appointment was leaked to Wednesday’s newspapers—in what Johnson regarded as an attempt to bounce him into confirming it—the premier’s patience ran out. He refused to make Cain chief of staff and then the two aides decided to stand down at the end of the year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-14/boris-johnson-clears-out-his-brexit-gang-to-take-back-control

Seems like it's come back down to leaking things to the press.

>>91498
Meanwhile ultra-cold boxes are actually being put out following a mass logistics operation that began even before we got the news on the vaccine. This includes the mass organisation of cargo-plane flights:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pfizer-sets-up-its-biggest-ever-vaccination-distribution-campaign-11603272614
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-14/crucial-vaccine-and-treatment-data-only-days-away?srnd=premium-europe
>> No. 91508 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 12:38 am
91508 spacer
>>91504

>Meanwhile ultra-cold boxes are actually being put out following a mass logistics operation that began even before we got the news on the vaccine. This includes the mass organisation of cargo-plane flights.

I have absolute confidence in a government that gave a cargo ferry contract to a company with no ferries, no experience in operating ferries, no ability to procure ferries and a website that was plagiarised from a takeaway.
>> No. 91509 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 2:03 am
91509 spacer
>>91493

The logistics will be a shitshow. Where I work, when we take delivery of control organisms and reagents requiring dry ice transport, it comes in this huge fuckoff insulated box, just for a tiny package no bigger than a packet of Haribo.

Transporting millions of vaccines this way is not just unfeasible, I'm not certain it's possible at all. The vaccine will have to be targeted very carefully at vulnerable groups until the supplies trickle through or another more robust one is certified.
>> No. 91510 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 2:30 am
91510 spacer
Boris isn't going anywhere, people are still in 2010-2019 unstable government mode of thinking and it's not adequete. He might get booted out 2022 or 2023 if Tory polling doesn't hold up (think Thatcher 1990) but other than that he's dandy. Sorry.
>> No. 91512 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 3:02 am
91512 spacer
>>91509
>The logistics will be a shitshow

They really will - normal doctors surgeries or pharmacies are not going to be able to handle it well. We're going to need dedicated mobile units that do it - serious refrigerated trucks.
>> No. 91514 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 3:05 am
91514 spacer

DSC2312-768x430.jpg
915149151491514
>>91509


>when we take delivery of control organisms and reagents requiring dry ice transport, it comes in this huge fuckoff insulated box, just for a tiny package no bigger than a packet of Haribo

Is that because putting multiple in one box would provide insufficient cooling, or because you can't cross contaminate? If the latter, can we not ship multiple vaccines in one of these big dry ice boxes? I accept it still might not be a huge number, but five or ten per box is still a lot more than one.

Obviously, "big fuck off box" doesn't give me much to work with in terms of estimates, but you underestimate just how much stuff you can fit in a heavy airlift cargo jet. It is expensive, but otherwise trivial to use Very Big Planes to fly these sorts of things over to us (after the politicians handwave the importing, obviously).

It'll still be a fucking nightmare, but the bottleneck would, in theory, be on the lorries on our home soil loading and driving the boxes to where they need to go.

And then the real problems start when you try and store these things for any length of time - how the fuck is that going to work? How many -70C warehouses are there in Britain?
>> No. 91515 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 3:27 am
91515 spacer
>>91513

>Obviously, "big fuck off box" doesn't give me much to work with in terms of estimates, but you underestimate just how much stuff you can fit in a heavy airlift cargo jet. It is expensive, but otherwise trivial to use Very Big Planes to fly these sorts of things over to us (after the politicians handwave the importing, obviously).

There are hard limits on how much dry ice you can put on a plane before there's a risk of the flight crew suffocating. There are some theoretical workarounds, but they're all massively dicey because nobody has ever tried doing anything that daft. Realistically, the vaccine is either coming across by sea in reefers or in dribs and drabs on regular air freight.

https://www.nap.edu/read/22651/chapter/6

Also:

Retailers, shipping and haulage companies have complained of "chaos" at Felixstowe Port in Suffolk, affecting goods in the run-up to Christmas.

One ship due to be unloaded at the port last week was redirected to Rotterdam because of "unacceptable" delays.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54908129
>> No. 91516 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 7:52 am
91516 spacer
>Despite the departure of Cummings and Cain, Johnson is understood to have told a group of officials in Downing Street that he wanted to get “the band back together” for the 2024 election.

>Cain handed in his resignation following the fallout from Stratton’s appointment. The prime minister is understood to have attempted to reverse the decision and offered him the role of chief of staff, but Cain quit after news of the job offer leaked.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/14/attacks-by-pms-ousted-aide-left-new-press-chief-in-tears
>> No. 91517 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 9:54 am
91517 spacer

Em2q5gpXcAA4RZP.png
915179151791517
Definitely no chance of this potentially resulting in any deaths for any reason at any future time.
>> No. 91518 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 9:55 am
91518 spacer
Or the other option to importing the vaccine into this country would be someone based in this country to pay a fuckton of money for a license to produce the vaccine locally (although even if that was done it would probably take months to ramp up production)
>> No. 91519 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 10:09 am
91519 spacer
>>91517
Jesus. It's not like the words 'Ireland' and 'starve' are politically charged, is it?
>> No. 91520 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 10:19 am
91520 spacer
>>91517

This seems shortsighted at best, completely fucking stupid at worst - they clearly haven't done much research into the tens of millions Ireland have been pumping into Rosslare and Dublin ports and their airports - They are more than ready to bypass UK trade entirely if need be. I don't really understand how the report has missed this, we have absolutely nothing other than politics to threaten Ireland with.
>> No. 91535 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 9:21 pm
91535 spacer

35707422-0-image-m-12_1605474374227.jpg
915359153591535
It seems rather convenient.
>> No. 91536 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 9:21 pm
91536 spacer
>>91509
Pfizer have already made crates the size of a suitcase that work for up-to 10 days and contain 1-5k of vaccines a piece. The big problem will be making sure baggage handlers don't break everything with their ape-like fists.

I probably should've put my money into logistics when I had the chance - the 'just in time' model of supply is going to Moon over the coming months.

>>91514
>How many -70C warehouses are there in Britain?

It's not just warehouses but university labs and even sperm banks. Then there's a powdered form in development for next year and all the other potential vaccines.
https://www.ft.com/content/0207755e-1bc8-4b46-bc25-1d89f4f9b6f5

>>91517
It should've been something emphasised from the start - Dublin needs to work with the UK on this. It's not just about the border but wider supply chains with GB that will fuck them harder owing to sheer scale. Although I'm not sure what kind of pull that has on the French fishing lobby.

>>91520
They're pumping money precisely because they realise how fucked they are if it all goes wrong. It creates an argument of time not that Dublin is out of the woods, especially when Ireland lacks the land infrastructure on top of entry-point woes.

You might also want to consider that port expansion takes a long time. Just look at the UK's own saga on airport expansion.
>> No. 91545 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 11:40 pm
91545 spacer
>>91535
It's just Boris being a useless coward again.
>> No. 91546 Anonymous
15th November 2020
Sunday 11:54 pm
91546 spacer
>>91535
I dunno - if he gets it twice, the entire narrative around immunity (and therefore vaccines) completely changes - plus the obvious risk to his health.
>> No. 91547 Anonymous
16th November 2020
Monday 2:15 am
91547 spacer
>>91535
It wouldn't suprise me if that useless lunatic Anderson decided to act as some sort of COVID suicide bomber. I tell you, these neophyte Tory MPs are Republican Party level nutty; we're already living in their fun house, we just haven't realised the front door's locked yet.
>> No. 91548 Anonymous
16th November 2020
Monday 7:03 am
91548 spacer
>Boris Johnson has been warned that his time in power might be running out with MPs claiming Rishi Sunak is 'agitating like fury' to take over.

https://www.If I post a link to this website again I will be banned.co.uk/news/article-8950609/Cummings-allies-claim-Rishi-Sunaks-time-drawing-close.html
>> No. 91549 Anonymous
16th November 2020
Monday 11:34 am
91549 spacer
>>91548
How ineffective of a politician do you have to be to find yourself facing a palace coup from Sunak? What next, is Mr Bean going to taking Carrie off him?
>> No. 91551 Anonymous
16th November 2020
Monday 12:05 pm
91551 spacer

1_James-Acaster.jpg
915519155191551
>>91549
>What next, is Mr Bean going to taking Carrie off him?

Rowan Atkinson has form for stealing much younger women so I wouldn't call it quite so absurd. I feel for James Acaster, imagine the nightmare of your girlfriend ringing up to say that she's dumped you for Mr Bean or the inevitable lead up of him elbowing his way in.

It's no wonder he stopped being funny.
>> No. 91559 Anonymous
16th November 2020
Monday 8:32 pm
91559 spacer
>>91551

When did he start?
>> No. 91575 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 3:44 pm
91575 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYWkbeYT7TU

This might be the most awkward interview I've seen on the news in recent years m'lord
>> No. 91577 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 4:53 pm
91577 spacer
>>91575
Did Heseltine let out some wind at 0:24?
>> No. 91578 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 5:13 pm
91578 spacer
>>91575

If you think that is awkward you haven't seen enough Kay Burley interviews. She is such an insufferable cunt her wikipedia categories her controversies not by incidents but by year.

This one sticks out of note her telling a phone hacked MP he should have just changed his pin, the full interview is more spectacular but sky news has taken it down because copyright claims are a great way to cover up for a punchable fuckwit.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYDBRjKva74
>> No. 91579 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 7:13 pm
91579 spacer
>>91578
> sky news has taken
Going violently off-topic - I'd've used have there. Are you some kind of foreigner?
>> No. 91580 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 7:35 pm
91580 spacer
>>91579

Americans are more likely to use the singular, but it's not at all clear-cut.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_grammatical_differences#Subject-verb_agreement
>> No. 91581 Anonymous
17th November 2020
Tuesday 7:58 pm
91581 spacer
>>91579

Sky News the faceless corporate entity, or Sky News the more informal group of people?
>> No. 91620 Anonymous
18th November 2020
Wednesday 10:28 pm
91620 spacer
Exclusive: Boris Johnson blocks promotion of MP who Carrie Symonds gave evidence against in sex assault case... even though the Tory rising star was CLEARED of groping woman at Christmas party

https://www.If I post a link to this website again I will be banned.co.uk/news/article-8963539/Boris-Johnson-blocks-promotion-MP-Carrie-Symonds-gave-evidence-against-sex-assault-case.html
>> No. 91621 Anonymous
18th November 2020
Wednesday 11:28 pm
91621 spacer
>>91620
>Boris Johnson has said privately that he will not promote Mr Holden because he fears his fiancee Miss Symonds would disapprove
Also some wanker's ladder climbing ambitions aren't worth the baggage he'd bring? The Mail's so deathly afraid of even the mildest suggestion that this government will be anything other than a pack of savage wreckers, that they'll stick up for someone nobody five feet beyond the steps of Parliament has ever heard of.
>> No. 91623 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 5:04 pm
91623 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE591359YHs

Don't worry about Brexit lads, we'll be sipping Port on Mars in no time.
>> No. 91624 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 5:18 pm
91624 spacer
>>91623
Trump's doing so well in the US, obviously Johnson needs to keep following in his footsteps.
>> No. 91625 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 5:29 pm
91625 spacer

_methode_times_prod_web_bin_76e9aed2-b515-11e8-849.jpg
916259162591625
>>91621
- Lee Cain. Beat Symonds to be Boris Johnson's SpAD in 2016 while he was Foreign Secretary, which she held a grudge about. Ousted.

- Dominic Cummings. Responsible for Javid stepping down as Chancellor, whom Symonds is close with as she used to be his adviser. Ousted.

- Richard Holden. Symonds testified that he's a sex pest. Blocked from promotion.

It's not too farfetched to suggest there's a pattern here.
>> No. 91626 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 6:06 pm
91626 spacer
>>91625
Symonds is actually slowly purging the shit from government?
>> No. 91627 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 6:07 pm
91627 spacer
>>91625
Please don't misinterpret me as defending these Tory cretins, but I find fault with your reasoning. Cain pipped Symonds for a job in 2016, okay. However, you have no idea if she held a grudge about it and apparently she's friendly enough with Johnson to bear his child now, even though he presumably chose Cain over her. Sunak has been the only Conservative to look half-decent during 2020 and is already being talked about as the next leader despite being in cabinet for less than a year, which would seem to make appointing him a misstep if you don't want backbenchers trying to carry him into Number 10 like a bunch of more self-interested, latter-day, Praetorians. And what I said about not having an alledged sex pest in the upper echelons of the party still stands with regards to Holden. If I was in any position of power in a political party and a man with the words "alledged sex pest" on his CV wanted a job I wouldn't even look him in the eye before ordering him covered in pitch and lit on fire. It just isn't worth the hassle, even if the allegation comes from a psychic with a fraud conviction claiming Holden tried it on with Bugs Bunny in drag while holidaying on Atlantis.

I've no doubt there's plenty of intriguing and game-playing in and around Number 10, but The Mail are clearly trying to lay the ground work to ultimately paint Symonds as the power behind the throne, which is a archetype going back to the days of Livia Drusilla. It's a cheeky little warning shot, in the same manner they had a pop at Marcus Rashford for owning loads of houses. The Mail's saying "we're watching you", like a mobster telling you where your kids go to school. Frankly, I think the way everyone's behaving as though Johnson is just some kind of idiotic sponge without the ability to generate his own thoughts letting him of frather easily. Though I will admit it's possible COVID turned his brain to soup or that all he ever wanted was to sit in the big chair, never really thinking what he'd do once he got there. Let alone what he'd do if he got there and everything went to absolute shit just as soon as the seat was warm.

My takeaway got delivered in the middle of writing this so that's my excuse if it's totally incoherent.
>> No. 91628 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 6:10 pm
91628 spacer
>>91627

>and apparently she's friendly enough with Johnson to bear his child now, even though he presumably chose Cain over her

That's an odd point to make when the discussion is about her manipulating Boris constantly.
>> No. 91629 Anonymous
19th November 2020
Thursday 6:25 pm
91629 spacer
That cow Patel has been found to have broken some rules. Just watch her not be held accountable for that either.
>> No. 91630 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 4:15 am
91630 spacer
>>91628
I find it hard to believe she'd get knocked up just so she can spend five years whispering in the PM's ear to do... what exactly? I'm not saying she doesn't have influence, but the idea she's puppeteering this whole shower is a bit far fetched. People like to think MPs are more inert than they really are, but in reality they're quite capable of heaping misery upon us all by themselves.

>>91629
Laying it on a bit thick there, Torylad.
>> No. 91631 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 6:40 am
91631 spacer

QVNIMTEzOTg5NDI0.jpg
916319163191631
>>91629
Apparently she's been given the option of either getting a written warning telling her not to be naughty again or she can wear some outfits that show off her chunky arse and that'll be the end of it.
>> No. 91632 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 7:01 am
91632 spacer
>>91630

The point is it's hardly shocking that she'd be more attached to her partner than a bloke from work who got promoted when she didn't, even if the partner had a hand in that - you've been in relationships, right? They're hardly straightforward.

Moreover nobody is suggesting she has the codes to the nukes or is altering the cogs of whitehall in smoky rooms behind everyone's back - the accusation is that she has whinged at her boyfriend about people who she didn't like and it has been effective.
>> No. 91633 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 10:19 am
91633 spacer
>>91632

As has been mentioned before, Carrie is not an ingenue - she worked in CCHQ for nine years and comes from a family of extremely well-connected journalists. She should not be underestimated.
>> No. 91634 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 10:44 am
91634 spacer
>>91633
>she worked in CCHQ for nine years
I'd already forgotten about that, and she used to be a Twitter bugbear in my sphere of political consciousness.
>> No. 91635 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 11:45 am
91635 spacer
>>91631
Jesus fucking Christ, I want to breed this woman.
>> No. 91636 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 11:57 am
91636 spacer

TELEMMGLPICT000224715213_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqM37qcIW.jpg
916369163691636
>>91635
She is prime hatefuck material.
>> No. 91637 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 12:32 pm
91637 spacer
Leftwing twitter:
>I can't wait for those MPs who were queueing up to condemn John Bercow over allegations of bullying to stick to their principles and condemn Priti Patel for the same.
Rightwing twitter:
>The Left turned a blind eye to John Bercow’s allegations of bullying in the hope that he could overturn the plebs vote for Brexit, so please do feel free to take with a pinch of salt their protestations now over allegations of Priti Patel raising her voice at the Home Office.
>> No. 91638 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 12:50 pm
91638 spacer
>>91637
If I gave a crap I'd check Twitter myself, but I don't have an account because I don't care. Indeed, unless you have a larger point to make that you managed to forgot about whilst copy-pasting your greentext, I think yours might be the most contemptible post I've ever seen on .gs.
>> No. 91639 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 12:59 pm
91639 spacer
>>91638
I didn't forgot about it, I just assumed the useless stalemate that my point was to implicitly draw attention to, was obvious.
>> No. 91640 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:32 pm
91640 spacer
>>91637>>91639

There's professional help for what you're going through, you know?
>> No. 91641 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:34 pm
91641 spacer
>>91640
What's that, then?
>> No. 91642 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:42 pm
91642 spacer
>>91641

Paying some big bloke to destroy all your internet-connected devices.
>> No. 91643 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:43 pm
91643 spacer
>>91642
I think you may be imagining something on my part that isn't there.
>> No. 91644 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:48 pm
91644 spacer
>>91643

Like you imagining how two factions of Twitter would post about something on here, but doing it in a really obnoxious way?
>> No. 91645 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:53 pm
91645 spacer
>>91636

I want to be her toilet slave.
>> No. 91646 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 1:55 pm
91646 spacer
>>91644

Yes, that isn't what happened. The only part that did happen is you getting angry about it, which is entirely on you.
>> No. 91647 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 2:46 pm
91647 spacer
>>91646

You're imagining things again, SchizoLad.
>> No. 91648 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 2:53 pm
91648 spacer
Can we just agree that neither of you actually give a shite and you're both derailing the thread in the most embarrassing way possible? Don't either you have some working-from-home or shopping to do? Maybe a Football Manager save you could get back to? Just be normal, yeah.
>> No. 91649 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 3:02 pm
91649 spacer
>>91648
My Darlington save got corrupted and I didn't have a backup. I'd made it from the Conference North to League Two in three seasons. Proper boiled my piss that did.
>> No. 91650 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 3:53 pm
91650 spacer
>>91649
Well you boiled your own piss there didn't you. Backup, backup, backup.
>> No. 91651 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 4:05 pm
91651 spacer
>>91650
Yeah it's my own fault for being such a wally. I was quite enjoying that save as my scouts were actually coming up with decent recommendations; Ross County accepted a bid of £0 for Russell Dingwall and he bagged more than a goal a game in the Conference North and when I got promoted they picked out a regen playing for an amateur side in Ireland that had the potential to at least cut it to the Championship.
>> No. 91652 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 4:40 pm
91652 spacer
>>91648
I went and played Thief III for a bit, I still don't know what got him so riled up.
>> No. 91653 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 5:00 pm
91653 spacer
>>91652
I mean, it was a useless post.
>> No. 91654 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 5:02 pm
91654 spacer
>>91653
As opposed to all the vastly constructive conversation that normally happens here? What are you on?
>> No. 91655 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 6:30 pm
91655 spacer
>A row has broken out after Boris Johnson’s adviser on the ministerial code resigned in the wake of the prime minister standing by the home secretary, Priti Patel, despite a long-awaited official inquiry finding evidence that she bullied civil servants. Sir Alex Allan’s findings, based on the Cabinet Office investigation, concluded that Patel’s approach “amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying” – noting instances of shouting and swearing – and decided that she had breached the ministerial code, even if unintentionally.

