I'm not the only person who works on the assumption that the Mail, whether on paper or on line is untrue unless backed up by two reliable and independent witnesses.
I absolutely get that Johnson is merely the boil on the buttock of modern Tory politics, but ISTM he is the first PM we've had who believes in absolutely nothing but his own advancement and gratification.
Famously David Cameron wanted to be PM because he 'thought he would be rather good at it'
And boy was he ever wrong. Yeah, Cameron was also pretty much a moral vacuum, though he does seem to have genuinely believed in continued EU membership, if only so he could keep going to those rather swish summit meetings.
Beat me to it.
But here's some thoughts about the PM's of my lifetime:
Thatcher.
Say what you like about Maggie and I could - and have - said plenty, she had a clear vision of what she believed was best for the nation Major
His government went nowhere- arguably due to a small majority and a party fatally divided by Europe. I would also argue that the economic issues at the start of his time was due to the failed philosophy of neoliberalism but he fought for peace in Northern Ireland and post his premiership he has repeatedly shown that he believes in doing what's right for the country. Blair
A decade of growth and rising living standards. But we have to talk about Iraq. I think it's hard to make a case that he didn't believe he was doing the right thing. It saddens me most that whilst I think nothing would have stopped Bush from going in after 9/11, I think Blair could have done more to prevent the disastrous aftermath. However from Kosova to Sierra Leone to Iraq to public sector services... he had a clear vision of what he thought was the best and right course. Brown
He is closest to my own political position so that might bias me somewhat but he again had a clear idea of what Britain could and should be. His management of the financial crisis and international leadership that prevented a world wide banking crisis was exemplary. History will be kind to him.
From what I've read he was impossible for those who had to work with him though. Cameron
DC had no vision and wasn't especially competent either. Slick PR and overconfidence and not a lot else. I'm sure his defenders would talk about saving the UK from becoming Greece. The only problem being that this is empirically false. There are some clear parallel with the current incumbent. May
Any serious look at her record as Home Secretary provides big clues as to what her Premiership would be like. The clues are there. For me, the biggest problem is that she believed that what was in the best interests of her party was also best for Britain.
Johnson is not a major aberration from the current Tory party, but he also has Trump lite narcissism.
YMMV of course but that whistle-stop tour is much more facts than opinion...
I'm not the only person who works on the assumption that the Mail, whether on paper or on line is untrue unless backed up by two reliable and independent witnesses.
I blame the Mail and its ilk for Brexshit, so much bullshit and misinformation shit through with thinly disguised racism.
The ownership of the mainstream media in the UK is concentrated in very few hands. They have had a hugely disproportionate effect on politics here in the U.K. It’s a sad state of affairs.
I’ve never visited the Mail website before and I’m amazed anyone ever does. It’s dreadful. Badly put together and hard to navigate. Smattered, as always, with anti EU tosh.
I'm not the only person who works on the assumption that the Mail, whether on paper or on line is untrue unless backed up by two reliable and independent witnesses.
I blame the Mail and its ilk for Brexshit, so much bullshit and misinformation shit through with thinly disguised racism.
The ownership of the mainstream media in the UK is concentrated in very few hands. They have had a hugely disproportionate effect on politics here in the U.K. It’s a sad state of affairs.
I’ve never visited the Mail website before and I’m amazed anyone ever does. It’s dreadful. Badly put together and hard to navigate. Smattered, as always, with anti EU tosh.
Something which Nicola was, naturally, far too polite to point out...
The scruffy git still doesn't fit into his suit - can't they find him a boiler suit, or a onesy?
The same St Nicola who want to suck up to the EU by letting them have our vacine supply
According to the story in the Mail, she has simply said she will make public the facts about Britain’s vaccine supplies, rather than hiding or attempting to hide them from the EU. The bit about “letting them have our vacine supply” has no basis in that story at all.
What is your source for that - both that it is our vaccine supply, and that she intends to let the EU have it?
