I'd stop it if I were you, MrMandid, you're not impressing anyone.
The only smart thing you've said here is that you'd expect to see a shift towards Labour before the next general election. I'm not a Labour voter but I certainly expect the see the same.
I also don't think we've seen the last of Boris's cock-ups. This is just the start.
You seem to be under the bizarre impression that I'm here to impress people. I'm not. If I make false comments or deliberately lie then fair enough. If you are worried about newbies such as myself offering a different perspective then that says more about the regular commentators here, not me. I've received a couple of personal messages of support saying that "I am wasting my time". And that may be the case, but I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and think that people are prepared to listen to and respond to alternative views. I may be wrong of course.
The ‘I’ve received personal messages supporting me’ routine is one of the oldest prevarications on the Internet, so please pardon me if I emit a ladylike snicker or two over that line.
As for your expressed (but thus far unsupported by the evidence) claim that, golly gee whiz, you’re just hoping to discuss differing views, we have a forum for that. It’s called Purgatory, and you are welcome to engage in reasoned discussion there. If you want to be a snot, this is the place, but be aware that there are limits.
I'd stop it if I were you, MrMandid, you're not impressing anyone.
The only smart thing you've said here is that you'd expect to see a shift towards Labour before the next general election. I'm not a Labour voter but I certainly expect the see the same.
I also don't think we've seen the last of Boris's cock-ups. This is just the start.
You seem to be under the bizarre impression that I'm here to impress people. I'm not. If I make false comments or deliberately lie then fair enough. If you are worried about newbies such as myself offering a different perspective then that says more about the regular commentators here, not me. I've received a couple of personal messages of support saying that "I am wasting my time". And that may be the case, but I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and think that people are prepared to listen to and respond to alternative views. I may be wrong of course.
The ‘I’ve received personal messages supporting me’ routine is one of the oldest prevarications on the Internet, so please pardon me if I emit a ladylike snicker or two over that line.
As for your expressed (but thus far unsupported by the evidence) claim that, golly gee whiz, you’re just hoping to discuss differing views, we have a forum for that. It’s called Purgatory, and you are welcome to engage in reasoned discussion there. If you want to be a snot, this is the place, but be aware that there are limits.
And it appears those limits are "don't disagree". Sorry, not buying it. It's a forum it's not a special ooooohhhh look at us we're so different and radical place. Your post is a code for "go away please, you're not saying OUR stuff". Sorry but that's just plain daft.
I’m in two minds. I am concerned that the Ship is at times an echo chamber, and that conservative voices (theological and political) are more of a minority.
But then, whenever we get new conservative voices, they’re the ones like this... or the other two with recent Hell threads.
The fact that one of our Admins, @Marvin the Martian is politically conservative, and is respected and loved by most of us, and that @Lamb Chopped, is one of the wisest people on the Ship, and a Republican, says that insightful conservative people can do well here. I wish there were more of those.
Having read the Hell heading and the guidelines, all my comments are well within them. Suck it up buttercups you have a non Boris hater, a non Tory basher. Deal with it.
I’m in two minds. I am concerned that the Ship is at times an echo chamber, and that conservative voices (theological and political) are more of a minority.
But then, whenever we get new conservative voices, they’re the ones like this... or the other two with recent Hell threads.
The fact that one of our Admins, @Marvin the Martian is politically conservative, and is respected and loved by most of us, and that @Lamb Chopped, is one of the wisest people on the Ship, and a Republican, says that insightful conservative people can do well here. I wish there were more of those.
I'd stop it if I were you, MrMandid, you're not impressing anyone.
The only smart thing you've said here is that you'd expect to see a shift towards Labour before the next general election. I'm not a Labour voter but I certainly expect the see the same.
I also don't think we've seen the last of Boris's cock-ups. This is just the start.
You seem to be under the bizarre impression that I'm here to impress people. I'm not. If I make false comments or deliberately lie then fair enough. If you are worried about newbies such as myself offering a different perspective then that says more about the regular commentators here, not me. I've received a couple of personal messages of support saying that "I am wasting my time". And that may be the case, but I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and think that people are prepared to listen to and respond to alternative views. I may be wrong of course.
The ‘I’ve received personal messages supporting me’ routine is one of the oldest prevarications on the Internet, so please pardon me if I emit a ladylike snicker or two over that line.
As for your expressed (but thus far unsupported by the evidence) claim that, golly gee whiz, you’re just hoping to discuss differing views, we have a forum for that. It’s called Purgatory, and you are welcome to engage in reasoned discussion there. If you want to be a snot, this is the place, but be aware that there are limits.
OK Mr M. Firstly you have not stopped commenting on Labour in the way you are accusing others commenting about The Conservatives.