>But Johnson, who is the sole arbiter of the rules, rejected his adviser’s conclusion by deciding that the code had not been breached, prompting Allan’s resignation on Friday.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/20/priti-patel-boris-johnson-bullying-report-findings
>> No. 91656 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 6:38 pm
91656 spacer

Malcolm_Tucker_2.jpg
916569165691656
>>91655
>noting instances of shouting and swearing
>> No. 91657 Anonymous
20th November 2020
Friday 7:01 pm
91657 spacer
>>91656

LIFE IMITATING ART INNIT
>> No. 91658 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 12:16 am
91658 spacer
Are we literally on a greasy slope towards Totalitarianism which has all the worst aspects of Hitlerism, or Stalinism with no redeeming qualities?

Are we to destined to be ruled by the failsons of hedge fund managers who make their name writing clickbait articles in online magazines mistake intelligence for knowing the names of rulers from the less admirable epochs of British history?
>> No. 91659 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 1:59 am
91659 spacer
>>91658
Probably.

At least we (as in the British public) voted them in. Yay democracy.
>> No. 91660 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 2:57 am
91660 spacer
>>91658

>Are we literally on a greasy slope towards Totalitarianism

No.

>Are we to destined to be ruled by the failsons of hedge fund managers

Always have been.
>> No. 91661 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 3:07 am
91661 spacer
>>91658
I've said it several times now; we lost the war in 2016, everything else is just the consolidation of power. After the Soviets pulled off Operation Bagration the Second World War was completely and hopelessly lost for the Germans and their Axis allies. Of course the war didn't end in mid-'44, but it was a foregone conclusion: unconditional surrender. That's what we're waiting for now. We can fight to take climate change seriously, tackle rampant inequality and homelessness and put civil liberties before state power and private business interests, but I can't personally entertain the idea of long-term success on any front any longer. Corbyn was a complete fluke and not an especially effective one. Though it's worth noting he polled alright considering his "radical" policies and "complete dog shit" political abilities, it matters not anymore. Even now they have power, right-wing Labourites attempt to split the party, seeing no hypocrisy in their own drive for political purity, despite spending half-a-decade crying wolf over the very same thing on the left. Even if Starmer, or whoever, does win the next election we'll have meek and shortsighted government that papers over the cracks, the UK's power will be too diminished internationally to influence anything and the rot of neoliberalism will continue more or less unabated around the world. I just think we're living in one of those eras where things go to Hell in a handbasket. Not in an exciting or immediate way, just that we, meaning humanity, have hit a snag. We might garrot ourselves or by 2100 they'll look back and laugh, who can say?
>> No. 91662 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 3:36 am
91662 spacer
>>91661

You have too much of a short term view. It would have appeared much the same to an old-guard leftie in 1992, with no apparent prospect of ever getting Labour back in. And then look what happened.

If you think we lost in 2016 then you haven't been paying attention for the past two decades.
>> No. 91663 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 4:38 am
91663 spacer
>>91661

Keir Starmer is going to be the next Prime Minister and it's going to be perfectly satisfactory.
>> No. 91664 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 4:56 am
91664 spacer
>>91661
It isn't that bad mate. Labour have always been shit, until a messiah comes along. Tories usually hold onto power for some two decades before Labour gets in. Blame the voters.
>> No. 91665 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 5:26 am
91665 spacer
>>91664
>Blame the voters.

Britain is socially conservative. Labour used to understood this with messages like "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" which Blair actually first made as Shadow Home Secretary in 1992/93 while John Smith was leader. It doesn't mean you have to bring back hanging, you just need to be aware of what the main public concerns are and to appeal to them; the rise in crime in the early 1990s was a major issue and Labour at the time tapped into that.

You need a coherent message to get people on board. Labour seem to have forgotten this in the past 10 years ago and largely taken votes for granted instead.
>> No. 91666 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 10:43 am
91666 spacer

welfare_figure_2_4.png
916669166691666
>>91665
You're not entirely wrong, but this is something you've got to be very careful with. The most fascinating opinion poll data out there is on public attitudes towards the unemployed: All through Thatcherism and for most of the 90s the public took the view that most of the unemployed were probably legitimately out of work. Then Labour started saying that actually people on the dole are dolescum and Labour's going to take away their handouts because that's what the tabloids say so the public must believe it, and after Labour did that public opinion moved sharply against the unemployed in a way that not even the 2008 recession could cure. Any moral qualms aside, this strategy has backfired horribly since the Conservatives will always be seen as tougher on welfare than Labour, but now more of the public believes that the Conservatives are justified in that stance.
>> No. 91667 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 11:05 am
91667 spacer

thebennies.jpg
916679166791667
>>91666
>but now more of the public believes that the Conservatives are justified in that stance.

You need to update your source material, lad.
>> No. 91668 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 12:36 pm
91668 spacer
>>91667
A shame that all it took to get us to a position still far less sympathetic than that of 1996 was ~8 years of real terms benefit cuts, 3-and-a-bit years of the most left-wing Labour leader since the invention of the internet, the continued botching of the rollout of universal credit, the Conservatives pledging to end the welfare freeze, and a global pandemic.
>> No. 91669 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 12:57 pm
91669 spacer

dolescum.jpg
916699166991669
>>91668
I reckon you're overthinking it.

If Labour are in power - People think benefits are too high.

If the Tories are in power - People think benefits are too low.
>> No. 91670 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 1:11 pm
91670 spacer
>>91669
That doesn't explain anything after 2010 though. The Tories have been in power since 2010, yet public opinion stubbornly remained on the side of "Benefits are too high" until this year. If it just followed who was in power, it would've flipped in 2011 or so.
>> No. 91671 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 1:50 pm
91671 spacer
>>91670
It's a trend. Look at the direction of travel.
>> No. 91672 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 1:57 pm
91672 spacer

9183875d0c1972da8dd6b3c5a0437458.gif
916729167291672
>>91670

>The Tories have been in power since 2010, yet public opinion stubbornly remained on the side of "Benefits are too high" until this year. If it just followed who was in power, it would've flipped in 2011 or so.

I think it's because post-2010, the Conservatives have been especially relentless in telling the public that our benefits system doesn't encourage enough self reliance. It was certainly part of Cameron's platform, but BoJo's stance isn't fundamentally different.
>> No. 91673 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 2:06 pm
91673 spacer
>>91671
A fair point, but the trend starts in 2016. The first crossover point is around 1997 / 1998 which is on the money for Tony getting in.

Maybe it helps that a lot of the tabloids help do their job for them, but it just seems that the game is tilted in the favour of the right when it comes to massaging public opinion and controlling the narrative.
>> No. 91674 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 2:24 pm
91674 spacer

nope.jpg
916749167491674
>>91673
>the trend starts in 2016.

Nope.
>> No. 91675 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 2:46 pm
91675 spacer
>>91674
I dunno, I'm inclined to still go by 2016 ladm9. Just looking at the grey line, if you take the average between 2008 and 2016 it's pretty stable at ~53% before taking a dive following that.
>> No. 91676 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 4:01 pm
91676 spacer

nope.jpg
916769167691676
>>91675
I disagree.
>> No. 91677 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 4:59 pm
91677 spacer
>>91673
>Maybe it helps that a lot of the tabloids help do their job for them, but it just seems that the game is tilted in the favour of the right when it comes to massaging public opinion and controlling the narrative.

This makes perfect sense when you consider that tabloids are owned by private corporations.
>> No. 91678 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 6:30 pm
91678 spacer

index.jpg
916789167891678
>>91677

How this man manages to evade the public's disdain is beyond me.

He essentially controls the mainstream media narrative in most of the Anglosphere, and he is a piece of work.
>> No. 91679 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 6:44 pm
91679 spacer
>>91678
If people didn't like what Murdoch had to say they wouldn't buy his newspapers or watch his TV channels.
>> No. 91680 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 7:54 pm
91680 spacer
>>91679

>If people didn't like what Murdoch had to say

But that's just it.

Murdoch isn't just simply some reactionary soap box preacher shoving his world view down your throat. None of the editors or owners of those more or less right-wing tabloids are. They're better than that.

On the contrary, they give the lower middle class public exactly what they want to read. A bit of oversimplified polemic here, the odd bit of rage bait, fake indignation and finger pointing there, and the unwashed masses will be none the wiser, and happy that somebody speaks their language.

People don't want to broaden their horizons. The lower down the social ladder you go and the lower your target audience's education, the more they will just want to read things that confirm the views they already have. That isn't to say that the same doesn't work with posh people and the preconceived views that they like seeing confirmed, but you could argue that the lower classes are much more unaware that that's how those rags get them.
>> No. 91681 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 8:01 pm
91681 spacer
>>91680
In other words, we're their betters and we know what's good for them.
>> No. 91682 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 8:07 pm
91682 spacer

unnamed.jpg
916829168291682
>>91680

This falls for the free market rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Just because an entitt has held onto a monopoly for long enough and managed to embed itself institutionally in such a way that it's very hard to root out, does not mean that it must be what people want. A company being profitable can be a sign of any number of things beyond just consumer demand -- but you've entirely missed the history of capitalism from the early twentieth century onwards if you think that consumer demand can't be ruthlessly manipulated with generations of relentless marketing and very deliberately squashing competing companies (or any organizations with a different message).
>> No. 91683 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 8:37 pm
91683 spacer
>>91682

I don't see how what I said is irreconcilable with the tenets of ruthless manipulative capitalism.

But in the end, even the most pervasive capitalist marketing ruse will not make eskimoes buy fridges. There has to be a baseline inclination towards your product, however faint and as yet unarticulated. You can then capitalise on that and engender actual demand for your product. Which is where unbridled capitalism then comes into play. But even that will not work if you fail to give people what they want.

You're a bit too far on the dystopian side, lad. People aren't just innocent sheep who have evil capitalism foisted on them until they unquestioningly absorb it and become mental zombies incapable of independent thought. It's a lot more complex than that.
>> No. 91684 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 10:04 pm
91684 spacer
>>91680
>you could argue that the lower classes are much more unaware that that's how those rags get them.

I don't really agree, I think middle class and upper middle class people consume media in the same way but just with trendier aesthetics. Obviously the Guardian is more likely to write serious and verified articles than the Daily Express, but if you're talking about people who read these I don't see a great diversity of viewpoints among its readers.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/oct/31/we-left-the-uk-for-portland-expecting-a-liberal-dream-that-wasnt-the-reality
Like, this article, just as an example and maybe a bit hyperbolic, but this woman's complaint is literally "I didn't like this place because people weren't enough like me and that's not acceptable to me", is the same mindset in a different section of society.

I suppose the difference if you're looking at it this way is that one part of society apparently consumes idiotic trash without question, the other consumes more credible and tasteful media (and trash) without question.
>> No. 91685 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 11:34 pm
91685 spacer

page3-iraq.jpg
916859168591685
>>91683
I don't think it's fair to assume the baseline demand for The Sun is entirely in its right-wing politics. Of all the reactionary rags that compose the British Press, The Sun had the best ongoing justification for buying it for the longest time: softcore pornography. (Granted, sometimes daringly synthesized with right-wing politics.)
There's also always sports coverage, celebrity coverage, giveaways, etc.
At the same time: The Sun isn't god and political people really ought to stop thinking it is. Their front page in 2007's Scottish Elections compared voting SNP to putting the countries head in a noose, then in 2011 and 2015 they were forced to follow the tides of public opinion and back the SNP just to maintain the illusion of influence. Any subsequent Labour government (or ideally, any Government, but it's more tactically beneficial to Labour) should put less effort into courting the press (by all means, do so in opposition) and more effort into reforming it.
>> No. 91686 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 11:42 pm
91686 spacer
>>91684

Shocker. Not every single person in Oregon is a wide eyed, pot smoking hippie.
>> No. 91687 Anonymous
22nd November 2020
Sunday 12:27 am
91687 spacer
>>91685

>I don't think it's fair to assume the baseline demand for The Sun is entirely in its right-wing politics.

This.

Your common garden Daz white van man doesn't buy any paper at all for the polticks. He buys it to find out who won the footy, what's on the telly, who's shagging who and all that stuff.

He gets a side helping of politics he thinks he's ignoring, but he eats it all up nevertheless, like a plateful of peas swimming in gravy on the side of a nice roast.

It's a self-sustaining cycle really. Same reason you like McDonalds and drink coke- It's not because it's the best, it's just completely ubiquitous and you're used to it.
>> No. 91688 Anonymous
22nd November 2020
Sunday 1:41 am
91688 spacer
>>91672
I reckon it's because issues of welfare are entirely too complicated to be based on the dole alone and that, obviously, public opinion is a strange beast. I'd hazard the flip in recent history is to do with stories over the system being cruel at the assessment stage which had previously not come about because everyone was still shaking off the memories of the recession.

>>91678
>How this man manages to evade the public's disdain is beyond me.

Everybody hates Murdoch and it's not even exclusive to Britain. The reality is he's an old fart these days and his main interest has always been making money which is why his networks haven't tried to exercise control on the content of shows like Family Guy.*

The people who really don't get enough notoriety are his rivals such as the Barclay Brothers and Lebedev or if you want to go down a /boo/ rabbit hole the faceless groups who control the news. Plus the internal politics of the news room such the ongoing sectarian conflict between the Mail and Mail on Sunday.

*I say this because Seth MacFarlane was asked about this given his relationship to Fox.

>>91684
I think the trend among the Middle Class is actually to read the Week these days. I'm not sure how editors pulling the 'best articles' of the week is any less questionable but then it's pretty much what using imageboards involve.

If they read print news at all that is. A couple years back I tried to read the Times but half the bloody thing was bullshit ad flyers/pull out sections.

>>91685
>Any subsequent Labour government (or ideally, any Government, but it's more tactically beneficial to Labour) should put less effort into courting the press (by all means, do so in opposition) and more effort into reforming it.

Go to bed, Hugh Grant.
>> No. 91689 Anonymous
22nd November 2020
Sunday 10:44 am
91689 spacer
>>91683

You just ignored most of my post, there. Media is a great example of an industry that's so monopolised that you can print with an extremely heavy political bias and claim it must be what people want to read. A short glance at the history shows otherwise, though, with the Daily Herald being one of the papers with a very large readership that was essentially crushed by the power of advertising capital.

This isn't dystopian fiction or my jaded worldview, it actually happened, and it regularly happens across industries. There are a several major mechanisms by which you can build a successful business in such a way that treats consumer demand as a peripheral concern (at best).
>> No. 91691 Anonymous
22nd November 2020
Sunday 11:17 am
91691 spacer
>>91689
>There are a several major mechanisms by which you can build a successful business in such a way that treats consumer demand as a peripheral concern (at best).

HMG PLC being the most blatant example. Too big to fail, too slippery to jail.
>> No. 91764 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 10:51 pm
91764 spacer

4caf09b2d0ad58c5dbbe34294c3b249e1e4434c3f490791675.jpg
917649176491764
Theres a one off edition of The Beano for Adults, and they're ripping the piss out of everything they can.
>> No. 91769 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 8:10 pm
91769 spacer
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/move-to-eu-or-face-disruption-city-of-london-is-warned-1.4420585
Apparently now all the City of London firms need to up stakes and join the EU. How are they going to do that and keep all their money in our tax havens?
>> No. 91770 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 10:17 pm
91770 spacer
>>91769
They're the Queen's Tax Havens, not yours mate, and I'm sure a way will be found.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0yccHhBIsE
>> No. 91771 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 9:35 am
91771 spacer
>>91764

Huh, so this is what the Viz would look like if it was really, really shit.
>> No. 91772 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 2:31 pm
91772 spacer
>>91771
Viz is really really shit. Who the fuck actually buys Viz?
>> No. 91773 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 2:55 pm
91773 spacer
>>91772
I used to buy it to run my Viz-fueled Vauxhall. But I had to trade it for something more practical.
>> No. 91774 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 4:38 pm
91774 spacer
>>91773

I've got a Volvo that runs on back issues of 2000 AD, if you're interested. Two careful owners, 80k miles, slight traces of fanny batter on the back seats, £895 OVNO, GSOH, no DSS.
>> No. 91783 Anonymous
28th November 2020
Saturday 12:23 am
91783 spacer
>>91771
But Viz is really really shit.
I think that's sort of the point.
>> No. 91801 Anonymous
28th November 2020
Saturday 4:29 pm
91801 spacer
>>91772
>>91783

This place really is full of utter snobs especially given that least two of us three seem to be unemployed or earn under 50k a year.

I'm just going to sit here happily reading my Viz and Private Eye, drinking my non-craft "piss in a tin" beer and watching re-runs of HIGNFY and other BBC comedy dross on fucking iplayer. Someone has to let the side down, after all.
>> No. 91803 Anonymous
28th November 2020
Saturday 4:35 pm
91803 spacer
>>91801
I thought 40k was the cutoff for snobbery? So long as it's a figure greater than your age of course.
>> No. 91804 Anonymous
28th November 2020
Saturday 4:47 pm
91804 spacer
>>91803

I vaguely remember there being a study a few years back that stated that £50k family income was the middle class cut-off point. Fuck knows though, really.
>> No. 91838 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 9:03 pm
91838 spacer
I would love to read a transcript of the trade deal talks that have been happening this week. I bet they're utterly moronic.
>> No. 91851 Anonymous
9th December 2020
Wednesday 10:02 pm
91851 spacer
>>91838
Bodger offers the Eu a Box of Sherbert Dib Dabs in exchange for ALL THE FISH.
>> No. 91852 Anonymous
9th December 2020
Wednesday 10:08 pm
91852 spacer
>>91851

I'm hoping for a 'dead parrot sketch' but it's Boris going to Brussels to argue with Ursula von der Leyen, but instead of a dead parrot it's an 'oven ready deal'
>> No. 93166 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 9:32 am
93166 spacer

42155764-0-image-m-1_1619246362304.jpg
931669316693166
I have no idea what the fuck is going on, but apparently it's all Carrie's fault again.
>> No. 93167 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 9:45 am
93167 spacer
>>93166
What's Boris doing for her in bed for her to be okay with all this?
>> No. 93168 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 10:27 am
93168 spacer

_118138815_dyson2_johnson_texts2x640-nc.png
931689316893168
>>93166
The Mail likes sticking it to Symonds because that means they can deflect from Johnson being a chocolate teapot, but clearly Number 10 collectively thought they could pin the shit on Cummings. It doesn't seem to have worked though as Cummings is not one to go quietly into the night. The "shit" in question was that Cummings had allegedly leaked the texts between Johnson and James Dyson, who asked for and promptly received guarantees on policy in order to deliver life saving medical ventilators, which it should be noted he was already being paid for — this wasn't a charitable donation — and the policy was regarding the tax status of "senior individuals" at the Dyson company. Cummings has said that it's total bullshit he leaked anything and more to the point the PM is a slimeball surrounded by idiots so bent you couldn't hammer them flat with Mjölnir, and that Johnson may have made an illegal deal to have donors pay for renovations to Number 11, which is where he actually lives because Number 10 is smaller.