Something which Nicola was, naturally, far too polite to point out...
The scruffy git still doesn't fit into his suit - can't they find him a boiler suit, or a onesy?
The same St Nicola who want to suck up to the EU by letting them have our vacine supply
According to the story in the Mail, she has simply said she will make public the facts about Britain’s vaccine supplies, rather than hiding or attempting to hide them from the EU. The bit about “letting them have our vacine supply” has no basis in that story at all.
What is your source for that - both that it is our vaccine supply, and that she intends to let the EU have it?
But here's some thoughts about the PM's of my lifetime:
Thatcher.
Say what you like about Maggie and I could - and have - said plenty, she had a clear vision of what she believed was best for the nation Major
His government went nowhere- arguably due to a small majority and a party fatally divided by Europe. I would also argue that the economic issues at the start of his time was due to the failed philosophy of neoliberalism but he fought for peace in Northern Ireland and post his premiership he has repeatedly shown that he believes in doing what's right for the country. Blair
A decade of growth and rising living standards. But we have to talk about Iraq. I think it's hard to make a case that he didn't believe he was doing the right thing. It saddens me most that whilst I think nothing would have stopped Bush from going in after 9/11, I think Blair could have done more to prevent the disastrous aftermath. However from Kosova to Sierra Leone to Iraq to public sector services... he had a clear vision of what he thought was the best and right course. Brown
He is closest to my own political position so that might bias me somewhat but he again had a clear idea of what Britain could and should be. His management of the financial crisis and international leadership that prevented a world wide banking crisis was exemplary. History will be kind to him.
From what I've read he was impossible for those who had to work with him though. Cameron
DC had no vision and wasn't especially competent either. Slick PR and overconfidence and not a lot else. I'm sure his defenders would talk about saving the UK from becoming Greece. The only problem being that this is empirically false. There are some clear parallel with the current incumbent. May
Any serious look at her record as Home Secretary provides big clues as to what her Premiership would be like. The clues are there. For me, the biggest problem is that she believed that what was in the best interests of her party was also best for Britain.
Johnson is not a major aberration from the current Tory party, but he also has Trump lite narcissism.
YMMV of course but that whistle-stop tour is much more facts than opinion...
AFZ
From this distance, I'd basically agree with you. Maggie Thatcher's policies were largely unacceptable (off the top of my head, I can't think of any that were even tolerable), but she had a clear vision of how to implement them and knew how to govern the country. She was a marked contrast to Cameron, May and BJ. Blair and Brown would have to be my personal favourites, Brown ahead of Blair largely because of Iraq and what followed. Major gets a big plus for his work towards getting peace in Northern Ireland; he did not get it but saw the process to the position where peace was all but inevitable. BJ would have to rank as one of the worst PMs since WW II, and I'd put him below Eden. Callaghan is the most tragic.
Something which Nicola was, naturally, far too polite to point out...
The scruffy git still doesn't fit into his suit - can't they find him a boiler suit, or a onesy?
The same St Nicola who want to suck up to the EU by letting them have our vacine supply
According to the story in the Mail, she has simply said she will make public the facts about Britain’s vaccine supplies, rather than hiding or attempting to hide them from the EU. The bit about “letting them have our vacine supply” has no basis in that story at all.
What is your source for that - both that it is our vaccine supply, and that she intends to let the EU have it?
But here's some thoughts about the PM's of my lifetime:
I think there's an argument to be made that the Cameron leadership represented the re-capture of the Tory party by traditional British elites (who had been somewhat sidelined from Thatcher onwards). The actual progress of the country since then has reflected their abilities in government ...
And today he is defying the travel ban and coming to Scotland. That will go well at the May elections (Scottish Parliament).
It probably wouldn't be too bad if it was just him. But, there'll be an entourage travelling with him, and a load of journalists descending on the places he visits to cover this. Someone local could have taken a laptop to the places he's going and he could visit via Zoom, the same as the rest of us have to.