This is seperate from the Greensill affair which was a quite undignified series of events in which David Cameron mooched around various ministers trying to get a massive government loan to save the pointless waste of a company Greensill Capital. All seemingly so he could make loadsa' money when the business, now bust, was floated on the stock market. As far as I know he never actually got any loans, just unfettered access to various members of government, which is the general problem with all of this.

Here's a good piece about what Greensill actually was, if like everyone else you have no idea: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/15/what-did-greensill-capital-actually-do
>> No. 93169 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 11:04 am
93169 spacer
>>93168
>Here's a good piece about what Greensill actually was, if like everyone else you have no idea: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/15/what-did-greensill-capital-actually-do

Not to mention the fact that Greensill were lending money out to companies that no mainstream bank was going to touch with a bargepole. Years ago most other banks stopped giving Sanjeev Gupta, mainly because they uncovered evidence of dodgy practices the equivalent of you going to 3 different banks and taking out 3 different loans secured against 1 car.
Every inch of his empire is dodgy as fuck, the government is definitely right to refuse to give them support because it's impossible to see where the money goes.
>> No. 93170 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 2:56 pm
93170 spacer
>>93166
>apparently it's all Carrie's fault
Or alternatively, brave Boris is innocent and blameless. I thought the Daily You-Know-What was turning against him? Clearly not.
>> No. 93171 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 3:11 pm
93171 spacer
>>93166
Will Carrie be the fittest First Lady of this entire century?
>> No. 93172 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 3:27 pm
93172 spacer
>>93171
I'm starting to see talk that she's the one twisting Boris' nipples into pushing green Britain. Personally I think COP26 and Biden might've done it but it's a fun theory that Carrie will save the world like she did with those enslaved monkeys.

Although I'm still team SamCam. Not so much outright fit as one of those people who really flourished after becoming a parent. A cool mum if you catch my penis.
>> No. 93263 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 12:55 am
93263 spacer

dsscs23.png
932639326393263
>>93166
Looking at the taste, I'm pretty sure this isn't Carrie's doing. Imagine trying to relax on this couch after a hard day at work.
>> No. 93264 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 11:11 am
93264 spacer
>>93263
https://quintessenceblog.com/sneak-peek-soane-fall-2017/

Although that picture is going around, it's from four years ago and a completely different place.
>> No. 93265 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 11:12 am
93265 spacer
>>93264

My understanding is that it's something from the same designer.
>> No. 93266 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 11:26 am
93266 spacer
>>93265
That makes twigs-inna-jar look classy. Fuck's sake.
>> No. 93267 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 12:17 pm
93267 spacer
>>93266
Dead classy.
>> No. 93268 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 1:55 pm
93268 spacer

Soane-The-Beaton-Sofa-Loose-Cover-5_HR.jpg
932689326893268
>>93264
The most upsetting thing is that she clearly has it in for floors which given the clientele means scratches and dents on historical homes. That and putting expensive vases precariously on tables that are themselves placed touching sofas and beds so they will get broken in short order.

Animals.
>> No. 93276 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 7:32 pm
93276 spacer
>>93268
>That and putting expensive vases precariously on tables that are themselves placed touching sofas and beds so they will get broken in short order.
As a member of the upper classes I think it's the done thing to leave fragile items in precarious positions to show that you're so rich you don't have to worry about replacing them.

The lower classes do a similar thing when they leave plastic chairs in their front gardens.
>> No. 93277 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 11:56 pm
93277 spacer
>>93276
>As a member of the upper classes I think it's the done thing to leave fragile items in precarious positions to show that you're so rich you don't have to worry about replacing them.

Everyone look at this nouveau riche and laugh. Us people of class never will spend a penny unless absolutely necessary.
>> No. 93281 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:41 am
93281 spacer
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: Almost everyone in this country has better things to worry about than Boris and Carrie's wallpaper

The real divide in modern Britain is not between Tory and Labour. It is between the metropolitan elite and normal men and women. One side is snobbish, largely state-employed, liberal in manners and views. The other side live in the real world, relying on hard work and long hours to put food on the table and a roof over their children's heads.

One side is scornful of Brexit and nostalgic for the cloudy bureaucracy of the European Union. The other is tired of remote government by distant and insulated elites. It is quietly patriotic and full of common sense. It sees Brexit – rightly – as a chance to bring the country closer to the ground, and government closer to the people.

One side gets its views and its idea of the world from the BBC and Twitter. The other derives its opinions from experience. They are as different from each other as a pub in Derby is from the Groucho Club in Soho, and the gulf between them has been growing mightily in the past few years.

Old Labour, a party of trade unionism and old-fashioned working-class socialism, has little to do with the new, slick, hair-gelled world of Sir Keir Starmer and his revived Blairism, and even less to do with the burned-out, bigoted Trotskyism of Jeremy Corbyn. But this is the unwelcome choice between equally unappealing menus which New Labour has offered to its voters in recent years.

The Brexit referendum liberated such voters from their old allegiances, and it looks as if millions of them will never come back. The old landmarks have gone. The old loyalties are broken, because the Left's leaders were not loyal to their rank and file. The old slogans do not work.

The voters will no longer troop out obediently to vote according to obsolete class divisions which belong in a dead age of clogs, coal miners and cotton mills. Britain just is not like that any more, and those who believe that it is, or act as if it is, are much like the Japanese soldier Hiroo Onoda, lost in the Philippine jungle, who refused to surrender until 1974, 29 years after the war had ended.


The entire article continues like this. It is absolutely amazing.
>> No. 93282 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:52 am
93282 spacer
>>93281

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, man of the people.
>> No. 93283 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:59 am
93283 spacer
>>93282
The very people who derided him for his wild lockdown ride to Barnard Castle now delight in the non-event of Wallpapergate, and the portrayal of the Premier's fiancee as Carrie Antoinette, a heedless plutocrat mocking the poor with the richness of her soft furnishings.

How foolish this all is. Prime Ministers work 24-hour days, never knowing when officials will burst in on them with urgent demands for decisions. Living above the shop is a burden, not a convenience. There is no proper boundary between work and life. It really is not unreasonable for heads of government to make their private space as pleasant as possible, and all civilised nations recognise this. Seldom has there been so much fuss about a non-issue.

Boris Johnson has shown in his time in office that he is skilled in using the levers of power. He has turned the Tory Party from a fractious mob into a united Government. By force of personality he liberated the country from the succession of Groundhog Days which were Theresa May's premiership. He got Brexit done. He reached out to the decent Labour voters whose party has abandoned them. And now he has brought us safely through the pandemic.

He deserves, and should receive, the continuing support of the British people.

>> No. 93286 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 10:48 am
93286 spacer
>>93281

Who wrote this?
>> No. 93287 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 11:13 am
93287 spacer
>>93286
By Mail On Sunday Comment For The Mail On Sunday.
>> No. 93288 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 11:36 am
93288 spacer
>>93283
I mean, fuck. Fucking hell. I clicked a Twitter link recently and wound up reading hundreds of tweets about Keir Starmer utterly annihilating Boris Johnson in Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, reducing him to a shrieking little petulant bitch over his flat renovations. I eventually watched it on YouTube and no such thing happened; Boris just answered the question loudly. It made me think, "Fucking lefties." But that's not even close to the bootlicking propagandist hackery of that article.
>> No. 93291 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 1:58 pm
93291 spacer
>>93288
>Boris just answered the question loudly

Utter bollox, Politicians don't answer questions, regardless of timbre.
>> No. 93292 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 2:05 pm
93292 spacer
>>93288
I do think you're understating the previous PMQs somewhat. Johnson was clearly shaken, and in a break with everyone second of his time in office was in no mood for joking. Equally it's not as though he was going to storm off in a huff and resign then and there, but then you shouldn't be going on sodding Twitter, should you? Least of all to look at what the kind of freak who watches PMQs thinks. Twitter is for looking at women who wouldn't give you the time of day and finding out if your favourite YouTubers are being slow or have had another breakdown.
>> No. 93467 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 11:09 am
93467 spacer

E00I6_RXEAg771t.jpg
934679346793467
We're living in the decade of Johnson.
>> No. 93470 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 12:00 pm
93470 spacer
>>93467
Well, the Conservatives managed 18 years last time they were in power, which in theory gives us one more Conservative general election win before people vote for whoever Labour have at the time. Probably one of Tony Blair's kids.
>> No. 93481 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 2:59 pm
93481 spacer
>>93470
Dan Jarvis is literally the only suitable candidate I can think of for the next leader after Unclear Starmer loses in 2024, barring perhaps the second coming of Burnham. That is assuming Jarvis isn't in one of the seats potentially at risk from Brexit Party voters flocking to the Tories.

Who else is there that would potentially have widespread public appeal? Lisa Nandy? Holly Lynch? Chris Evans? Emma Hardy? Ian Byrne? Afzal Khan? Debbie Abrahams? Jim McMahon? Sarah Champion? Louise Haigh? Emma Lewell-Buck? It's slim pickings.
>> No. 93483 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 3:13 pm
93483 spacer
>>93481

>It's slim pickings.

The problem goes far beyond the leader. Blair was the charismatic figurehead, but he had a team of real heavy-hitters around him - Brown, Straw, Cook, Beckett, Blunkett, Darling, Short, Mowlam and many more. Through no fault of his own, Starmer is stuck with one angry Brummie and a bunch of instantly-forgettable nobodies.
>> No. 93530 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 2:55 pm
93530 spacer
>>93481

Unironically Zarah Sultana. She's young, she's Northern, she's BAME, and most importantly in Post-Trump era politics: she has the meme factor.
>> No. 93531 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:09 pm
93531 spacer
>>93530
Absolutely fucking not.
>> No. 93532 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:10 pm
93532 spacer
>>93530
Surely it has been established that appealing to Twitter extremists is not the way to win an election? I think the best approach is honestly for Labour to just stick with Starmer. Labour tend to get rid of their leaders just before they would have been popular. There was a lot of criticism when the tabloids started cheering for Conservative policies that were Ed Miliband's policies, after Ed had been replaced by Jezco. Now the Conservatives have got rid of the sickle-wielding Corbynite insurrectionists, they are once again picking over his old policies and implementing a bunch of them. There's nothing to be done right now because the current situation requires big spending, but once that's over, Labour need to be ready for that rather than still reacting to the previous loss.
>> No. 93535 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:52 pm
93535 spacer
>>93530
I don't think someone who spent over a grand of taxpayer money on an iPhone should be regarded as Cabinet material. Not saying that the frontbench needs to be squeaky clean but it's hardly punching farmers and fast-tracking visas for fanny.
>> No. 93536 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:55 pm
93536 spacer
>>93530
>and most importantly... she has the meme factor.
Jabbering fucking freak, shut up.
>> No. 93538 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 4:03 pm
93538 spacer
>>93532
>Surely it has been established that appealing to Twitter extremists is not the way to win an election?
Not really, that appears to still be highly contentious. Going by https://twitter.com/DaftLimmy/status/1391394432319164418 Corbyn was totally irrelevant to the decisions and the only people whose dislike of him really mattered was the people in the party itself who self-sabotaged because of it.
Honestly it's quite funny watching you all run around trying to make it still his fault that the party's doing worse now. "It must be that the voters lost faith in the party for making him leader to begin with and we need to win them back". No, obviously not. The fact that Johnson is in power now demonstrates the personal merits of the leader are pretty fucking irrelevant.
>> No. 93542 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 5:25 pm
93542 spacer
>>93538
>you all
I can't speak for the whole country, but I'm the person you replied to. Obviously coronavirus was largely unforeseeable, but it changed the landscape in such a way that if Jeremy Corbyn was still around, he'd do amazingly. That was my point. Everything being done now, he could have stood there and said, "This is exactly what I told you needed to be done!" I'm sure he'd still get it wrong somehow, getting Meghan Markle to design him a brand-new IRA balaclava or something, but it would have been an absolute open goal. I bet Labour are furious they got rid of him when they did, instead of either one year later or one year earlier.
>> No. 93543 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 5:28 pm
93543 spacer
>>93542
He is technically still around, all his diehard fans are obsessing about him over on you guessed it.
>> No. 93546 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 5:54 pm
93546 spacer
There's a fun line in The Times article about Dodds and Rayner being thrown under the bus.
>One shadow minister said things were “worse than they were under Corbyn”, whose staff at least followed the template of top-down trade union politics

I say this not to contribute to the ongoing continuation of the argument over how much Corbyn should be blamed for the strange death of Labour England, but because I always find it interesting how important (yet underrated) logistics, having a template, etc seems to be in politics. All that stuff is behind the scenes, so it's not surprising it would be neglected by people who're inexperienced and mismanaged by people from the last Labour government. Asking Peter Mandelson to run your spin operations in 2021 is a bit like calling in a guy who once knew how to do a half arsed job soldering broken ZX Spectrums and asking him to unbrick your iPhone 12.
>> No. 93569 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 8:53 am
93569 spacer
>>93530

I'm keeping a keen eye on Sultana's career, precisely because she's so young.

She's from the generation that has used shit like Twitter and Facebook their entire lives, so the minute she gets near a sniff of power she's either going to be unpersoned in a media frenzy over a meme she posted while she was still at uni, or she's going to make a peculiar turn away from class-based left wing politics because some shadowy higher authority is blackmailing her over said meme she posted in 2012.

>she's BAME

I think the electorate can stomach a darkie, and possibly a woman too, but not both at the same time; and certainly not given the precise nature of Labour's present unpopularity. It's the last thing Labour needs to try get virtue signal votes.
>> No. 94376 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 6:24 pm
94376 spacer

Screen-Shot-2021-07-31-at-15.15.59.png
943769437694376
Sunak, Truss and Mordaunt are the only MPs to poll more than 10% of Conservative Home members for next Tory leader, the first time they've run this poll since the general election.
>> No. 94377 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 8:12 pm
94377 spacer
>>94376
>Sunak, Truss and Mordaunt

Sounds like a Law Firm from an abandoned Terry Pratchett manuscript, or the contents of a Wiccan's spice rack.
>> No. 94378 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 8:30 pm
94378 spacer
>Carrie Johnson and Boris Johnson expecting second child
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58042146

Can someone take him down to the vet already. This has long since gotten out of hand.
>> No. 94379 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 8:39 pm
94379 spacer
>>94378
She's beautiful, I'd have many lovely children with her.
>> No. 94380 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 11:21 pm
94380 spacer
>>94379

She looks like more of a ventriloquist's dummy than Gove (even if the power dynamic actually works the other way around), how the hell does that happen? She just needs 8 hours in makeup with a black biro to complete the look.
>> No. 94381 Anonymous
2nd August 2021
Monday 11:26 pm
94381 spacer
>>94379
Imagine going in for Johnson's sloppy seconds. The inhumanity of it is overwhelming, the humilation indescribable.
>> No. 94389 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 10:32 am
94389 spacer
While most members of his government were winding down for the summer, Boris Johnson was getting decidedly wound up. At 9am on Monday, the prime minister met his senior Downing Street aides and was, according to those present, “apopleptic”, “raging” or “fucking tonto”.

In a fit of frustrated impotence, Johnson openly suggested that he might sack his chancellor of the exchequer, Rishi Sunak. The focus of Johnson’s rage was the report in this newspaper last week that Sunak had written to the prime minister calling for a significant easing of the coronavirus travel restrictions, warning that they were damaging the economy and leaving the UK at a disadvantage to its European Union rivals. The problem was that the first Johnson knew of the letter was when details of it appeared in the media. Officials had failed to flag it for his attention, or to put it in his ministerial red box.

Johnson was furious at the leak and questioned the motives of the leaker. The letter seemed designed to undermine agreed policy and to make it look like the Treasury was trying to push him into action. As far as Johnson was concerned, he and Sunak were in agreement that a lot of the restrictions needed to go. Johnson’s aides were quick to blame officials at the Department for Transport, who had been copied in to the letter, but the prime minister was concerned about whether his ministers had been disloyal.

Sunak was not at the meeting. Johnson demanded to know: “Where’s Rishi? I need to speak to Rishi.” Then, in front of more than a dozen witnesses, he made a toxic suggestion that could electrify already tense relations between No 10 and No 11 Downing Street. A senior source said: “He said: ‘I’ve been thinking about it. Maybe it’s time we looked at Rishi as the next secretary of state for health. He could potentially do a very good job there.’ In an open meeting, after ranting about Rishi, he then suggested the chancellor could be demoted in the next reshuffle.”

The prime minister is known for making off-the-cuff comments “half in jest” and few expect him to carry out the threat. But the fact that he even entertained it is significant. Several of those present were struck by his vehemence and his reckless openness at a time when growing scrutiny is falling on tensions between No 10 and the Treasury. The letter affair was evidence not just of Johnson’s annoyance. The fact that he had not seen Sunak’s memo raised alarm bells that Downing Street dysfunction did not disappear with Dominic Cummings.

Johnson’s mood on Monday would hardly have been improved by the monthly survey conducted by ConservativeHome, a website that measures the views of party members. After a month in which he was forced into a U-turn over isolating and presided over chaotic Covid travel rules, Johnson plummeted 36 points to a net positive rating of just 3 per cent. Only Robert Jenrick, the housing secretary, Amanda Milling, the party chairman, and Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, are below him. Sunak was second on plus 74 per cent, behind only Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, who has won plaudits with the Tory grassroots for getting on with post-Brexit trade deals. Asked who should be the next leader, 31 per cent of those polled named Sunak. Only Truss (12 per cent) and Penny Mordaunt (11 per cent) also made it into double figures.

A senior Tory said of Johnson: “His personal numbers are dropping like a stone. His unfavourables are going up and his favourables are going down. The critical concern for Boris is that he is prime minister because he is a winner. As soon as he is not, he has very few allies in and around the party.” But Johnson’s popularity has also been declining in national polls — along with that of the Conservatives in some of their traditional southern seats — and others suggest that, for a politician who wants to be loved, this is distressing. Critics say Johnson has little interest in a cabinet of talented and ambitious rivals, preferring (in a phrase the prime minister has used himself in private) “tired old lions”. Sunak is all too clearly a “hungry young lion”.

Few expect a reshuffle before the new year but it is understood that Johnson has, in the past, considered Truss, a former chief secretary to the Treasury, as Britain’s first female chancellor, with Jacob Rees-Mogg as her deputy. “The PM keeps talking about Liz Truss,” a source said. “He’s always got on quite well with her. He thinks she’s controllable.”


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/together-alone-boris-johnson-and-keir-starmer-wish-they-werent-here-0rbzf6n0q

Rishi has him rattled.
>> No. 94390 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 12:28 pm
94390 spacer
>>94389
Sounds like the spending review will be fun.
>> No. 94391 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:07 pm
94391 spacer
>>94389

I know we're all used to this sort of political "intrigue", but imagine for a second your own boss going on like this in a meeting, or even in private. You'd have him out the door via HR by lunch time.
>> No. 94392 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:27 pm
94392 spacer
>>94391
1. No you wouldn't, what bollocks.

2. This false equivalence of government with whatever random sandwich supplier you work for irks me.
>> No. 94393 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:41 pm
94393 spacer
>>94392

Yes I would.

My job is more important than the government
>> No. 94394 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:45 pm
94394 spacer
>>94392

It's interesting that you seem to think that petulant backstabbing is acceptable or even required of a government leader.
>> No. 94395 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:57 pm
94395 spacer
>>94394
Not him but I assure you that if I spoke to the press against my boss I'd be getting much more than a dressing down. If my job was also specifically to tell him about this kind of thing going on I would also have some angry words in my direction.

This might not be how it works at your job with Starmer but then some people have more authority.
>> No. 94396 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 1:57 pm
94396 spacer
>>94395

Is that what happened?
>> No. 94397 Anonymous
8th August 2021
Sunday 2:38 pm
94397 spacer
>>94396
Yes.
>> No. 94399 Anonymous
11th August 2021
Wednesday 8:38 am
94399 spacer

46529951-9881581-image-a-58_1628631924408.jpg
943999439994399
47% of Tory voters think Sunak should replace Johnson within the next 12 months.
>> No. 94400 Anonymous
11th August 2021
Wednesday 9:37 am
94400 spacer
>>94399
That's not 47% of Tory voters, that's 47% of Tory voters who think Rishi should succeed Boris.
>> No. 94401 Anonymous
11th August 2021
Wednesday 1:38 pm
94401 spacer
>>94400
Indeed, if otherlad looks at the top left pie chart he can see that actually fewer Tories think Rishi would make a better PM than Boris.
>> No. 94402 Anonymous
11th August 2021
Wednesday 7:50 pm
94402 spacer
>>94399
>Happy for wife/partner to dine with

Are you aiming for the lowest or highest score on this one?
Seems a bit racist to ask if you'd go for a pint with a devout Hindu.
>> No. 94405 Anonymous
12th August 2021
Thursday 9:20 am
94405 spacer
>>94401
Whoever's drawing those pie charts needs a talking to.
>> No. 94406 Anonymous
12th August 2021
Thursday 9:24 am
94406 spacer

Capture.png
944069440694406
>>94405
This is bizarre.
>> No. 94417 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 12:35 pm
94417 spacer
>>94406
I think the numbers are correct if they rotate once anti-clockwise.
>> No. 94418 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 12:53 pm
94418 spacer

1.png
944189441894418
>>94417
Still looks a bit weird.
>> No. 94419 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 2:09 pm
94419 spacer

download (20).jpg
944199441994419
>>94406

It's deliberate and has been seen before.
>> No. 94646 Anonymous
21st September 2021
Tuesday 11:36 pm
94646 spacer

Have-I-Got-News-For-Youed.jpg
946469464694646
>The government will meet the operating costs of a US-owned fertiliser plant so it can restart production of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the UK after warnings of food shortages. The deal will allow CF Industries, which supplies most of the CO2 used in food production, to restart its factory in Billingham, Stockton-on-Tees. It had halted two of its fertiliser factories due to soaring gas prices.

>The BBC understands the deal could cost tens of millions of pounds.

>On Tuesday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged people not to worry about putting food on the table this winter, amid rising energy and food bills and a cut to universal credit. Wholesale prices for gas have surged 250% since January, with a 70% rise since August alone, leading to calls for support from the industry, and the collapse of some smaller energy firms.

>The resulting shortage of carbon dioxide saw warnings about the potential impact on food suppliers, as well as the NHS and the nuclear industry, where it is used as a coolant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58641394

I never would've guessed we'd run out of hot-air in conference season.
>> No. 94648 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 12:29 am
94648 spacer
>>94646
> It had halted two of its fertiliser factories due to soaring gas prices.
Surely this is like if the price of gold skyrocketed so hard that you closed down all your gold mines? It's inexplicable.
>> No. 94649 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 1:41 am
94649 spacer
>>94648
It's natural gas that's become prohibitively expensive, not the C02 they're selling.
>> No. 94674 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:42 am
94674 spacer
>>94648
CO2 is a shitty by-product of their fertiliser production. To produce fertiliser they need natural gas. Natural gas has become extremely expensive. They therefore have ceased production as it's not profitable, therefore no CO2.
>> No. 94675 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:53 am
94675 spacer
Why is natural gas so much more expensive now than it was five years ago? I’ve been keeping an eye out, though I’ve not looked into it directly myself, but nothing I’ve read has mentioned it.
>> No. 94676 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:54 am
94676 spacer
>>94675
You can thank the cunts blocking all the fracking everywhere.
>> No. 94677 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:14 am
94677 spacer
>>94676
No, you can thank the cunts who are blocking nuclear. "Oh no, we can't deal with nuclear waste, lets just blow up the country and poison half the isle". Fucking crusties.
>> No. 94678 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:17 am
94678 spacer

bitchtits.jpg
946789467894678
>>94675
I wrote a massive response to this but Brian killed it.

1. Coronavirus has delayed maintenance and investment in production facilities, LNG ports, interconnectors (plus a fire in Norway)
2. Long winter has meant European reserves are low to begin with (in our case Rough storage facility was also shut down as it was unsafe)
3. Weather has hit renewable generation.
4. Coal price is also high, substitution is more difficult/expensive.
5. Massive demand for gas from Asia and Latin America due to increased investment in China, a long, hot summer in Asia and drought in Latin America (means they can't produce hydro).
>> No. 94679 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 7:09 am
94679 spacer
>>94675
It's those sneaky fucking Russians.
>> No. 94684 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 10:16 am
94684 spacer
>>94677
Can you use it to make CO2 and not cause food shortages? You lot will be the end of Britain.
>> No. 94685 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 1:59 pm
94685 spacer

ONS_Gas_price.jpg
946859468594685
>>94678 Of course, that graph's time period was chosen carefully.
>> No. 94686 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:47 pm
94686 spacer
>>94684
You don't need the CO2, silly. Do you think germs are going to survive on a chicken breast that's glowing like the Demon Core? Obviously not.
>> No. 94687 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:59 pm
94687 spacer
>>94685
Why, yes, the graph does indeed to show a different shape to [checks notes] a different fucking graph.
>> No. 94688 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:01 pm
94688 spacer
>>94687
Don't do the "check's notes" thing on here, it's unbecoming. You're better than that and it displays a level of disrespect to the site.
>> No. 94689 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:08 pm
94689 spacer
>>94686
Although I did see that our creakingly shite and close to retirement AGR fleet need regular CO2 deliveries. Although it's a tad worrying that it's not a closed system, but I know nothing.
>> No. 94690 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:19 pm
94690 spacer
>>94688
You're (a) wrong, and (b) not my real dad.
>> No. 94691 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:20 pm
94691 spacer
>>94687 Hang on, that graph came from an ons.gov.uk page about gas prices! Sorry, didn't see they'd sneakily given me a CPIH when I asked it to generate the gas price graph.
Still, off you go, find the right thing rather than whining, eh?
>> No. 94692 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:24 pm
94692 spacer
>>94688
What? Think you got carried away with that post.
>> No. 94693 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:30 pm
94693 spacer

historic_gas.jpg
946939469394693
How about this one?
from https://www.erce.energy/graph/uk-natural-gas-nbp-spot-price/
It does look like we're in an exciting spike. Super. Not least because I buy my gas in red tanks, pikey-style. Should have laid in a few last month.
>> No. 94694 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 4:32 pm
94694 spacer
>>94678
"The UK's sixth largest energy company, Bulb, is seeking a bailout to stay afloat amid surging wholesale gas prices."
says BBC news - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58619418

But there's an agreed upon route to deal with failed energy companies without fucking their customers over excessively. Why on earth is a government bailout even remotely possible? I guess it does no harm to ask, since they'll all be jobless in a month, but, frankly, fuck'em.
>> No. 94695 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 5:30 pm
94695 spacer

Screenshot 2021-09-23 172934.png
946959469594695
>>94693
Here's the current spike added in for context.

Fun times.
>> No. 94696 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 5:35 pm
94696 spacer
>>94694
Buying gas at current market rates and then selling it to residential customers within the price cap is a guaranteed recipe to lose money. The competitors aren't going to step in without government backing.
>> No. 94697 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 5:42 pm
94697 spacer
>>94696
BRB, checking ebay for diesel generators.
>> No. 94698 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 6:02 pm
94698 spacer
Are we going to come full circle and re-nationalise a load of energy suppliers because the mean old free market is making it too hard for them?
>> No. 94699 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 6:06 pm
94699 spacer
>>94698
Not if Starmer has his way.
>> No. 94700 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 6:44 pm
94700 spacer
>>94699
But what about all the hard working families with no heating?
>> No. 94701 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 7:15 pm
94701 spacer
>>94700
They can put a hat on.
>> No. 94702 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 8:07 pm
94702 spacer
>>94700
All that hard work will keep them warm.
>> No. 94703 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 8:34 pm
94703 spacer
>>94698
They're not really suppliers though. They're just companies set up as a bonkers scheme to create an illusion of competition by having a fuckload of middlemen buying energy off real suppliers and selling it onto consumers. The big suppliers are in no real danger in the short term.
>> No. 94704 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 11:47 pm
94704 spacer
Where the fuck is Lembit Opik wih his Big Dick Energy Company?
>> No. 95023 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 9:13 am
95023 spacer
>Mr Johnson can face a leadership challenge if 15 per cent of the party – 54 MPs – submit letters of no confidence to Sir Graham. Government whips believe that letters running into “single/double figures” have been so far submitted.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/12/15/boris-johnsons-magic-died-1922-committee-ahead-shattering-commons/

If the Tories lose North Shropshire today Johnson is in serious trouble.
>> No. 95024 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 2:26 pm
95024 spacer
>>95023
I hope they lose more than anything right now. I feel as though the last two years of Johnson as PM have lasted fifty.
>> No. 95025 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 2:39 pm
95025 spacer
Unsure how I feel about the alleged Tory leadership challenge that might be incoming. On one hand, we might end up with a psychopath like Raab in charge. On the other hand, seeing Johnson's hopes and dreams of being the next Churchill blow up in smoke, I would love that. He might even go down in history as less effective than May.
>> No. 95026 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 3:32 pm
95026 spacer
>>95024
I don't think it's entirely Boris Johnson's fault that the last two years have felt so perpetually dark and miserable. Other things have happened, or in my case, not happened, which have contributed to the frustration much more than le whiff whaff man.

>>95025
Keir Starmer would be an interesting change from the Conservatives. Not very interesting, certainly, but a step in the right direction nonetheless. But if it's just a leadership change in the Conservative Party, with no general election, then that's terrible news. Boris has brought the retards to the forefront, but at least he's giving them higher wages and nationalised trains and banter. If Boris goes, he will be replaced by one of the retards he brought in, denouncing those thieving workers and crying out for things to be more in favour of the Home Counties retired twat army in their £2m houses. We've already got a right-wing reactionary party in government, and they've already fucked up the national discourse. If we bin their leader just as he's about to raise taxes on the 1% and invest in national infrastructure, all that will happen is we'll get the worst of both worlds. We might as well elect George Osborne.
>> No. 95027 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 5:10 pm
95027 spacer
I think Carrie Symonds is lovely, and I wondered "what are her feet like?", so I Googled and it turns out she has a WikiFeet page, with her feet rated 4 out of 5. Sometimes I love the internet.
https://www.wikifeet.com/Carrie_Symonds
>> No. 95028 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 5:17 pm
95028 spacer
>>95027
Taking the phrase tory boot licker to a whole other level there.
>> No. 95029 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 6:34 pm
95029 spacer
>>95024

As much as I would also enjoy Johnson's misfortune, I'm with these lads.

>>95025
>>95026

Trouble with the Tory party right now is that none of the people likely to take over are particularly pleasing prospects. I mean granted, a Tory is a Tory, but at least Bozza's desperate populism has kept the worst of their usual impulses in check. What would we have instead?

Absolute best case scenario is Rishi gets it, but he's little more than a yes man, who the rest of the party would bully into bringing back hanging and making hoodies illegal to desperately appease the maungy pensioner vote; because I'm fairly sure either way, despite how pish Labour still are right now, they know they're fucked in a general election. They've shagged it. Even the papers are turning on them.
>> No. 95030 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 6:53 pm
95030 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
950309503095030
This woman is going to be a lame duck caretaker Prime Minister because no-one else is stupid enough to drink from that poisoned chalice and it's going to be fucking awful.
>> No. 95031 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 8:12 pm
95031 spacer
>>95025
You might want to be more concerned that the biggest cause of any leadership challenge would be bringing in new lockdown rules. Imagine having an anti-lockdown faction in power - not having a "hurr durr why doesn't the government put the unvaccinated in concentrations camps" complaint but a government that pretends the pandemic is over.

>>95026
>But if it's just a leadership change in the Conservative Party, with no general election

Of course it is, you might as well be fantasising about a Lib Dem government because at least they're the one's actually competing in Shropshire.
>> No. 95032 Anonymous
16th December 2021
Thursday 10:36 pm
95032 spacer
>>95029
You're quite right. I don't think any systemic change will come about if Johnson is given the boot either, it's just that I've given up on any change being possible at all and as such all I can look forward to is the comeuppance of individuals. I'm getting into the peasant mindset of "well, everything's horrible, but occasionally the Earl's son dies or a spider crawls into his plate helmet".
>> No. 95033 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 3:18 am
95033 spacer

Cabinet-League-Table-Nov-21-1.png
950339503395033
>>95030
It's inevitable. Her popularity cannot be denied.
>> No. 95034 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 3:37 am
95034 spacer
The Friend-Enemy distinction in politics makes strange bedfellows. Here I am hoping that the Liberal Democrats lose the by-election to the Tories, who I hate, partially because of a principled loathing of the Lib-Dems but mostly for the unprincipled reason that I want the Prime Minister, who I wish was not the Prime Minister, to remain Prime Minister until the next general election so that he can defeat the leader of the opposition and remain Prime Minister and force Labour to pick a new leader from a talent puddle I already regard as containing no potential leaders. Not because I want any of this, but because this is a set of outcomes which pleases almost nobody and I just happen to regard almost all of British politics as an "enemy" - perversely making Boris Johnson the closest thing I have to a "friend" at this point in time.

Of course, I have a little tactical justification for each piece of this - but the rational "what if all the replacements for Johnson are worse?" question has already been asked, so I'm interested in the psychology of this. Perhaps what I've just described is me being a serial contrarian, but the basic mindset is everywhere - think of the sense of unrestrained glee that might come to some Tories tonight if they lose the seat, since it'll let them ditch the world's least popular party host. Even though they're no fans of the Liberal Democrats, the Lib-Dem is a temporary friend and their own leader an enemy.
>> No. 95035 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 3:43 am
95035 spacer
Someone appears to have misplaced Owen Paterson's 20k majority.
>> No. 95036 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 4:49 am
95036 spacer

Screenshot 2021-12-17 044817.png
950369503695036
Well, this is embarrassing.
>> No. 95037 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 4:55 am
95037 spacer
>>95034

>I'm interested in the psychology of this

Millenarianism (also millenarism), from Latin mīllēnārius "containing a thousand", is the belief by a religious, social, or political group or movement in a coming fundamental transformation of society, after which "all things will be changed".

Many if not most millenarian groups claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong, and that they will soon be destroyed by a powerful force. The harmful nature of the status quo is considered intractable without the anticipated dramatic change.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism
>> No. 95038 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 9:59 am
95038 spacer
>>95036
I know there are always a few joke candidates in elections, and even more whenever there's a by-election, but THREE votes? I assume Yolande Kenward voted for herself, maybe a boyfriend or husband, and one friend. If she has adult children, even they didn't vote for her. Her other friends didn't vote for her. She must be awful.
>> No. 95039 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 10:09 am
95039 spacer
>>95038

I found this from when she previously stood:
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/yolande-kenward
>> No. 95040 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 10:17 am
95040 spacer

D85FhmTX4AASVnk.jpg
950409504095040
>>95039
I want to continue to use my skills, influence and experience for the benefit of the people of Maidstone, and beyond. I rose to the top of Maidstone and decided that if you have power and influence there is responsibilities to use that for the benefit of others. I started campaigning for children's rights in 1997. I founded the Kent Business Network to restore trust and ethics to business in Kent.

I started campaigning for patients rights in 2000. On 31.10.2000 I founded the Patient Support Trust to reduce the risks for patients and for children. In 2001 I wept for humanity at what I saw was going on at the highest levels in politics in Maidstone. I decided in 2001 that I was going to stand to be Maidstone's MP so that I could change things at the highest levels. But those at the highest levels did not want me standing against Ann Widdecombe in the 2005 General Elections - Ann Widdecombe was elevated up and I was thrown in the gutter.

The first threat to lock me up came in June 2001. In August 2001 I sent a business mailer out to 20,000 business contacts in Kent suggesting that the business community decided that the Kent Police contract with the Home Office re paedophiles should be cancelled and that instead the business community pay higher business rates to help compensate Kent Police for their loss of revenue. I did this after an 8 year-old girl was raped. An organised crime gang that included paedophiles smashed up my businesses and my charities.

I have lost millions since I decided to stand to be a MP. I have been doing free legal work for many years - mainly in child protection cases where parents have lost faith in their legal aid solicitor. I was stopped from standing against Helen Grant in the 2010 General Election. I am committed to fair elections and for this reason I did a Brexit challenge last year with particular reference to Maidstone and the KB of Sutton. There were problems with all my communications from Maidstone re my legal challenge.

>> No. 95041 Anonymous
17th December 2021
Friday 12:50 pm
95041 spacer
>>95039
>>95040
Looks like she's tripled her votes. Maybe there's something our vibrant democracy can learn from calling everyone you don't like a carpet-bagger and suggesting that they're implicated with terrorism.
>> No. 95042 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 7:27 am
95042 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_RabUKWisk

I am 99% certain she was trying to actually stab Tim Farron.
>> No. 95043 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 12:16 pm
95043 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/17/boris-johnson-accepts-responsibility-for-north-shropshire-byelection-mauling

>Boris Johnson has said he accepts responsibility for his party’s crushing defeat in the North Shropshire byelection but also defiantly blamed the media for focusing on “politics and politicians” following a string of allegations about Tory sleaze and breaches of lockdown rules.

Right. The press were clearly being petty cunts and weren't doing their job of focusing on the situation at large.
>> No. 95044 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 10:25 pm
95044 spacer
>Boris Johnson was dealt another major blow to his leadership on Saturday night as it emerged that the man overseeing Brexit was resigning from the cabinet.

>With Tory MPs already warning the prime minister that he would have to regain control of the government to survive as leader until the next election, it emerged that Lord Frost is to leave the government after frustrations over Brexit negotiations and broader concerns over the government’s Covid policies and tax increases.

https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/18/brexit-ministers-shock-resignation-leaves-boris-johnson-reeling

Brexit minister resigns in anger over Brexit deal he helped negotiate.
>> No. 95045 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 1:32 am
95045 spacer
>>95044
Reading some of Frosty's positions on non-Brexit things, he seems like another hard-right old-skool Tory bastard, seething about taxes and mask-wearing. I won't miss him if he just fucks off gently in that good night, but if he starts being seen as a martyr rather than a mental fuckface, this could contribute further to the Littlejohns taking over the asylum, and that must be resisted at all costs. Where are the soft, nice Conservatives? I know Heidi Allen got chased out, and so did Philip Hammond who's probably cashing in at some hedge fund or something now, but there must still be MPs who aren't absolute fascists and will be willing to stand up for One-Nation Conservatism. I don't think Labour want a general election right now, so they can't help us, and voters at large won't help us anyway because imbeciles outnumber every other demographic. So personally, I'd be happier if Boris and co cheered as loudly as they can about getting rid of Lord Frost.
>> No. 95046 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 11:08 am
95046 spacer
Hard not to see him as one of the first rats jumping off the sinking ship. It's all going tits up for the Conservatives.