Maybe he'll stop at the hotel at Gretna Services and quarantine for 2 weeks before entering the country.
He will not have left the UK
The point about quaranting maybe redundant, but if I got on a ferry and visited my family in Northern Ireland I wouldn't be leaving the UK either, and I certainly am not able to do that without potentially being prosecuted for breaking the law. But as we know, different rules for different people. I'm not an SNP kind of person, but Ms Sturgeon had a point when she said that if, according to government rules, she's not allowed to travel to Aberdeen from Edinburgh for a Covid test, isn't it kind of hard to justify a journey from Westminster to Livingston to have a photograph taken? (Well, okay I elaborated with the reference to the photograph, but it is accurate!)
Unless there's been an update that I've missed, moving across borders within the UK is meant to be for 'essential' purposes only. What, seriously, is 'essential' about the Prime Minister posing for PR shots in Scotland when he lives in England?
The excuse given (according to, amongst others, Gove) is that it was to show how Westminster is deeply involved in Scotland's reception and roll-out of the vaccination programme. Perhaps Westminster don't know that Scotland has the internet and TV? We really don't need to see - on our TV screens, ironically enough - a silly man playing dress-up in a lab coat pratting about with test vials to come to a conclusion about Johnson's contribution to the situation. He was in Livingston, apparently - he could've been in his own bathroom at home, for all the difference it made. Who is the better for Johnson's physical presence in Scotland? Has he been to Northern Ireland or Wales recently? The sub-text, suggested, is that it is Johnson's response to the idea that support for Independence has been growing in Scotland, since his administration began. Now that sounds a bit more likely.
If Johnson were capable of planning I'd say he wants to get rid of about fifty seats in Parliament that aren't going to vote Conservative any time soon.
No, I don't think that's fair. If I take the Mail report at face value (yes, I know, but go with it for a moment) then the implications are that AstraZeneca probably has some significant quantity of vaccine in its warehouse in the UK ready for distribution. Johnson wants to be cagey about the amount that they have on hand, because there's a fair amount there, and the EU would argue that AstraZeneca can easily use some of those doses to help meet its corporate obligations to the EU. Johnson wants those doses to stay in the UK to safeguard the UK's vaccine rollout against production problems in the UK plants.
Sturgeon wants to tell the EU exactly what AstraZeneca has in the warehouse, which if my supposition is correct, would clearly strengthen the EU position and weaken Johnson's position in this argument.
Telford's characterization contains a little hyperbole, and worst-case-scenarioism, but it's no more a lie than much of the other rhetoric that is spouted here by shipmates of other political stripes.
Do you have any evidence that while the UK governments get criticism for the vaccine roll-out being behind schedule, with clinics saying they can give more jags if there was vaccine available, that there's significant stock in warehouses?
And today he is defying the travel ban and coming to Scotland. That will go well at the May elections (Scottish Parliament).
It probably wouldn't be too bad if it was just him. But, there'll be an entourage travelling with him, and a load of journalists descending on the places he visits to cover this. Someone local could have taken a laptop to the places he's going and he could visit via Zoom, the same as the rest of us have to.
Maybe he'll stop at the hotel at Gretna Services and quarantine for 2 weeks before entering the country.
He will not have left the UK
The point about quaranting maybe redundant, but if I got on a ferry and visited my family in Northern Ireland I wouldn't be leaving the UK either, and I certainly am not able to do that without potentially being prosecuted for breaking the law. But as we know, different rules for different people. I'm not an SNP kind of person, but Ms Sturgeon had a point when she said that if, according to government rules, she's not allowed to travel to Aberdeen from Edinburgh for a Covid test, isn't it kind of hard to justify a journey from Westminster to Livingston to have a photograph taken? (Well, okay I elaborated with the reference to the photograph, but it is accurate!)