Lib-Lab coalition government by this time next year.
>> No. 95047 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 11:26 am
95047 spacer

liz-truss.jpg
950479504795047
>>95045
A lot of Tory members share similar views to Frost, in that they feel the party (and Johnson) are too lefty as a result of taking a lot of the centre ground from Labour. You've only got to see how popular the likes of the death penalty are amongst them.

They will bring about the golden age of Truss.
>> No. 95048 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 12:00 pm
95048 spacer

skynews-nadine-dorries-boris-johnson_5619905.png
950489504895048
https://news.sky.com/story/nadine-dorries-kicked-off-tory-mps-whatsapp-group-after-defending-hero-boris-johnson-12499621
>> No. 95049 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 7:20 pm
95049 spacer
>>95048
What an odd path they are walking now, where my enemy's enemy is Nadine Dorries. It's like they've gone full echo chamber and must purge anyone who is not devoted enough, even if that person's usual ideological opponents still hate her as much as they ever did. If even Nadine Dorries is too much of a sneering intellectual for these simian simpletons, then nobody is safe.
>> No. 95050 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 7:39 pm
95050 spacer
>>95049
>sneering intellectual

She's little more than a shameless sycophant.
>> No. 95051 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 10:18 pm
95051 spacer
>>95050
I think that was rather Anon's point. If that kind of cretin is being usurped then whoever's coming next is all kinds of trouble.

Of course, being Conservatives they also hate women, so you can't read too much into it.
>> No. 95052 Anonymous
19th December 2021
Sunday 11:57 pm
95052 spacer
>>95051
>Of course, being Conservatives they also hate women, so you can't read too much into it.

Insightful stuff.
>> No. 95053 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 2:23 am
95053 spacer
>>95052
If you'd like to list all the nice things about the Conservatives I'll be sure to read them tomorrow.
>> No. 95054 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 9:12 am
95054 spacer
>>95053
I have more money in my pocket under the Tories, which is nice.

The Tories only dislike you if you're poor. It doesn't matter what your skin colour is, what you have between your legs or what you're attracted to; what matters is how much money you have.
>> No. 95055 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 10:24 am
95055 spacer
>>95054
>what you have between your legs
They don't care if it's a man, woman or child.
>> No. 95056 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 10:37 am
95056 spacer
>>95055
Do children have different genitals to adults?
>> No. 95057 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 10:58 am
95057 spacer
>>95054

>The Tories only dislike you if you're poor.

Conversely, no government in recent history has cemented structural poverty quite like Blair and Brown with Labour's job market "reforms".
>> No. 95058 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 11:35 am
95058 spacer
>>95053
Levelling up is a fundamentally good idea.
We're doing more in space.
Fitter MPs.
Call it a capitalist plot all you want but they do keep away most of that guff about things like unconscious bias that Labour would eagerly force on the population.
That whole 'only a racist would see immigration as depressing wages' fell flat on its face didn't it.
Love of money.
>> No. 95059 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 11:38 am
95059 spacer
>>95056

It's a joke about carpet-baggers.
>> No. 95060 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 11:51 am
95060 spacer
>>95054
The Tories have been in power for eleven years now, so yeah, you probably are earning more, because that's how time works. Except, their ignorant policies have likely made the country as a whole poorer and less productive, so I'm glad you got lucky, but Britain overall got shafted. And I'm pretty sure there are plenty of xenophobic and sexist conservatives and Conservatives.

>>95058
"Levelling up" is a con. The government is redesignating money they were already spending as and pretending they're making new investments, it's the same rhetorical sleight of hand as the "northern powerhouse". I don't really know what to say if you're falling for it again; would you like to buy some magic beans?
>> No. 95061 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 11:57 am
95061 spacer
>>95058
>Fitter MPs
rather like lavishing praise on the tallest dwarf, only without the joy of looking down on them physically as well as professionally.
>> No. 95062 Anonymous
20th December 2021
Monday 12:33 pm
95062 spacer
>>95060
There's already been changes to the Green Book to account for levelling up and the upcoming White Paper is about to do away with councils in a fundamental reshape of English administration:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/levelling-up-local-government-white-paper-b1972948.html

Of course most of the money is just shifting chairs at the moment because we've only just has a multi-year spending review. You're just being a negative ninny because they're not on your team.
>> No. 95063 Anonymous
23rd December 2021
Thursday 3:48 pm
95063 spacer
>>95060
>policies have likely made the country as a whole poorer and less productive
Here's a thing I've been wondering about inflation. Low inflation means your money is worth almost as much next year as it is this year. Zero inflation would mean the purchasing power of £1 would never change. And high inflation would mean that if you have lots of money saved up, it's better to spend it now before all the prices go up. Right?

So while those of us in the salaried class will watch the value of our savings dwindle under high inflation, people will even more savings (the business owners, the 1%, the, you know, enemies) will stand to lose even more. Unless they spend all their money now. So surely, high inflation must encourage the super-rich to stop hoarding all the wealth and to reinvest their money back into the economy. If you own a company, high inflation means you should invest your money in increased productivity. If you're just your regular millionaire, now is the time to redistribute that wealth, surely.

Everyone puts a negative spin on inflation, because everyone has five figures in the bank that they want to buy a house with and still can't, and that money is about to become worthless. But if wealth redistribution is your game, and if companies investing in improved employee productivity is your game, then high inflation is surely wonderful news.

Isn't it? If not, why not?
>> No. 95065 Anonymous
23rd December 2021
Thursday 4:16 pm
95065 spacer
>>95063
Or they could just raise prices and buy houses.
>> No. 95066 Anonymous
23rd December 2021
Thursday 4:50 pm
95066 spacer
>>95063

Because that simply isn't how it works. Just like anything else, Johnny McHelptoBuy will see his decade of careful, scrupulous savings undone overnight, but Lord Scrooge Loadsadosh Bezos III has a longlist of different ways to wriggle out of the consequences, or even turn it to his benefit, like his type always do.

The game is well and truly rigged. Every economic crisis and subsequent "recovery" we have had over the last century has done one thing only: Cement in place safeguards that prevent the clowns who are running the circus from facing any repercussion when the big top goes up in flames again. Each time they just wait it out, and go back in like nothing happened, with even less damage done than the last time.
>> No. 95067 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 8:27 pm
95067 spacer

Screen-Shot-2021-12-26-at-18.11.12.png
950679506795067
The last time they polled Tory members, in August, Sunak was the clear favourite on 31% with Truss in second place on 12%. Now Truss is on 23% with Sunak on 20%.

It's happening, lads. Truss for PM.
>> No. 95068 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 10:30 pm
95068 spacer
>>95067
She seems okay to be honest, but I don't know very much about her personal politics. How much of a fascist/corporate shill/total retard is she?
>> No. 95069 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 10:51 pm
95069 spacer
>>95067
In the event that this comes to pass, please keep horny posting under control. I'm depressed enough already.
>> No. 95070 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 11:33 pm
95070 spacer

fetishes.png
950709507095070
>>95068
Exactly a year ago she came out with an attack on modern woke culture that does nothing to help the disadvantaged live a better life and is all about dividing people into boxes for their pet political projects:
https://www.Please don't ban me.co.uk/news/article-9089985/LIZ-TRUSS-Equality-not-just-woke-warriors-favoured-few.html
>> No. 95071 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 11:35 pm
95071 spacer
>>95068
She's an opportunist first and foremost. She was president of the Oxford University Lib Dems before joining the Tories. She campaigned for remain but said she'd have voted leave in hindsight because she's seen the way the wind is blowing. She's also been known to refer to herself as "The Truss" in the third-person.

I believe she was also one of the Tories behind that paper ages ago calling British workers lazy and wants to massively cut back employment rights.
>> No. 95072 Anonymous
28th December 2021
Tuesday 12:10 am
95072 spacer
>>95068
CHEESE
>> No. 95073 Anonymous
28th December 2021
Tuesday 3:53 pm
95073 spacer
>>95070

That's all well and good, but it's coming from a right winger, so you know she's merely read class reductionist lad's posts on here and thought "You know that's a good point, I can opportunistically steal that to steer the votes of reactionary working class populists towards a policy platform of thatcherite neo-liberalism".
>> No. 95074 Anonymous
28th December 2021
Tuesday 3:59 pm
95074 spacer
>>95073
>reactionary working class populists

The working class in this country is, and always has been, predominantly socially conservative. It's not exactly a revelation that opposing idpol mindworms will be popular with them.
>> No. 95075 Anonymous
28th December 2021
Tuesday 4:09 pm
95075 spacer
>>95074

Nationalism, regionalism and all that are just a different flavour of idpol.
>> No. 95076 Anonymous
28th December 2021
Tuesday 10:13 pm
95076 spacer
>>95075
But, so is class war. We divide ourselves based on whether our parents went to university and whether we are homeowners, but really, we should all be uniting against the 1%. In many cases, your boss is on your side.
>> No. 95077 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 1:19 am
95077 spacer
>>95076
Class war lad is (probably) talking about class in the Marxist sense, not in the British sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_in_Marxist_theory
>> No. 95078 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 3:49 pm
95078 spacer
>>95074

Yes, exactly; it's just that coupled with an economically, materially conservative political ideology, it will never actually benefit them. It's a cynical way to get large chunks of the electorate to vote against their own interest.

Unlike some of the other lads on here, I'm not of the opinion that working class people are thick for falling for it time after time. They simply have too many other things going on in their life to spend all the time scrutinising ideology saddos like us do.

They vote based on their bellyfeels, and the Conservatives are good at tapping into that, whereas the majority of the mainstream political left (what remains of it) is either completely blind or, worse, pathologically averse to that.

>>95077

Indeed. Class consciousness is not identity politics, indeed it is the very antithesis of identity politics. Class crosses every other line of race, gender, sexuality, favourite food, choice in hentai, whatever; and instead aligns people based on their shared mutual interest. Whoever came up with the "lol class war is just another kind of idpol" line probably thinks they're dead clever, but it doesn't hold up to the slightest interrogation.

I've had this conversation with intersectional types before who will make arguments along the lines "but we can't possibly tolerate being allied with racist, homophobic beer belly football blokes". Except you can, indeed, you must, and that's the point. You don't have to like one another, you don't have to sit around a campfire singing kumbaya with each other. You can stick to your Discord DnD groups and they can stick to the Red Lion flat roof pub- But in aligning based on your material interest, you will both benefit in tangible, real world ways, which fractured, divisive, oppositional identity focussed politics will simply never deliver.
>> No. 95079 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 4:28 pm
95079 spacer
>>95078
>They vote based on their bellyfeels, and the Conservatives are good at tapping into that

All the hyper-emotional, constantly-outraged people I've ever met have been unswervingly hostile to conservatism. You've fallen into the classic trap of assuming that people you disagree with are irrational, emotional and easily-manipulated while those you agree with are high-minded and logical. It's worth noting that every single one of your beliefs also come from your 'bellyfeels', only you've dressed it up with an architecture of political theory to assuage your self-perception as a rational creature.
>> No. 95080 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 7:18 pm
95080 spacer
>>95079

>All the hyper-emotional, constantly-outraged people I've ever met have been unswervingly hostile to conservatism.

So what you're saying is you don't go in the Daily Mail comments section, only the Guardian one?

>You've fallen into the classic trap of assuming that people you disagree with are irrational, emotional and easily-manipulated while those you agree with are high-minded and logical.

No, you.

>It's worth noting that every single one of your beliefs also come from your 'bellyfeels', only you've dressed it up with an architecture of political theory to assuage your self-perception as a rational creature.

I suppose we might as well not discuss it at all then had we. It's bellyfeels all the way down.

I'm not trying to be snarky, but while you're not entirely wrong, this kind of take is entirely unproductive. It's important to remember that the people you disagree with aren't stupid or bad people, and that was part of the point of my post; but that doesn't imply you can just wave your hands and go "well it's all the same in the end", you have to have some convictions.

Being over-committed to relativism and pragmatic realpolitik is pretty much how we got into our current mess, I'd argue.
>> No. 95083 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 8:18 pm
95083 spacer
>>95080
I don't count 'weirdos who write in the comments section of online newspapers' to be people I've met. If you do, then I'm not surprised you have a warped perception of our population.
>> No. 95088 Anonymous
29th December 2021
Wednesday 11:30 pm
95088 spacer
>>95078
>Whoever came up with the "lol class war is just another kind of idpol" line probably thinks they're dead clever, but it doesn't hold up to the slightest interrogation.

It does though. Working class consciousness is exactly that just as people of all the colours of the rainbow can band together under nationalism, humanity or whatever other spook you're peddling. All you're doing is elevating your own god over everyone else's and in doing so holding the explicit assumption that my interests will always align with my fucking job.

>>95077
>Class war lad is (probably) talking about class in the Marxist sense, not in the British sense.

How ironic given what Marx was writing about conditions of the British class system during the first industrial revolution.
>> No. 95089 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 10:41 am
95089 spacer
>>95088
>How ironic given what Marx was writing about conditions of the British class system during the first industrial revolution.
From the way you talk you obviously don't understand what classwar lad means by class. You can't have a productive discussion until you do.
>> No. 95090 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 12:38 pm
95090 spacer
>>95089
I am literally talking about how class in a Marxist sense was developed from the observations Marx made in industrial England you utter carpet-bagger.
>> No. 95091 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 2:40 pm
95091 spacer
>>95089
On some level, you do need to acknowledge other people's definitions of something when they all agree on a different definition from yours. I get the feeling Mr Proletariat here says "working-class" to mean anyone who is paid a salary in a job, rather than being the person who pays the salaries. In that case, everything he says is totally right. But the names of the social classes are gibberish, and whatever they mean, they certainly don't mean that to a lot of people. And if you start getting militant about how the working class needs to overthrow the middle class or whatever, there's going to be a lot of English students working in Starbucks, and hipster bartenders, who hear that twat wideboy car salesmen are coming after them to hit them with a copy of The Sun. This is why I prefer to describe our enemies as "the 1%". I can't see any way where that can be misinterpreted.
>> No. 95092 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 6:13 pm
95092 spacer
>>95091
>>95090
>>95089

Well for a start the terminology can be and is a great deal more specific if you want to talk about these matters in the fully Marxist sense; it's just that the most common terms like working, middle and upper class are the most accepted in common parlance.

For instance saying "middle class" is pretty nebulous and is exactly the sort of thing that gets middle class people's backs up because they don't like to admit their position of relative privilege within the system; for them it turns into identity politics in much the same way critical race rhetoric does for white people. "I might shop at Waitrose and my mum and dad were both lawyers, but that doesn't mean I'm in league with Jeff Benzos!" they might protest. And that's fair enough.

But if you were to instead use the term "professional managerial class", it's far more descriptive in terms of one's relation to the means of production. It's not accusing you of being a bourgie because you eat quinoa, it's because the way in which you earn your living directly serves the interests of capital. Your actions and interests align with the ruling class because you have chosen to serve as a low ranking officer within that hierarchy.

Middle class does not mean the same thing as PMC, but the terms are often used interchangeably, and the realities of our economy mean a great deal of middle class people are also PMC. You can be "middle class" and be a barrista at Starbucks in the wishy washy cultural sense, but in the Marxist sense you are for all intents and purposes a part of the proletariat.

Again, much like racial and gender politics etc, this is a sleight of hand that the elite and media class will often employ to try and de-rail and muddy the waters of any real discussion of material class interest by the peasantry.
>> No. 95093 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 8:53 pm
95093 spacer
>>95092
>Well for a start the terminology can be and is a great deal more specific if you want to talk about these matters in the fully Marxist sense

No it's not and that's precisely the problem. Proletariat and it's sub-classes has some very shaggy borders because it was never properly defined, for example do you include only those drawing a regular salary (salariat) or do you include cash-in-handers, bennies chasers and even small shop owners.

This is without getting into the fact that even as Marxism was spreading it was rendered obsolete by the second wave of the industrial revolution.

>Again, much like racial and gender politics etc, this is a sleight of hand that the elite and media class will often employ to try and de-rail and muddy the waters of any real discussion of material class interest by the peasantry.

"Material class interest" is buzzword used by thugs in some zero-game us vs them bullshit. It's not real and it doesn't help the 'peasantry' even if you want to crudely boil people down to their labour.
>> No. 95094 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 9:20 pm
95094 spacer
>>95093

I don't think you really know what you're on about, to be honest.
>> No. 95095 Anonymous
31st December 2021
Friday 12:38 am
95095 spacer
>>95094
Witty retort, I can't wait to see you at a student house party trying to cop-off with someone's girlfriend by talking about Palestine and Bernie Sanders.
>> No. 95096 Anonymous
31st December 2021
Friday 2:03 am
95096 spacer
>>95095

Eh.

See, the part where I can tell is where you talk about it as if the Marxist school of thought has stayed statically exactly where it was when the book was written two hundred years ago or whenever it was, and is thus "obsolete", which isn't the case.

It's a method of analysis, not an instruction manual or religion.
>> No. 95097 Anonymous
31st December 2021
Friday 9:03 am
95097 spacer
>>95092

This is bang on, to the point where I have little to add, for once.

>>95093

You are absolutely blagging this.
>> No. 95098 Anonymous
31st December 2021
Friday 11:14 pm
95098 spacer

ideologies.jpg
950989509895098
>>95096
>the part where I can tell is where you talk about it as if the Marxist school of thought has stayed statically exactly where it was when the book was written two hundred years ago

Marxist thought has never been able to address the categorisation problem which is pertinent to what we're talking about. There isn't a consensus on class in the Marxist school beyond the brushstrokes so trying to be ivory tower "you just don't get Marxism like me" isn't going to work, much as ineffectual academic bollocks is all you and your fellow-travellers represent these days.

>It's a method of analysis, not an instruction manual or religion.

Dialectical Materialism is actually more a pseudo-science but I won't let you stop embarrassing yourself by clinging to an ideology the left abandoned over 40 years ago and your complete inability to address even the most basic post-left critiques.
>> No. 95099 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 1:08 am
95099 spacer
>>95098

Don't you turn are Slavoj on me you little tosser. Do you have any idea how many of his lectures I've listened to? Have you even touched his books? You fucking scrote sniffing little dickweed? You fucking limp knobbed arse-licking little toe fucker? You fucking porridge enjoying noodle nog? Jesus fucking christ.
>> No. 95100 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 2:46 am
95100 spacer
>>95099

This is embarrassing.
>> No. 95102 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 10:58 am
95102 spacer
>>95100
You fight like a dairy farmer.
>> No. 95103 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 12:56 pm
95103 spacer
>>95102
How appropriate, you fight like a cow.
>> No. 95104 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 3:24 pm
95104 spacer
>>95092
> a sleight of hand that the elite and media class will often employ
The "media class" is absolutely, 100%, some bollocks you have made up. I don't think Friedrich Engels was ever too upset about newspaper conspiracies or the establishment BBC.
>> No. 95105 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 4:33 pm
95105 spacer
>>95104

There are a lot of things that weren't really much of an issue in the 1800s. But we don't live in the 1800s. Keep up, and maybe give Manufacturing Consent a read (and then consider what modern technology might have added to that premise since the 60s.) This is basic stuff ladm12.

At least brush up on the material before coming to a discussion, you might even learn something. I'm arguing on the side of Marxism in this thread but I wouldn't necessarily even call myself one, there's just undeniably a lot of valuable theory to mull over in that school of thought, and a lot of lads here are clearly reflexively dismissing it despite knowing fuck all about it. Ignorance does nobody any good.

For me, the biggest issue with Marx is only that while the fundamental analysis is completely sound, the people who have attempted to act on it have always been flawed, at best. The repeated failure of real world communism doesn't somehow debunk Marxism, though- People were trying to make flying machines work for years before the Wright Brothers came along, but all of the early scientists and engineers who said it wasn't possible would look like right dickheads today wouldn't they. And even then, in the long view, as we're starting to see, were flying machines even something we should have invented? But I'm getting beyond the point here.

Personally I'd put Capital right next to Wealth of Nations for required reading if you wish to understand the way the world works. It's funny that otherlad posted a Zizek meme when he clearly has little grasp of Zizek's critique of ideology, and simply sleeps on the other side of the bed.
>> No. 95108 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 6:43 pm
95108 spacer
>>95105
>Wealth of Nations ... required reading

Actually one of my favourite books. Whether you agree with the premise and theory behind it, it's just one of those books (like Marx) everyone should probably read once.
>> No. 95109 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 9:31 pm
95109 spacer
>>95104
The media class may not actually be a "class", but they're absolutely a real thing. You don't need a conspiracy for a bunch of people working in close proximity to one another to all sit around chattering about the same things, sharing similar opinions, instinctively protecting those they know from outside attacks, etc. It's a reasonably recognised phenomenon in most professions, and it's easy to see why that applies to the media more than most.

I don't even think it's a one-sided anti-Labour anti-Left kind of thing. My present line of thought is that the decline in Tory popularity at the moment isn't because the public are weirdly superficial people who're more bothered by an illegal party than by a bungled pandemic response, it's because the party made an excellent story - Media people were shocked, interested, talking about it, so it cut through with them. This was practically outright stated by (ITV?) who had newsworthy footage which they judged not to be in the public interest until someone else broke the story. Then once that came out, the government's credibility started to fall because reasonable people - people who don't pay too much attention - were now seeing the government's failures on the evening news.

It's even easy to see how this sort of thing works: If you're sitting with someone you vaguely know in the press gallery, after the weather and the kids are you going to talk to them about the illegal party or about the statistical analyses of the Bank of England's monetary policy you've been reading?
>> No. 95110 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 11:48 pm
95110 spacer
>>95108
>(like Marx)

I'm not surprised that proponents of Marx should be treated in the same way as proponents of Hitler - Marxists and Nazis should have their faces caved in with bricks on public roads.
>> No. 95111 Anonymous
1st January 2022
Saturday 11:55 pm
95111 spacer

cfm.jpg
951119511195111
>>95110

You alright lad?
>> No. 95112 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 12:09 am
95112 spacer
>>95110
This kind of thing is the most obvious sign that someone knows sod all about Marx.
>> No. 95113 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 1:22 am
95113 spacer

marx.jpg
951139511395113
>>95111
>>95112

>This kind of thing is the most obvious sign that someone knows sod all about Marx.

I have read Marx, all of his theories have failed. He missed the Mus lims with Bauer theory.

Marx was a nobhead that never knew anything about hard work and failed in his theory that Bitcoin would happen.
>> No. 95114 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 1:33 am
95114 spacer
>>95113
No one serious still follows Marx, Georgism is it. You can carry itr off? It's yours. You cannot? It's ours.
>> No. 95115 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 1:43 am
95115 spacer
>>95113

To everyone their needs - who decides what I need?
If you think it is the state, you don't think.
>> No. 95116 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 1:49 am
95116 spacer
>>95099
>are Slavoj

Well considering he's more of a Hegelian.

>>95105
>For me, the biggest issue with Marx is only that while the fundamental analysis is completely sound

That's literally the biggest drawback of Marx and Engels work though. They arguably started social science but the analytical tools and conclusions have no science at all to them and what's left brings forward existing ideas of the time. To go back to my original point the fundamental analysis is undermined by being born in a particular place and time, one rooted too resolutely to labourers.

>>95109
If you'd actually read up on the theory you would know that false consciousness in a Marxist context is exactly based on idea production that is controlled by an elite. In your example the news bosses who can control the narrative rather than Cody with the top knot.
>> No. 95117 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 2:24 am
95117 spacer
>>95110
Come on man. I'm the last person in the universe who would be described as a proponent of Marx - I just think we should all read books (and news), we don't always agree with. It's a good thing.
>> No. 95118 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 2:28 am
95118 spacer

EgCkIFTXoAI-4SB.jpg
951189511895118
>>95116

>s exactly based on idea production that is controlled by an elite

Like government passes perhaps, where you have to have a jarg injection 3 times a year to save you from the same risk of dying from being struck by lightning before you can go anywhere

Like a communist government that gives fuck all to lazy people - I'd be a communist just so I could spend my time saying face the wall shooting lazy bastards. Watch Leo Kearse by the way, he's funnier than I am.
>> No. 95119 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 5:43 am
95119 spacer
It's weird, the last dozen posts in this thread read like we're being raided by a facebook fishing group full of Sun reading grandads.
>> No. 95120 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 9:59 am
95120 spacer
>>95119

I think it's just the one.
>> No. 95121 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 3:22 pm
95121 spacer
>>95116
It may be a vice but I don't particularly care for the Marxist theory on news production. I don't need in-depth theory to tell me commercial ownership of the news is a bad idea and in seeking to explain things "the guy at the top sets the narrative" isn't as interesting as decentralised insanity merely incentivised by the structure of capital ownership. The former tells us only that we live under capitalism because the communists have been slacking when it comes to abolishing it: the latter gets at some of the fun flaws of being apes in a supposedly post-industrial capitalist society.
Especially when you want to explain a case like when Owen Jones called on Corbyn to resign in 2017 because it was "obvious" Labour was going to go down to a dismal defeat. What's more likely: that his boss rang the phone and said if he wanted to keep his job he'd have to do the Scott Trust a favour, or that he buckled to the pressure created by the social consensus that Corbyn was doomed, to the dominance of a well established narrative which - as the subsequent election showed, was at odds with a fundamentally unpredictable future.
>> No. 95122 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 6:36 pm
95122 spacer
>>95121

Does it ever occur to you that the world is a big enough and complicated enough place that it can be, and has been, both of those in different instances? That one of them isn't incompatible with the other?

Why do you people insist on having your grand theory of everything and sticking to it at all costs? I know it helps monke sleep at night if monke thinks he understands where banana come from, but sometimes monke has a habit of ignoring what is staring him in the face for the sake of the internal consistency of his own Big Banana Theory.
>> No. 95123 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 7:40 pm
95123 spacer
>>95122
>Big Banana

No astroturfing or shilling. gb2 Chatsworth.
>> No. 95124 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 7:56 pm
95124 spacer
>>95122
Whatever reply I expected, it wasn't that. I'm disappointed, but not bothered think up a snarky reply. I didn't say the Marxist theory was wrong, or present two "competing" theories, let alone a "grand theory of everything". Indeed, the only reason I gave for ignoring Marxist theory was agreeing with it so often as to find it uninteresting. Sometimes a monkey on the internet sets aside "what's staring him in the face" because it's been staring him in the face so long that he's become bored of it and because other monkeys have already ook'd out everything there is to be said on that matter, so he might as well try something else.
And with that I thought I was quite clear about my position: I want something mildly interesting.
>> No. 95125 Anonymous
2nd January 2022
Sunday 9:18 pm
95125 spacer
>>95124

It was meant more light heartedly than you seem to have taken it lad.

I mean I sympathise, I really do, that's why I still keep up my longstanding tradition of getting stoned on a Sunday and reading /boo/ material until I'm not sure what's real any more. The grand conspiracies and elaborate double bluffys They use to keep us all down are a lot more interesting than the pragmatic real world assumption that it's all just rich wankers independently acting in their own rational self interest.

But the really interesting bit is when they start to overlap. Occasionally, rich wankers acting in their own rational self interest naturally forms an actual conspiracy. Like that thing about lightbulbs, where all the companies conspired to make their bulbs have shorter lifespans to keep sales going. Or that thing where the boss of Nissan is an international fugitive now, or such like.

I've talked before about how a lot of tinfoil conspiracy types are on the very edge of just being Marxists, if they'd only take their meds. The only difference is they see it as "the jews/royal family/space lizards etc" instead of just "the bourgeois", but they're only a hop skip and a jump away. There's a lot of overlaps and parallels I find intriguing because when so many people can come to these conclusions independently, and the only significant difference is that they lack the educated vocabulary to describe it, there has to be something to it.

Or maybe Marx was just the original David Icke. Who knows. Either way I certainly don't find it boring.
>> No. 95209 Anonymous
13th January 2022
Thursday 3:39 pm
95209 spacer

chingalinga.jpg
952099520995209
Ignore the ongoing shitstorm that should lead to Johnson standing down, there's a Chinky spy in our midst!

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 95210 Anonymous
13th January 2022
Thursday 9:43 pm
95210 spacer
>>95209

Surely that just leaves him looking even worse, letting a literal commie spy swan around under his government's nose all this time.
>> No. 95211 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 12:25 am
95211 spacer
>>95210
I'm sure Xi could've had no idea that one of his officials was meeting with such ne'er-do-wells. His first inkling was probably only once he decided to drive an authentic Chinese car but ended up having to push a clapped-out Rover off the road.
>> No. 95212 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 10:24 am
95212 spacer
>>95209
Ah Mail. having a picture of her and Jez front and centre as if she's not more interested in Tory lads.
>> No. 95214 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 10:26 am
95214 spacer
It’s quite amusing how far the government has to reach for fall guys now; James Slack anyone? And hearing him and earlier in the week the PM himself say they cannot discuss the parties because Sue Gray is investigating is hilarious nonsense. Utterly amazed Johnson hasn’t resigned, which probably speaks to my own naivety, but I’ve never seen arrogance like it.
>> No. 95215 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 1:39 pm
95215 spacer
>>95212
She did apparently donate six-figure sums to Labour MP Barry Gardiner. Just think: if China was meddling in our elections instead of Russia, we'd have Keir as a Prime Minister.
>> No. 95216 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 3:29 pm
95216 spacer
I can't get over the way that the party which seems to have angered the press the most, the one which seems to have made their view unambiguous that he should resign also happens to be the one party that party-animal de Pfeffel didn't actually go to.

In my relentless contrarianism, I hope he stays on. I hope he stays on and wins the next election. I want to see Labour and the press try to rationalise it.
>> No. 95217 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 4:39 pm
95217 spacer
>>95214
>It’s quite amusing how far the government has to reach for fall guys now; James Slack anyone?

The contention is that Johnson is the Minister responsible, not that he personally got the poppers out for someone's leaving do.

In a way I feel sorry for him for now getting shit for parties he didn't even attend. I'm trying to imagine my care-factor if this wasn't the No10 office, "we had some drinks when we were all had to be in the office" seems a bit of a non-story to me. Almost curtain twitching.
>> No. 95218 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 4:59 pm
95218 spacer
>>95217
I think it's the release of pent up anger more than anything.
>> No. 95219 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 5:00 pm
95219 spacer
I think it's that someone with influence over the media wants to replace him with someone else.
>> No. 95220 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 5:04 pm
95220 spacer
For once, can't it just be Labour playing a blinder? Are we really just not used to Labour playing the game the way the Conservatives have always played it?
>> No. 95221 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 5:39 pm
95221 spacer
>>95220
What have they actually done, other than letting them implode?
>> No. 95223 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 6:32 pm
95223 spacer
>>95217
It's a bizarre political system that puts more weight on being the minister responsible for a party than on being the prime minister responsible for tens of thousands of deaths. It's almost why I want him to stay on: the press and the Labour party stood back and let him get away with his biggest failure, I'll be damned if they're going to turn around and demand he acts like Thomas Dugdale now.

>>95218
You have to wonder whose anger is being released, over what, and why now? Is it centrists finally realising we've buggered it all up, or has he just finally annoyed press barons and people in his own party enough that they're done with him?
>> No. 95225 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 6:38 pm
95225 spacer
>>95223

>You have to wonder whose anger is being released, over what, and why now?

The man in the street is fucking fed up with COVID. Now that it looks like it's in the rear view mirror, someone needs to be the villain so we can all move on. Boris has made plenty of fuckups, but the Downing Street parties struck a very relatable sense of grievance over "one rule for them". It's not rational, but people are willing to tolerate poor leadership during a crisis because at least it's not a power vacuum.
>> No. 95229 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 8:49 pm
95229 spacer
The news tl;dr
1) Someone leaked "Operation Save Big Dog", Boris' plan to throw someone else under a bus to protect him.
2) No10 has been having "Wine Friday" drinks pretty much ever week throughout the pandemic.
3) Labour still can't access their membership list thanks to ransomware in October last year, and also may be liable to pay compensation to everyone on it (including many people who left and asked to be taken off it years ago, but weren't).

This country really needs a hard reset, this doesn't seem salvageable at this point.
>> No. 95230 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 9:34 pm
95230 spacer
>>95217

When a company does something wrong, the boss is the one who takes the flack. If anyone's responsible for a group's fuckups, it's the leader- That is the purpose of leaders, figureheads, whatever. It's their job to actually run the fucking show such that fuckups don't happen, and Boris has failed in every possible metric.

>>95223

>You have to wonder whose anger is being released, over what, and why now?

No you don't you bloody toff. It's exceedingly obvious to anybody who isn't alarmingly divorced from reality. I suppose I can excuse the pair of you for still being shut in your shed bunkers with the decade's supply of toilet roll you bought in March '20, but to anybody remotely in touch with the real world this is there's really very little complexity to understand- The government have displayed immense hypocrisy, and although we all knew they were hypocrites already, the exact nature of their hypocrisy in this case is enough to really pour piss on a lot of people's chips.

Anger has been slowly building, and this comes along hot on the heels of other big publicity hits like directly betraying the swing voters up north who won them the last election, and that other big hypocrisy scandal about trying to change the rules so they didn't have to punish one of their own. The Conservative party has been a walking disaster for roughly the last six months and this is the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

The "why now" is perhaps the only interesting part of the question. I'd wager it's because there's not much else happening in the news right now (apart from impending war with Russia and the subsequent nuclear armageddon, I suupose, but that's not generating clicks) and when this one dropped a few weeks back, they never expected it to actually grow legs like it has. It's the gift that keeps on giving- the Tories are so corrupt you'll find a scandal behind every curtain, tucked into the crevices of every armchair, and the public are ravenous for it right now.
>> No. 95231 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 10:13 pm
95231 spacer
>>95230
It's an odd contrast getting so bothered by the idea that it's ambiguous who's angry, why, and why now, before suggesting that it essentially comes back to it being a low-brow story on a slow news day. If we were in the business of sacking leaders for being massive fuckups overseeing massive fuckups we'd go through as many prime ministers a year as Japan, and if the public were really so attuned to being shafted by the government then we wouldn't have had a full term government in living memory.
>> No. 95233 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 10:45 pm
95233 spacer
>>95231
She doesn't have a particularly strong accent, though, she just has a generic Northwestern twang. It's not received pronunciation, by any means, but it's not a distinct and sharp accent either.
>> No. 95234 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 10:47 pm
95234 spacer
>>95230
>When a company does something wrong, the boss is the one who takes the flack. If anyone's responsible for a group's fuckups, it's the leader- That is the purpose of leaders, figureheads, whatever. It's their job to actually run the fucking show such that fuckups don't happen, and Boris has failed in every possible metric.

It's a few tins in the office not letting prisoners escape. The fact that the press have been running with a story about it being on the eve of ARE PHIL'S funeral just goes to show how much of this is being manufactured by the machine itself.
>> No. 95235 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 11:06 pm
95235 spacer
>>95231

>It's an odd contrast [...] suggesting that it essentially comes back to it being a low-brow story on a slow news day.

Except it's not, and that shows yet again how disconnected you are, m8. Low brow populism, appealing to the lowest common denominator, is precisely what put this government where it is. If you stat making the kinds of rookie errors the tabloids can air you out to in front of that low brow audience, you're not only fucked, but you're a giant myopic gimp who doesn't deserve to run a model railway, let alone a country.

It helps to remember that the press are this country's real opposition party, not the shadow cabinet.
>> No. 95236 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 11:07 pm
95236 spacer

ed miliband sandwich.jpg
952369523695236
>>95234
>just goes to show how much of this is being manufactured by the machine itself

OH NO
Remember Ed Miliband's sandwich?
Remember everything about Jeremy Corbyn?
Remember "Will the last person in Britain please turn out the lights?"?
Or is it only suspicious and wrong when it's the Conservatives under attack?
>> No. 95238 Anonymous
14th January 2022
Friday 11:59 pm
95238 spacer

Dominic-Cummings-Reuters-Yui-Mok-e1569583797886-80.jpg
952389523895238
REVENGE IS A DISH BEST SERVED IN THE GARDEN.
>> No. 95240 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 1:55 pm
95240 spacer
>>95236
Why not both? Bollocks is bollocks and the fifth estate fucks around with useless stories only it is interested in publishing.
>> No. 95241 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 2:52 pm
95241 spacer
>>95240

Eating a bacon sandwich weird is not really the same as partying while ordering a national lockdown.
>> No. 95242 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 3:04 pm
95242 spacer

CO5F8EEWwAIqDWP.jpg
952429524295242
>>95241
I think that's rather the point he was making. A Labour leader rides a bike and is immediately labled a Maoist, whereas Johnson has to all but literally spit in the eye of a dying pensioner to get anything short of glowing praise from some papers.
>> No. 95243 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 3:52 pm
95243 spacer
>>95241
The example I'm specifically talking about doesn't actually even have Boris partying. It has some drones having a few drinks, cheeky but if you care about such a thing then it says something about you really.
>> No. 95244 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:00 pm
95244 spacer
>>95243

Fuck off, CCHQlad. You're repeating the same shit the talking heads in the news have been trying to push all week. They puzzled me a bit actually, because you have to wonder just what kind of sycophant is still sticking to the brief and clinging to Boris' arse hairs by this point.

Either way, it's not working mate, people are pissed, dear leader is fucked.
>> No. 95245 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:08 pm
95245 spacer
>>95244
>the talking heads in the news have been trying to push all week

The news has been dominated this week by talk of an office party. Not Channel Crossings, inflation or even what we call our sweets - you can't pretend this isn't getting silly or that somehow this is the moment Starmer becomes PM.
>> No. 95246 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:13 pm
95246 spacer
>>95245

When the best defense you can muster is "oh come on, it's been going on a bit long now hasn't it? please?" then it doesn't bode well.

Labour aren't in any position to come riding in and take over, by any means, but this is the beginning of the end of the Tories, like "that bigoted woman" was for Gordon Brown.
>> No. 95247 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:37 pm
95247 spacer
>>95245
Why should what we call our sweets be more important than this, you cunt?
>> No. 95248 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:38 pm
95248 spacer
>>95246
>this is the beginning of the end of the Tories

Come on, lad. How many times has that been said for the past 10 years? I'm not even a Tory or an anti-lockdowner but of all the fucking things Johnson has done it would be laughable for this to be it. You'll even notice that some of the loudest voices in the Conservative Party are at the moment new entrants who aren't used to a political shitstorm.