Unless there's been an update that I've missed, moving across borders within the UK is meant to be for 'essential' purposes only. What, seriously, is 'essential' about the Prime Minister posing for PR shots in Scotland when he lives in England?
The excuse given (according to, amongst others, Gove) is that it was to show how Westminster is deeply involved in Scotland's reception and roll-out of the vaccination programme. Perhaps Westminster don't know that Scotland has the internet and TV? We really don't need to see - on our TV screens, ironically enough - a silly man playing dress-up in a lab coat pratting about with test vials to come to a conclusion about Johnson's contribution to the situation. He was in Livingston, apparently - he could've been in his own bathroom at home, for all the difference it made. Who is the better for Johnson's physical presence in Scotland? Has he been to Northern Ireland or Wales recently? The sub-text, suggested, is that it is Johnson's response to the idea that support for Independence has been growing in Scotland, since his administration began. Now that sounds a bit more likely.
Something which Nicola was, naturally, far too polite to point out...
The scruffy git still doesn't fit into his suit - can't they find him a boiler suit, or a onesy?
The same St Nicola who want to suck up to the EU by letting them have our vacine supply
According to the story in the Mail, she has simply said she will make public the facts about Britain’s vaccine supplies, rather than hiding or attempting to hide them from the EU. The bit about “letting them have our vacine supply” has no basis in that story at all.
What is your source for that - both that it is our vaccine supply, and that she intends to let the EU have it?
I may have exaggerated a bit
The word is "lied".
My spelling and typing is often poor but not that bad
Do you have any evidence that while the UK governments get criticism for the vaccine roll-out being behind schedule, with clinics saying they can give more jags if there was vaccine available, that there's significant stock in warehouses?
No, of course not. But if there isn't a stock in the warehouse, then telling the EU that wouldn't damage Johnson's position - if anything, it would enhance it, and a rational Johnson (yeah, I know) would be happy to tell the EU that our cupboard was bare and we didn't have any spare.
And yes, I understand that Johnson and Sturgeon are engaging in a pissing contest that has nothing to do with vaccines, and rationality is not always the primary consideration.
Of course Boris is not content with killing people off unnecessarily (for which we know he's very sorry...) he is also continuing his assault on our democracy.
It seems to be clear that he's going to appoint Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom. For those of you who don't know, Dacre is just to the Left of Hitler and thinks Goebbels was far too worried about the truth.
He is a major reason why the Press Complaints Committee was such a pathetic failure.
The sooner Johnson fucks right off... how much more damage???
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
It seems to be clear that he's going to appoint Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom. For those of you who don't know, Dacre is just to the Left of Hitler and thinks Goebbels was far too worried about the truth.
He is a major reason why the Press Complaints Committee was such a pathetic failure.
The sooner Johnson fucks right off... how much more damage???
I suspect you'll be disappointed. There's a fairly significant wing of the Tory party who have tied their mast to the spite and cruelty strategy adopted by the press; this is why a former board member of the HJS is leading a review into Prevent and why Jessica Butcher and David Goodhart were appointed to the EHRC. You'll recall that it was Theresa May who gave Toby Young a place on the Office of Students.
I think we'll see more of the same; igniting a culture war is going to be a large part of the appeal of the right to their traditional base.
It seems to be clear that he's going to appoint Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom. For those of you who don't know, Dacre is just to the Left of Hitler and thinks Goebbels was far too worried about the truth.
He is a major reason why the Press Complaints Committee was such a pathetic failure.
The sooner Johnson fucks right off... how much more damage???
I suspect you'll be disappointed. There's a fairly significant wing of the Tory party who have tied their mast to the spite and cruelty strategy adopted by the press; this is why a former board member of the HJS is leading a review into Prevent and why Jessica Butcher and David Goodhart were appointed to the EHRC. You'll recall that it was Theresa May who gave Toby Young a place on the Office of Students.