>like "that bigoted woman" was for Gordon Brown

So you admit that this is a load of tosh. One of that unlike bigot-gate isn't even happening anywhere close to a general election.
>> No. 95249 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 4:45 pm
95249 spacer
>>95248

You're really not familiar with the idiom of the straw breaking the camel's back, are you?

The press of been turning on the Tories (or just Boris, maybe) slowly but surely over the last six to twelve months, I noticed it as far back as August last year; but by now they are outright gunning for them.
>> No. 95250 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 6:06 pm
95250 spacer
>>95248
>You'll even notice that some of the loudest voices in the Conservative Party are at the moment new entrants who aren't used to a political shitstorm.
I have absolutely noticed this, but my explanation is different from yours. The ones who are still supporting Boris are the career politicians and climbers who are near the top of the government, and Boris put them there. They are MPs for safe Conservative seats, their positions as MPs are near-enough guaranteed, and what really matters to them is forming relationships with those above them who can help them climb higher. They've been doing this for their whole lives, and they do favours for each other.

Meanwhile, the ones who are kicking off are mainly the new Red Wall ones. This isn't (in my opinion) because they don't understand politics, because we understand politics here and they almost certainly know more about their job than we do. But they were elected to represent people who have traditionally hated the Conservative Party, and who felt very uncomfortable voting for them, and these MPs came in at a time when most governments would usually not win another election afterwards. And £81,932 a year goes a long way in Teesside and Burnley and places; they fucking love their new job. They need to represent their voters as hard as they possibly can, or the gravy train will hit the buffers. And they're not going to be made Health Secretary because they don't have the connections, so there's no point in sucking up to the bosses.

I don't like the Red Wall Tories because they stand for things I don't like and am actively opposed to, but I can't deny they are doing their job properly.

>>95249
>The press of [sic] been turning on the Tories (or just Boris, maybe) slowly but surely over the last six to twelve months
I saw something in Private Eye over a year ago about this. One of the newspaper owners has fallen out with him, I think, and Keir Starmer has been running a bit of a charm offensive on them behind the scenes. It's all bollocks and treachery, but it always has been. And whenever it turns people against Labour, it's worked, so I guess it's too bad for BoJo if he's innocent, because he's still having the people turned against him.
>> No. 95251 Anonymous
15th January 2022
Saturday 11:53 pm
95251 spacer
>>95245

>by talk of an office party.

Dishonestly and brazenly downplaying the news in an act of feigned ignorance does not seem to work for number 10 anymore, so I'm not sure why you're attempting it here.
>> No. 95252 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 6:19 am
95252 spacer
>>95244
>Either way, it's not working mate, people are pissed, dear leader is fucked.
You say this in a sort of cheering way, but you don't really set out how things are going to go. I saw Starmer calling for the Tories to bounce Johnson in the national interest earlier, and he was doing the same thing. Nobody seems to think about these things Strategically.
If Johnson goes they pick Sunak or Truss, the press are content with having bounced partylad and Labour's chances of losing the next election return to 100%. You get the brief excitement of Johnson going "I'm fucking off, bye" and then you get to stare down a leadership contest of absolute ghouls, the only consolation prize being that Labour probably aren't in on the joke and will be genuinely disappointed to lose the 2023 election.

Johnson holding on is ironically the best thing for the country and for the Labour party, but people are so caught up in this frenzy about the polls suddenly moving and stuff 'finally cutting through' (ha!) that they can't stop and think about it for a second. Which is surely the dynamic that the press barons and other cunts who're sick of Johnson but don't actually want a Labour government that will deliver a means tested windfall tax on the office for oh-who-fucking-cares when they can hold out hope for Thatcher's yangsi.
>> No. 95253 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 2:23 pm
95253 spacer
>>95252
The trouble with all of this shit we find ourselves in is that if the Tories just do nothing, the next election isn't until the end of 2024 and there's nothing anyone can do to force it to happen any earlier without their approval. The bill to repeal FTPA is looking less attractive so I can imagine JRM "forgetting" to schedule it in for Third Reading if it gets through the committee.
>> No. 95254 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 2:46 pm
95254 spacer
What if we just started killing them?
>> No. 95255 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 3:00 pm
95255 spacer
>>95254
That would only create sympathy for them.
>> No. 95256 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 3:17 pm
95256 spacer
>>95253
>The bill to repeal FTPA is looking less attractive so I can imagine JRM "forgetting" to schedule it in for Third Reading if it gets through the committee.

I don't see it. There's a lot you can say about JRM and being autistic about tradition to the degree that it interferes with his own life is one of them.

>>95254
Congratulations, if we weren't already on some list then we certainly are now.
>> No. 95257 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 3:46 pm
95257 spacer
>>95256
JRM is the god-king of procedural fuckery. He'll know what he can and can't do, and he absolutely can simply not put something on the calendar if it benefits him and his party to not put it on the calendar. Like that time he refused to put a confidence motion up for debate because it didn't have the Leader of the Opposition's name on it.
>> No. 95258 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 5:36 pm
95258 spacer
>>95254
Shhh. We all think it but you can't go saying it. Besides, after thinking about it extensively, I have concluded that the Conservative Party really don't stand for anything beyond what the electorate asks for. They were anti-Brexit until they started losing, and suddenly they pivoted instantly to having always been 100% in favour of extreme No-Deal Brexit, of course they were, what are you talking about? So really, you'd need to go after the voters themselves, and that's going to be a lot harder. It's pretty easy to vandalise entire streets in Conservative areas, without killing anyone and simultaneously exposing just how strong people power can really be if someone actually did it, which of course I never would.
>> No. 95259 Anonymous
16th January 2022
Sunday 5:41 pm
95259 spacer
>>95257
Read what I wrote again, JRM will pass the bill because FTP offends him and he's shown that things like that matter to him. In the past he has defended the jury system from conservative peers and even the leader of the liberal democrats.
>> No. 95260 Anonymous
17th January 2022
Monday 4:13 pm
95260 spacer
So, in the space of 24 hours, we've had an announcement that the BBC is toast, and the military are going to actually start patrolling the Channel.

LOOK OVER THERE AT THAT DEAD CAT.
>> No. 95261 Anonymous
17th January 2022
Monday 5:53 pm
95261 spacer
>>95260
You forgot that Starmer had a beer in his office or something.
Which I know I ought to read it as a warning shot to him from our awful proprietorial press, but I can't help go for the funnier alternative: He's had great fun watching Johnson be soaked, thinking he's the one controlling the weather, but now it's inexplicably pissing down on him too...
>> No. 95262 Anonymous
17th January 2022
Monday 6:10 pm
95262 spacer
>>95261
Yeah; that story feels entirely like a message from the Daily You-know-what to him, more like an open letter than a news story. They posted a negative story about Emma Raducanu too, like a message to say, "We built you up. Now look how easily we can knock you down. Now, let's talk about the favours you can do for us when we need them."
>> No. 95263 Anonymous
17th January 2022
Monday 6:54 pm
95263 spacer
>>95261
>>95262
Apparently he had a beer with his lunch while on a campaign stop, which amusingly would indeed make that a "work event".
>> No. 95264 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 12:21 pm
95264 spacer
Tory MP Christian Wakeford defects to Labour

Tory MP Christian Wakeford has defected to the Labour Party and called on Boris Johnson to quit as prime minister.

Mr Wakeford took the Bury South seat from Labour at the 2019 general election.

He was among the MPs to have written a letter of no confidence in the prime minister, following revelations about lockdown parties in Downing Street.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60054968
>> No. 95265 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 1:56 pm
95265 spacer
>>95264
Did the floor walk right before PMQS too. What a lad.
>> No. 95266 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 2:03 pm
95266 spacer
>>95264
I don't really trust this fellow because as a member of the 2019 intake it's not like he can realistically claim he didn't know what he was signing up for. Regardless, it's one in the eye for the freak we call PM right now, that's good enough.
>> No. 95267 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 2:06 pm
95267 spacer
>>95264
Does his no confidence vote still stand if he's left the Conservative Party?
>> No. 95268 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 2:37 pm
95268 spacer
>>95267
This is what I'm wondering. I assume Graham Brady just throws the letter in the bin if the MP leaves the party, but I haven't seen this officially clarified anywhere yet. I guess there's an outside chance that leaving the party could mean fewer letters are needed anyway, so it won't matter, but that would require some very fortuitous rounding.
>> No. 95269 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 3:06 pm
95269 spacer
Hold on. Labour MPs could all defect simultaneously, submit a no-confidence motion in the Prime Minister, force the election then all defect back again. The letters must get thrown away if you leave the party, surely.

I've been looking on Wikipedia and the Parliament website for the 1922 Committee, and nobody seems to know. Which is strange because it must have happened before.
>> No. 95270 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 9:30 pm
95270 spacer

wankford.png
952709527095270
https://twitter.com/YoungLabourUK/status/1483774774350422016

Retards. Have they learnt nothing? Just take the free MP. Will they also go through a list of their existing MPs and tell people not to vote for them? Christian Wakeford is not going to suddenly take over the party anyway; he'll be a non-entity backbencher within a few days. I keep calling him Christian Wakefield and that's today when he's all over the news.
>> No. 95271 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 9:44 pm
95271 spacer
>>95270
It's a signal to the left of the party that they don't care about who they have representing them, as long as they've got the numbers. Wakeford voted for UC cuts, he voted for tougher asylum laws, he is a Tory through and through but now we're meant to praise him because he saw his future would be upended if Bozza is ousted and he's jumping before he's pushed.
>> No. 95272 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 10:27 pm
95272 spacer
>>95271

You don't seem to understand basic things like "political parties" and "whips". Neither does whoever is in charge of the Young Labour twitter account, apparently.
>> No. 95273 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 11:15 pm
95273 spacer
>>95270
But Chris Wakey's profoundly untrustworthy and his actions look blantantly cynical. Labour might end up having to defend the thoroughly awful voting record of their newest MP, detracting from their own criticisms of Johnson as well. It's not like Wakeford just got caught up in a frenzy for "leveling up" and "getting Brexit done", he's been active in the Tory Party for ten years and I'd be amazed if he'd ever voted Labour in his life. We're not talking about Rachel Reeves being soft on multinationals here, he's only had a problem with conservatism since he realised his 400 vote majority was a one off under Johnson.

I disagree with >>95271 that this is a "signal to the left", because I think this is an, unintentional, fuck you to the entire party membership. This wanker's clearly more concerned with keeping his deposit come the next election, and no one's going to be mad enough to try another Change.UK@PipeDream.org endevour for a generation or more. Now it's those idiot Labour members' job to help keep Christian Wakeford earning £80,000 per annum, even though six weeks ago he'd likely have dubbed them "cultural Marxists" and agreed with Director of the Reich Security Patel that anyone expressing subversive views within earshot of another subject ought to be rednitioned to St Helena.

I don't know, even after all that I can't say this was the wrong call regarding his admittance, at least on a non-ideological level. I'm just deeply uncomfortable having someone like this in the party and it further evidences how little those welcoming him with open arms actually cared about "Labour values" whilst Corbyn helmed the party.

Ah, shite, almost went a whole Labour-specific post without mentioning the old man. Maybe next time.
>> No. 95274 Anonymous
19th January 2022
Wednesday 11:36 pm
95274 spacer
>>95272
I admire the degree of pride you seem to take in the fact that most of parliament is worthless, utterly interchangeable lobby fodder.
>> No. 95275 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 12:57 am
95275 spacer
>>95271
>It's a signal to the left of the party that they don't care about who they have representing them, as long as they've got the numbers.
Lad. Our political system literally revolves around whether or not you've "got the numbers". You'd think anyone supporting the former party of James Callaghan would understand this.
>> No. 95276 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 7:42 am
95276 spacer
>>95275

Exactly. Ideological purity doesn't get legislation through parliament. A compromise government can achieve infinitely more than a principled opposition. The Labour Left doesn't care about actually improving the lives of ordinary people, only their own petty infighting and holier-than-thou games.

>>95273

>I think this is an, unintentional, fuck you to the entire party membership.

So what? The party membership don't choose the next prime minister, the electorate does. Christian Wakefield is by all accounts a decent bloke who does right by his constituents and he's welcome in my party. If you prefer being in opposition, you're welcome to cut up your membership card.
>> No. 95277 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 8:02 am
95277 spacer

FJeK4-EXsAISkH6.jpg
952779527795277
Is there anything Labour won't squabble over? Anyone with a functioning brain would know that if the party don't welcome Wakeford they'd completely scupper chances of any other Tory defectors. Just take the small win for now.
>> No. 95278 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 8:18 am
95278 spacer
>>95274
They are all globalist liberals.
>> No. 95279 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 9:08 am
95279 spacer
I love how everyone took the bait about this one defector and it's got Boris off the hook. Good, because he needs to stay in office as long as possible to fuck up as much as possible.

Honestly though this was the parliamentary equivalent of letting a stink bomb off near the end of class so the teacher forgets to come round and collect your homework. Same deal as when Cummings and Hancock and That Other Bloke got sacked.
>> No. 95280 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 10:35 am
95280 spacer
>>95279
I completely agree with you. The best thing Labour could do right now is vote FOR Boris in a vote of confidence and keep him in power longer. The longer he stays now, the more damage is done. But I doubt they'll see it like that.
>> No. 95281 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 10:40 am
95281 spacer
>>95277
What you're witnessing is Labour factionalism in its natural environment. He might be red but he's not the right shade of red so is in effect an enemy more despicable than the Tories. This is especially important for Young Labour who of course live in a bubble world of hard-left politics because they're all on less than 30k a year and don't interact with normal people.
>> No. 95282 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 11:02 am
95282 spacer
>>95280
How would Labour explain to the electorate that they think Boris is doing huge damage to the country and is trusted by no-one, but they still support him being the prime minister?
>> No. 95283 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 11:04 am
95283 spacer
>>95276
>So what? The party membership don't choose the next prime minister,
Don't patronise me, you little shite. I was perfectly amiable towards you in my post and I didn't even say this defection was definitely a bad thing. My point is that this turns the spotlight on Labour and raises difficult questions. Also, I don't know if you've been paying a jot of attention, but the party's been cutting like depressed teenager because "there's no money left" so actually those members aren't the pointless morass you seem to think they are.

>If you prefer being in opposition, you're welcome to cut up your membership card.
One MP doesn't flip a majority, genius, let alone a 80-odd seat majority, and the chances of further defections look remote. The arrogance of assuming everything's always brilliant and nothing can go wrong, and anyone preaching caution is an enemy is hurting my brain and my soul. Thinking Starmer will stroll into Downing Street without breaking a sweat because Johnson's still there? I don't know where you people get your confidence from, but it's something to behold.
>> No. 95284 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 11:26 am
95284 spacer
>>95281
>they're all on less than 30k a year
Oh yuck! Eww! Quick, somebody step on them! I can't believe we let these vile "people" vote just like the normals.
>> No. 95285 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 12:22 pm
95285 spacer
>>95283
> "there's no money left" so actually those members aren't the pointless morass you seem to think they are.

There's no money left because Labour suffered one of its worst electoral defeats in history after embracing politics that nobody wanted. You get bennies for having MPs.

>>95284
Exactly. You can track the correlation between poor people and Labour voting, only a conservative has an existential interest in the population control and eventual eradication of the poor (along with taxes).
>> No. 95286 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 12:44 pm
95286 spacer
>>95285
> only a conservative has an existential interest in the population control and eventual eradication of the poor (along with taxes).
No, conservatives need a healthy supply of poor people to work in their mills and factories.
>> No. 95287 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 12:52 pm
95287 spacer

bozzed.jpg
952879528795287

>> No. 95288 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 1:06 pm
95288 spacer
>>95285
Could you do me a favour and stay out of serious politics threads from now on, oddballlad? People are talking about, well, reality, then you roll up like Dr Strangelove and begin rambling about the need for a nuclear strike on the SNP and the forced deportation of any woman over 1.75 metres tall. It’s not the first time.
>> No. 95289 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 2:53 pm
95289 spacer
>>95286
Don't worry, Westminster has been doing its best to do away with factories for decades.

>>95288
>People are talking about, well, reality

I'm sorry lad, Corbynism failed and December 2019 relegated it to the dustbin of history. That's the reality we live in.
>> No. 95290 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 3:01 pm
95290 spacer
>>95289
>I'm sorry lad, Corbynism failed and December 2019 relegated it to the dustbin of history. That's the reality we live in.
What are talking about, you big psycho?
>> No. 95291 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 3:16 pm
95291 spacer
>>95290
I assume he is referring to Boris's 80(ish)-seat majority that was achieved despite him being an obvious incompetent bastard. But then, in your defence, this majority was achieved at least partly thanks to BoJo's Corbynite policies.
>> No. 95292 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 3:48 pm
95292 spacer
>>95291
>this majority was achieved at least partly thanks to BoJo's Corbynite policies.

Did he actually have any Corbynite policies or was it just slogans like "levelling up"?
>> No. 95293 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 5:07 pm
95293 spacer
>>95289
Surely the present shows, if nothing else, that we do not live in reality.
We're seriously expected to believe that the population will accept 150,000-175,000 deaths but not a party. That they'll turn on the Tories for "not delivering" for the north, despite the fact the Tories won 2010, 2015 and 2017 without the north and Labour has been losing elections with the North back since the 1950s. That they won't tolerate obvious cronyism and corruption despite the Tory party being nothing but that. (oh oh, but it's not that all these things individually, it's their collective impact.)

I'd say this is more plausible: Press coverage (mostly reflecting a consensus among the 'political class' rather than a 'conspiracy') accepted shoving Johnson into No. 10 despite all his flaws because they fucking hated Corbyn and they were bored of the tedious games of hung parliaments. Now that Corbyn's fucked off to irrelevancy they're no longer united by loathing him, so they've started to turn on Johnson. On the balance of forces, this is mostly because they want a Tory government without Johnson rather than because Starmer is 'cutting through'. Labour will go down to another defeat at the next election, but everyone will claim victory because they'll gain maybe 20 seats.
>> No. 95294 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 8:00 pm
95294 spacer
>>95292
The one I was thinking of was the nationalisation of Northern Rail, but I don't actually know if that was in the manifesto or if they only did it once they'd won and never actually wanted to deliver such a fantastic act of justice.
>> No. 95295 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 10:30 pm
95295 spacer
>>95293

>We're seriously expected to believe that the population will accept 150,000-175,000 deaths but not a party.

Will you change the bloody record already, you dense fucking cunt. I'm almost as sick of hearing you make this retarded false equivalence as I am hearing about the parties.
>> No. 95296 Anonymous
20th January 2022
Thursday 10:44 pm
95296 spacer
>>95295
Don't piss yourself, mate.
>> No. 95297 Anonymous
21st January 2022
Friday 11:41 pm
95297 spacer
>>95295
So what we've established here is that you get sick of things after they've happened twice. Instead of politics, have you considered watching where lightning strikes?
>> No. 95298 Anonymous
24th January 2022
Monday 6:45 pm
95298 spacer
>ITV News understands Boris Johnson had a birthday party during the first lockdown in 2020 despite the rules forbidding social gatherings indoors at the time.