I think we'll see more of the same; igniting a culture war is going to be a large part of the appeal of the right to their traditional base.
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
As is well known, the only opinion poll that counts is the one that happens at polling stations. The Conservatives and Labour have been running fairly close in the polls in the last few months. An election right now would probably be a close-run thing (2015 or 2017 rather than 2019) and it would be a bit of a tossup between Starmer and Johnson. In a couple of years, when the immediate aftermath of Covid and Brexit is more apparent, it will depend on public perception of those two things. I suspect Johnson's numbers will go down, but we'll see.
It seems to be clear that he's going to appoint Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom. For those of you who don't know, Dacre is just to the Left of Hitler and thinks Goebbels was far too worried about the truth.
He is a major reason why the Press Complaints Committee was such a pathetic failure.
The sooner Johnson fucks right off... how much more damage???
I suspect you'll be disappointed. There's a fairly significant wing of the Tory party who have tied their mast to the spite and cruelty strategy adopted by the press; this is why a former board member of the HJS is leading a review into Prevent and why Jessica Butcher and David Goodhart were appointed to the EHRC. You'll recall that it was Theresa May who gave Toby Young a place on the Office of Students.
I think we'll see more of the same; igniting a culture war is going to be a large part of the appeal of the right to their traditional base.
The Tories were 10 points ahead at the election, 20 points ahead immediately before Starmer was chosen as Labour leader, and things are now neck-and-neck. Those numbers don't make much of a defense of Corbyn. (ie. some combination of Starmer and Johnson have reduced the Tory lead over Labour by 20 points in the last year.)
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
Those figures are national, and given the state of the UK at the moment, it's even harder than usual to predict an outcome from them. The figures are very close, it's going to be on a seat-by-seat basis. Maybe even some tactical voting by LibDems and Greens to vote Labour in particular seats where those votes would make such a difference. (Or of course bring in preferential voting.)
Comments
Not sure what you mean - link, please?
I'm damned if I can be arsed to go chasing after what's probably a load of tory lies anyway.
BTW, you need to learn how to spell *vaccine* correctly.
The link is Mail on Line . 10 letters and 2 spaces
Beat me to it.
But here's some thoughts about the PM's of my lifetime:
Thatcher.
Say what you like about Maggie and I could - and have - said plenty, she had a clear vision of what she believed was best for the nation
Major
His government went nowhere- arguably due to a small majority and a party fatally divided by Europe. I would also argue that the economic issues at the start of his time was due to the failed philosophy of neoliberalism but he fought for peace in Northern Ireland and post his premiership he has repeatedly shown that he believes in doing what's right for the country.
Blair
A decade of growth and rising living standards. But we have to talk about Iraq. I think it's hard to make a case that he didn't believe he was doing the right thing. It saddens me most that whilst I think nothing would have stopped Bush from going in after 9/11, I think Blair could have done more to prevent the disastrous aftermath. However from Kosova to Sierra Leone to Iraq to public sector services... he had a clear vision of what he thought was the best and right course.
Brown
He is closest to my own political position so that might bias me somewhat but he again had a clear idea of what Britain could and should be. His management of the financial crisis and international leadership that prevented a world wide banking crisis was exemplary. History will be kind to him.
From what I've read he was impossible for those who had to work with him though.
Cameron
DC had no vision and wasn't especially competent either. Slick PR and overconfidence and not a lot else. I'm sure his defenders would talk about saving the UK from becoming Greece. The only problem being that this is empirically false. There are some clear parallel with the current incumbent.
May
Any serious look at her record as Home Secretary provides big clues as to what her Premiership would be like. The clues are there. For me, the biggest problem is that she believed that what was in the best interests of her party was also best for Britain.
Johnson is not a major aberration from the current Tory party, but he also has Trump lite narcissism.
YMMV of course but that whistle-stop tour is much more facts than opinion...
AFZ
Please stop being an arse. It is basic courtesy to link to that to which you are referring.
Otherwise expected people to show you the same respect you show the rest of us. Almost none.
AFZ
Genius.
Even Wiki* won't accept the Mail as a source...
AFZ
*Wikipedia is in my view unfairly maligned.** It really is remarkable.
**the Mail group is unfairly taken seriously. It really is remarkably bad at journalism.
You appear to be as bad as me at posting the right links.
I blame the Mail and its ilk for Brexshit, so much bullshit and misinformation shit through with thinly disguised racism.
The ownership of the mainstream media in the UK is concentrated in very few hands. They have had a hugely disproportionate effect on politics here in the U.K. It’s a sad state of affairs.
You don’t know how to make links, do you?
Here is the link - https://tinyurl.com/y27wtfql
I’ve never visited the Mail website before and I’m amazed anyone ever does. It’s dreadful. Badly put together and hard to navigate. Smattered, as always, with anti EU tosh.
Worryingly it's one of the most-visited 'news' websites in the world: https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/category/news-and-media/
Really? Are you being deliberately stupid? (Again?)
Go and stick your head in some compost, and see if you can grow yourself another brain-cell.
According to the story in the Mail, she has simply said she will make public the facts about Britain’s vaccine supplies, rather than hiding or attempting to hide them from the EU. The bit about “letting them have our vacine supply” has no basis in that story at all.
What is your source for that - both that it is our vaccine supply, and that she intends to let the EU have it?
If it weren't true, they wouldn't be allowed to print it.
Otherwise, why bring it up? Apart, that is, from the need to make this thread all about Telfordworld yet again...
Sometimes you can be really childish.
From this distance, I'd basically agree with you. Maggie Thatcher's policies were largely unacceptable (off the top of my head, I can't think of any that were even tolerable), but she had a clear vision of how to implement them and knew how to govern the country. She was a marked contrast to Cameron, May and BJ. Blair and Brown would have to be my personal favourites, Brown ahead of Blair largely because of Iraq and what followed. Major gets a big plus for his work towards getting peace in Northern Ireland; he did not get it but saw the process to the position where peace was all but inevitable. BJ would have to rank as one of the worst PMs since WW II, and I'd put him below Eden. Callaghan is the most tragic.
The word is "lied".
There's an old saying - *If you lie down with a dog, you rise up with fleas*.
I think there's an argument to be made that the Cameron leadership represented the re-capture of the Tory party by traditional British elites (who had been somewhat sidelined from Thatcher onwards). The actual progress of the country since then has reflected their abilities in government ...
Back to COVID; it appears that one of the current slogans run as part of the covid awareness campaign is "Look him in the eyes .. and tell him you really can't work from home", this contrasts with the governments message back in November. Of course, on the one hand it's absolutely wild that the government would think that the average employee has any control over whether they are being made to go in, on the other; it's fairly clear that this an entirely cynical move designed to blame the public for the deficiencies of the government.
The point about quaranting maybe redundant, but if I got on a ferry and visited my family in Northern Ireland I wouldn't be leaving the UK either, and I certainly am not able to do that without potentially being prosecuted for breaking the law. But as we know, different rules for different people. I'm not an SNP kind of person, but Ms Sturgeon had a point when she said that if, according to government rules, she's not allowed to travel to Aberdeen from Edinburgh for a Covid test, isn't it kind of hard to justify a journey from Westminster to Livingston to have a photograph taken? (Well, okay I elaborated with the reference to the photograph, but it is accurate!)
Unless there's been an update that I've missed, moving across borders within the UK is meant to be for 'essential' purposes only. What, seriously, is 'essential' about the Prime Minister posing for PR shots in Scotland when he lives in England?