>It's alleged that the prime minister's wife, Carrie Johnson, helped organise a surprise get-together for him on the afternoon of 19 June just after 2pm. Up to 30 people are said to have attended the event in the Cabinet Room after Boris Johnson returned from an official visit to a school in Hertfordshire. ITV News understands that the interior designer, Lulu Lytle - who was not a member of No 10 staff - also attended the gathering. At the time Ms Lytle was renovating Boris Johnson’s flat in Downing Street, which has been the subject of a separate controversy.

>ITV News also understands that on the evening of 19 June 2020, family friends were hosted upstairs in the prime minister’s residence in an apparent further breach of the rules. Number 10 have denied this, claiming the prime minister only hosted a small number of family members outside. At the afternoon event, Carrie Johnson and Lulu Lytle are believed to have presented the prime minister with a cake whilst his wife led staff in a chorus of happy birthday before "both Carrie and Lulu joined him upstairs". Those assembled are understood to have eaten picnic food from M&S, with the gathering lasting for around 20-30 minutes. Downing St say the prime minister only attended for less than 10 minutes.

>In June 2020 social gatherings indoors were still forbidden under lockdown laws. At the time there was also intense concern about the potential for singing to spread Covid-19, with choirs unable to meet to rehearse. ITV News understands those present at the afternoon party included the prime minister’s principal private secretary, Martin Reynolds, who had previously invited over 100 staff to a drinks party on 20 May 2020.

>Jack Doyle, currently No10's director of communications, and the head of operations, Shelley Williams-Walker, are also said to have been there. They were joined by other members of the Prime Minister's Private Office, No10 special advisers and No10 operations and events staff. The week before his birthday party, Boris Johnson had asked the rest of the country to stick to the guidance in a press conference from Downing Street. “I urge everyone to continue to show restraint and respect the rules which are designed to keep us all safe. It’s only because of the restraint that everyone, you all have shown so far, that we are able to move gradually out of this lockdown”, he said on 10 June 2020. He added: "It is emphatically not designed for people who don't qualify to start meeting inside other people's homes - that remains against the law."

https://www.itv.com/news/2022-01-24/boris-johnson-had-birthday-bash-during-lockdown-itv-news-understands

PMQs will be interesting this week.
>> No. 95299 Anonymous
24th January 2022
Monday 8:23 pm
95299 spacer
>>95298
>social gatherings indoors were still forbidden under lockdown laws
It's been two years, but it's still weird to see language like "forbidden" used to describe socialising.
>> No. 95300 Anonymous
25th January 2022
Tuesday 12:28 am
95300 spacer
>>95299
I remember thinking about how much of a dystopian nightmare the modern world would look to someone from the Middle Ages at the start of the pandemic. Imagine explaining the entire planet from Antillia to Cathay being under house arrest with Parliaments militia roaming the streets to catch anyone outside without good reason, and even then needing to wear a face cloth with speaking with merchants.

Maybe they'd understand if they had experience with plague outbreaks but I can imagine the ban on Church would be unsettling.
>> No. 95301 Anonymous
25th January 2022
Tuesday 11:32 am
95301 spacer
>Police to investigate Downing Street lockdown parties

>The Metropolitan Police have launched an investigation into parties held in No 10 during the coronavirus pandemic. Commissioner Cressida Dick (61) said they were looking into "potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations" in Downing Street and Whitehall since 2020.

>She said the investigation was launched as a "result of the information provided by the Cabinet Office inquiry team", led by civil servant Sue Gray (63). The Cabinet Office said Ms Gray's own inquiry would continue. But the BBC understands the report will not be published while the Met are investigating, and it is not clear how long the force will take.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60123850

Not to be a /boo/lad but a police inquiry might've just saved the PMs skin.
>> No. 95302 Anonymous
25th January 2022
Tuesday 12:22 pm
95302 spacer
>>95301
So we know he did it, but he won't resign until Sue Gray's report is released, and it was about to be released, but then the police said they'd look again, so Sue Gray won't release her report until the police are finished. When will the police be finished? And why didn't they start earlier if they wanted to investigate it themselves?

Once the police report is finished, I don't think they should publish it until MI5 have also had a look and written their own report, which in turn cannot be released until Interpol finish their own report which shall remain unpublished until the CIA have also investigated. This is not the most brazen corruption I have seen from this government, but that says more about them to be honest.
>> No. 95303 Anonymous
25th January 2022
Tuesday 1:41 pm
95303 spacer

Felixstowe-Defib-4.jpg
953039530395303
>>95300

They'd probably be familiar with the idea of quarantine and may well recognise the concept of miasma. What they'd struggle to understand is the miraculous state of medicine in the 21st century. They would certainly know people who had been killed, blinded or disfigured by smallpox, a disease we have now completely eradicated.

If they're weirded out by lockdowns, they'd go fucking mental if you showed them a defibrillator or an MRI scanner. A talking box that can raise the dead? A tunnel that can see inside the body? Witchcraft.
>> No. 95304 Anonymous
25th January 2022
Tuesday 2:42 pm
95304 spacer
>>95300
Places like Eyam shut themselves off from the outside world to try and stop the spread of the plague, plus many people were boarded up in their houses if someone in their family had it.
>> No. 95305 Anonymous
26th January 2022
Wednesday 8:29 am
95305 spacer

dick.png
953059530595305
Every fucking day. Every single fucking day when I come home this police commissioner just sits there and gives me this stupid look on her face. What do I do about her, I'm out of ideas?

To be serious though, how FUBAR are the Conservatives when a police investigation into the PM produces an almost audible sigh of relief?
>> No. 95306 Anonymous
26th January 2022
Wednesday 9:22 am
95306 spacer
Well Liz Truss was on the radio this morning and fuck me, I didn't realise how dense she sounds. She's like a posh version of that yummy mummy Labour woman who I always mentally replace with Katherine Tate, only instead of poor education she just sounds like she's on vallies and her lips are full of botox.

She also talked a lot of utter bollocks about Ukraine, how the fuck has she ended up foreign minister, let alone in line for next PM. How have any of these clowns ended up in their jobs even. Fuck me it's a depressing state of affairs in the world today.
>> No. 95307 Anonymous
26th January 2022
Wednesday 8:21 pm
95307 spacer
>>95306
>that yummy mummy Labour woman
I have no idea who you mean.
>who I always mentally replace with Katherine Tate
Ohhh! Angela Rayner!
>> No. 95308 Anonymous
26th January 2022
Wednesday 8:26 pm
95308 spacer
>>95306


Putin must be quaking in his caligula.
>> No. 95309 Anonymous
26th January 2022
Wednesday 9:29 pm
95309 spacer
I, and I'm aware I've probably jinxed/cursed us all by putting this into writing, don't think Truss would win a general election. I think she's too silly, but without the reputation Johnson had as well as inheriting his current one, both of which I think will just make her look like that much more of a dick the second she tries to go viral. Also there seems to be much less appetite in the wider parliamentary Conservative Party for Johnson style "big spending", even if it is a hollow promise to begin with. If they try to go all Dave and Gideon with the belt tightening it's not going to go over well. Psychologically people were primed to be tricked into the thinking, post-Great Recession, that the wastefulness of government had caused the economy to collapse, sort of giving a moral dimension to the whole idea. Now there's nary a UK resident who didn't put up with at least something over the course of the pandemic, so in my opinion it won't even take something as negative as May's "death tax" to tank a Tory campaign.

>>95308
Yeah, see, this is like making your school mates laugh. A general election would be like going straight from that to a fifteen minute stand-up set, she'd die on her arse.
>> No. 95310 Anonymous
27th January 2022
Thursday 11:55 am
95310 spacer
That "lawyer not a leader" jibe backfired spectacularly.
>> No. 95311 Anonymous
28th January 2022
Friday 8:49 pm
95311 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/28/sue-gray-report-fears-indefinite-delay-met-intervention-partygate

Looks like the Partytime Report (I refuse to use that godawful -gate suffix) will have more black bars than a Futanari Manga.
>> No. 95312 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 12:04 am
95312 spacer
>>95311
Not to sound hysterical, but this feels a completely corrupt to me. Whether or not the PM would remain the PM was supposedly dependant on Gray's report, the Met seemingly had little interest in conducting their own investigation into No. 10 breaking lockdown rules, but now Cressida Dick looks to have saved Johnson's bacon at the eleventh hour, her organisation's curiousity suddenly piqued. Is it a reach to say the post powerful copper in the UK is doing her pal the PM a favour?
>> No. 95313 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 12:27 am
95313 spacer
>>95312

Why shit in the hand of the one person who can nominate you for a peerage? Dick is Cockblocking everyone for the sake of that alone.
>> No. 95314 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 12:48 am
95314 spacer
>>95313
The PM can't fire her, so I suppose her calculus is based on whether she's likely to see another PM. If she brings down Johnson, Starmer would ennoble her in a second, but ... you know.
>> No. 95315 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 12:54 am
95315 spacer
>>95312
I still think Boris's resignation is a question of when, not if. I can imagine you might do a poll of people asking if he'll resign within the next month, and plenty of people would say no, but if you ask them if they think he will get anywhere near completing his actual term, and not resign at all, I can't imagine anyone would believe that. Whatever he does now is just stalling for time. He could personally solve absolutely every problem suffered by every single person in the country, and it would just feel like he's trying to distract us from the sword of Damocles over his head.

If there was any justice, anyone helping him now would see their reputations tarnished irreparably and they would vanish forever when he goes. But that's if there was any justice, and there isn't, so they can help him as much as they like.
>> No. 95316 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 2:40 am
95316 spacer
I for one look forward to Johnson resigning only to jump right over to a well paid gig as an opinion columnist or one of the various other retainers for the generally useless people who make up most of our journalistic and political public life, all sins washed away, all attempts to pick at the scabs from his time in office suddenly as distasteful as asking who helped him rise to office in the first place. Why keep going on about all that? Premier Truss is announcing trade deals, Keir's setting out a new clause 4, even the Lib-Dems managed to come third in that by-election... And anyway, he said sorry and quit, what more could you want? It's time to move on, the man's been punished enough...
>> No. 95317 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 10:09 am
95317 spacer
>>95316
You're absolutely right of course, as soon as he goes he'll be rehabilitated as an elder statesman like all our former prime ministers are.
>> No. 95318 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 10:14 am
95318 spacer
>>95317
Doubt it.
>> No. 95319 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 11:09 am
95319 spacer
>>95317
>>95318
He'll be about as popular as David "who?" Cameron.
>> No. 95320 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 11:24 am
95320 spacer
>>95319
I think the difference is Cameron is loaded enough never to have to work again. I know Johnson is far from a pauper but he's complained about struggling on his income before and his wife seems to have expensive taste, not to mention the amount he'll be paying out in child maintenance.
>> No. 95321 Anonymous
29th January 2022
Saturday 6:27 pm
95321 spacer
>>95316
I predict a shit TV program.
Like they'll try and push him as Wacky Clarkson.
>> No. 95322 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 1:06 am
95322 spacer
I don't think Johnson can be rehabilitated for mainstream audiences at this point. He'll always have his zealots who'd back him if he anounced a new plan to throw Earth into a black hole, but there's no way he can do an Ed Balls and become a presenter or anything like that. One of those Tory loyalist rags might give him a column or he could carve out a niche in the nuttier right-wing spaces, but really I think he's just going to become a notable backbencher.
>> No. 95323 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 10:17 am
95323 spacer
>>95322
You really think he wants to be an MP? An irritating lord, maybe, but a heavily scrutinised MP, in an era when moonlighting is getting a bad name?
>> No. 95324 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 12:46 pm
95324 spacer
>>95322
I think this is far too optimistic. Reckon >>95321 is nearer the mark. He'll be on fucking celebrity bake off or some other shit program. Or a return to HIGNFY were he gets gently ribbed and everyone has a good chuckle at silly old Boris and his larks when he was PM. Lots of shit jokes about parties etc. It will be relentlessly grim, as UK political reality and the establishments ability to manipulate always is.

I am a massive miserable pessimistic cunt though so who knows really.
>> No. 95325 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 1:01 pm
95325 spacer
>>95324
Whenever his times on Have I Got News For You get brought up, Ian Hislop gets very defensive and says he hates him and it absolutely is not their fault that people actually voted for him. That's probably the last thing Boris will be on again, unless it's a one-off guest presenter appearance where they just rip into him (and it all rolls off him effortlessly like it always has done).

His biggest money-spinner before he was Prime Minister was absolutely his newspaper column, and I'm sure he will walk right back into that. On top of that, he'll probably write a book or two. I can see him doing the odd appearance on political programmes with journalists who ask tough questions, like Andrew Marr, but that's if there are any such journalists left and they don't all quit, like Andrew Marr did. If they do, it's GB News for him.
>> No. 95326 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 1:05 pm
95326 spacer
>>95325
I think that's probably right. At the very least it's in Murdoch's interests to keep him comfortable as a show of good faith to others he wants to push around.
>> No. 95327 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 1:15 pm
95327 spacer
>>95324

He seems very much the type who would relish the opportunity to go on Celebrity I'm A Jungle Fort Boyard Weakest Catchphrase, and everyone would lap him up in that context. He'd be washed up and disgraced but he'd own it, he'd make that his whole brand.

He's that odd kind of toff who shares one defining trait with the very lowest of the underclass- He has absolutely no shame.
>> No. 95328 Anonymous
30th January 2022
Sunday 8:48 pm
95328 spacer
>>95327

He'll do a version of Jack Whitehall: Travels With My Father with Stanley. It'll be a massive hit and everyone will forget about the 150,000 dead.
>> No. 95329 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 9:04 am
95329 spacer
>>95328
You just know that, just like the whole thing with the "model buses" before, he'll negotiate a fee of £150k per episode and will mention that number very publicly, or will compare whatever fee he does get to his £150k as PM just so that when people associate that number with him, that's what comes to mind instead of the bodies piled in the streets.
>> No. 95330 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 3:04 pm
95330 spacer
Might genuinely be one of the most half-arsed, shallow and lazily written reports I've ever read.
A whopping 12 pages of nothing.
If I submitted that as an assignment, I'd get a third at best.
>> No. 95331 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 3:13 pm
95331 spacer
>>95329
What "model buses" thing is this?
>> No. 95332 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 3:18 pm
95332 spacer
>>95331

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLcCZjDoWTQ
>> No. 95333 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 3:57 pm
95333 spacer
>>95330
I've just started it. Out of 12 pages, page 1 is the title and page 2 is "this page intentionally left blank". I should breeze through this.
>> No. 95334 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:00 pm
95334 spacer
Christ he's getting savaged at PMQs.

How much longer can he cling on from here, it's getting absurd.
>> No. 95335 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:04 pm
95335 spacer
Where the Hell were the media getting that inflated nonsense about what a big beast of Westminster Sue Gray supposedly was? They were making her out to be as fearsome and uncomprimising as the Spanish Inquisition two weeks ago, but it turns out she's basically a teaching assistant for grown men who never got over their public school days.
>> No. 95336 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:08 pm
95336 spacer
I can't stand to listen to his voice but it's worth it to hear the booing coming from both sides.
>> No. 95337 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:28 pm
95337 spacer
Ian Blackford was dismissed by the Speaker for refusing to withdraw the claim that the PM "misled the House". I can't think where Blackford got that idea from. It's not like the summary Sue Gray produced has directly contradicted multiple statements Boris made from the dispatch box or anything.
>> No. 95338 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:30 pm
95338 spacer
I'm slightly comforted by how many people are speaking eloquently and passionately against the Prime Minister, but I don't understand how we've sunk so low as a country to reach this point. I feel sullied by association with this mop-headed gobshite.
>> No. 95339 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:33 pm
95339 spacer

purple vagina.png
953399533995339
What's this thing some of the tories are wearing?
>> No. 95340 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:36 pm
95340 spacer
He's referring to the report so often it's reminding me of Father Jack shouting "that would be an ecumenical matter!" when the Bishops were visiting.
>> No. 95341 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:37 pm
95341 spacer

hmdt.jpg
953419534195341
>>95339
27 January is Holocaust Memorial Day.
>> No. 95342 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:52 pm
95342 spacer
What the flaming fuck is going on?
>> No. 95343 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:55 pm
95343 spacer
>>95337
I didn't watch it live, but the rule is you can't call someone a liar. The BBC live feed also said the Speaker gave him several opportunities to rephrase his allegation. So I think Bossman Ian the king of the Commons might have been asking to get thrown out so he could look hard in front of his mates. Although it does seem odd that you can't say someone's a liar even when it's been proven.
>> No. 95344 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 4:58 pm
95344 spacer
>>95339
>>95341
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-home-office-the-times-channel-government-b977106.html

Lol. Lmao.
>> No. 95345 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 5:00 pm
95345 spacer
Have emailed my MP asking him what it would take to get one of them to stand up and just tell Johnson, on behalf of his constituents, fuck off.
>> No. 95346 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 5:09 pm
95346 spacer
>>95345
Boris Johnson is an MP himself, of course. He has constituents too. I wonder if they have been emailing him such comments.
>> No. 95347 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 7:06 pm
95347 spacer
Apparently, the police investigation into the Ain't No Party Like A Conservative Party is expected to take "not more than a year". I'm starting to worry Boris will actually refuse to leave, like Donald Trump. He'll be dragged kicking and screaming out of Downing Street while telling reporters it's a conspiracy.
>> No. 95348 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 8:24 pm
95348 spacer
>>95337
>>95343
Here is a video: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-60205873

It's definitely a stunt. He's trying to get on the news. I still admire him hugely, but this is definitely a low point in an otherwise classy career.
>> No. 95349 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 8:42 pm
95349 spacer

Untitled.png
953499534995349
What will be the next scandal Boris will get away with by the hair of his bollocks?

>>95348
This isn't the first time the SNP has done this and won't be the last. Remember all that noise during EU Exit where the entire party left.
>> No. 95350 Anonymous
31st January 2022
Monday 8:48 pm
95350 spacer
>>95348
Obviously he's trying to get on the news, but I also think it's important that someone tell the PM to his face what he is, and he is a liar. I have no problem with what Blackford did.
>> No. 95351 Anonymous
1st February 2022
Tuesday 12:43 am
95351 spacer
>>95338
Oddly I feel he only gets more appropriate as time goes on. Having the view that our problems originate in the past 60 years rather than the last 6, there's something gratifying in watching others suddenly dragged into the madness, realising that the country's a mess and that they're powerless to do anything about it - even if they'll usually put a sting in their lamentations by wistfully remembering another time when our terrible politics seemed so normal and sensible and all the cabinets of overpromoted mediocrities were so well presented on TV.
>> No. 95352 Anonymous
1st February 2022
Tuesday 2:54 am
95352 spacer
>>95348

It may be a stunt, but he's far from unique. Dawn Butler did it last year and Dennis Skinner has done it more often than I can count. Personally, I think it's an appropriate protest in the circumstances; the Prime Minister dragged the house into the gutter yesterday and using the L-word was entirely justified.
>> No. 95353 Anonymous
1st February 2022
Tuesday 5:27 am
95353 spacer
>>95352
Speaking of Dennis Skinner, he was famously chucked out for accusing the Tory front bench of being coke fiends, but Boris got away with accusing the Labour frontbench of the same.
>> No. 95354 Anonymous
4th February 2022
Friday 10:51 am
95354 spacer

rats.jpg
<