The excuse given (according to, amongst others, Gove) is that it was to show how Westminster is deeply involved in Scotland's reception and roll-out of the vaccination programme. Perhaps Westminster don't know that Scotland has the internet and TV? We really don't need to see - on our TV screens, ironically enough - a silly man playing dress-up in a lab coat pratting about with test vials to come to a conclusion about Johnson's contribution to the situation. He was in Livingston, apparently - he could've been in his own bathroom at home, for all the difference it made. Who is the better for Johnson's physical presence in Scotland? Has he been to Northern Ireland or Wales recently? The sub-text, suggested, is that it is Johnson's response to the idea that support for Independence has been growing in Scotland, since his administration began. Now that sounds a bit more likely.
No, I don't think that's fair. If I take the Mail report at face value (yes, I know, but go with it for a moment) then the implications are that AstraZeneca probably has some significant quantity of vaccine in its warehouse in the UK ready for distribution. Johnson wants to be cagey about the amount that they have on hand, because there's a fair amount there, and the EU would argue that AstraZeneca can easily use some of those doses to help meet its corporate obligations to the EU. Johnson wants those doses to stay in the UK to safeguard the UK's vaccine rollout against production problems in the UK plants.
Sturgeon wants to tell the EU exactly what AstraZeneca has in the warehouse, which if my supposition is correct, would clearly strengthen the EU position and weaken Johnson's position in this argument.
Telford's characterization contains a little hyperbole, and worst-case-scenarioism, but it's no more a lie than much of the other rhetoric that is spouted here by shipmates of other political stripes.
My spelling and typing is often poor but not that bad
Good summary.
No, of course not. But if there isn't a stock in the warehouse, then telling the EU that wouldn't damage Johnson's position - if anything, it would enhance it, and a rational Johnson (yeah, I know) would be happy to tell the EU that our cupboard was bare and we didn't have any spare.
And yes, I understand that Johnson and Sturgeon are engaging in a pissing contest that has nothing to do with vaccines, and rationality is not always the primary consideration.
Indeed it is.
Alas, it is with a heavy heart that I have to say that I doubt if Bozzie has read it - let alone marked, learned, or inwardly digested it.
It seems to be clear that he's going to appoint Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom. For those of you who don't know, Dacre is just to the Left of Hitler and thinks Goebbels was far too worried about the truth.
He is a major reason why the Press Complaints Committee was such a pathetic failure.
The sooner Johnson fucks right off... how much more damage???
AFZ
Alas, I fear that we are likely to be saddled with Bozzie And The Chumocrats until the next General Election (if such things haven't been abolished by then).
I shan't see it. I'll probably be in a mass grave somewhere, covered with quicklime...
Not if I can help it.
Didn't he used to either own or edit the Daily Fail? Nuff said ...
I suspect you'll be disappointed. There's a fairly significant wing of the Tory party who have tied their mast to the spite and cruelty strategy adopted by the press; this is why a former board member of the HJS is leading a review into Prevent and why Jessica Butcher and David Goodhart were appointed to the EHRC. You'll recall that it was Theresa May who gave Toby Young a place on the Office of Students.
I think we'll see more of the same; igniting a culture war is going to be a large part of the appeal of the right to their traditional base.
Indeed. They are occassionally very opne about their intentions...
https://twitter.com/alienfromzog/status/1355962634093404163?s=20
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 41% (+4)
LAB: 38% (-3)
LDEM: 7% (+1)
GRN: 4% (-)
via @OpiniumResearch, 28 - 29 Jan
Chgs. w/ 15 Jan
...and from the same poll, who do you think would make the best Prime Minister?
Johnson 33 +4
Starmer 29 -3
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1355613132421558277?s=09
Oh, wait...
Yes, and Steve Baker is both highly religious and deeply connected with various dark money outfits from across the pond.
And your point is?
Those figures are national, and given the state of the UK at the moment, it's even harder than usual to predict an outcome from them. The figures are very close, it's going to be on a seat-by-seat basis. Maybe even some tactical voting by LibDems and Greens to vote Labour in particular seats where those votes would make such a difference. (Or of course bring in preferential voting.)