Second you really have not discussed. Popularity is not the same as good, one does not lead to the other. Up till the point of the virus there were (and still are ) many voice raised in concern over how the Conservatives have dealt with public services etc due to austerity and even before. There are reasonable voices calling for a delay in Brexit. Boris is not listening.
I pointed out some of Boris’ big mistakes, you failed to comment. His suitability for being PM is not based on the vote. It is judged by his actions.
Having read the Hell heading and the guidelines, all my comments are well within them. Suck it up buttercups you have a non Boris hater, a non Tory basher. Deal with it.
[Hostly winged helmet ON:] @MrMandid, you don’t seem to have read far enough in the required literature, namely the Ship’s Ten Commandments. (A link may be found in the intro to the forums.) You are in violation of No. 8, “Don’t crusade.” All of your posts have been variations on a single theme, “Boris is right and good because election results.” Kindly cease and desist immediately. [/Hostly winged helmet OFF]
Having read the Hell heading and the guidelines, all my comments are well within them. Suck it up buttercups you have a non Boris hater, a non Tory basher. Deal with it.
Hey dood. This particular buttercup (or perhaps you'd prefer snowflake? Or, I dunno, "doll"?) is situated within spitting distance of literally as far from London as it is possible to get without going into space, so you can believe me when I say I have no dog of my own in this very English fight. But if you're getting a persecution complex because of the kinds of responses you're generating, I'd say that has less to do with the flavour of your politics than you think. It won't have nothing to do with your style (and for fuck's sake please stop saying do crack on, it makes you sound like Graham Chapman at his pipe-smoking-tweediest-slash-camp-judg-iest), but the big thing is that this is (as least far as the internet is concerned) a surprisingly permanent and stable community. I've been posting here since 2008, and I'm not one of the hallowed early few. People aren't taking you seriously because there is no reason to. We have all seen this blurting one-note over-enthusiastic wankery before at least a hundred times. It doesn't represent an attempt to engage, and it doesn't last. On the other hand, if you have other things to talk about, large or small, and you stick around for six months or so, people may very well conclude that you're a decent sort of chap or chap-ess and actually be interested in your opinions and your contributions and you become part of the community. My experience was that it took about that long. You may not feel that it's worth it. Whatever. Your call.
I've said this elsewhere, and people have disagreed with me for perfectly legitimate reasons, but I do think that, in the case of a daisy like Mr Mandid, the best thing to do is to ignore him completely.
He has nothing at all to say that we haven't heard before, ad nauseam.
I've said this elsewhere, and people have disagreed with me for perfectly legitimate reasons, but I do think that, in the case of a daisy like Mr Mandid, the best thing to do is to ignore him completely.
He has nothing at all to say that we haven't heard before, ad nauseam.
I'm always a bit torn on that one. Erin always insisted we shouldn't feed Trolls. I do think some kind of attempt to engage in good faith (even in Hell) is important. If, when it's been pointed out more than once that the issue is the style of posting rather than holding a differing position, the poster continues to be a jerk, well then, I've tried. I feel this is important because not all jerkiness is from Trolls - sometimes it's people genuinely trying to express themselves and struggling. Conversely, I think the pattern of boring repetition and refusing to engage with points raised - or even attempt to, proves the point.
I can believe he's had PMs supporting him. Probably from the likes of Deano who's a fellow fucknugget with a similar MO.
Well, there are other unbelievable statement he's posted. Do you really believe he ever stood as a Labour Party candidate? and, that there's anywhere in the UK that a Labour candidate wouldn't finish in the top four candidates within a constituency?
I can believe he's had PMs supporting him. Probably from the likes of Deano who's a fellow fucknugget with a similar MO.
Well, there are other unbelievable statement he's posted. Do you really believe he ever stood as a Labour Party candidate? and, that there's anywhere in the UK that a Labour candidate wouldn't finish in the top four candidates within a constituency?
I can believe he's had PMs supporting him. Probably from the likes of Deano who's a fellow fucknugget with a similar MO.
Well, there are other unbelievable statement he's posted. Do you really believe he ever stood as a Labour Party candidate? and, that there's anywhere in the UK that a Labour candidate wouldn't finish in the top four candidates within a constituency?
Maybe somewhere deep in toryshire there is a council election where they actually have a Labour candidate and they get beaten by UKIP, Green, tory and lib dem but it seems unlikely.
I've said this elsewhere, and people have disagreed with me for perfectly legitimate reasons, but I do think that, in the case of a daisy like Mr Mandid, the best thing to do is to ignore him completely.
He has nothing at all to say that we haven't heard before, ad nauseam.
I'm always a bit torn on that one. Erin always insisted we shouldn't feed Trolls. I do think some kind of attempt to engage in good faith (even in Hell) is important. If, when it's been pointed out more than once that the issue is the style of posting rather than holding a differing position, the poster continues to be a jerk, well then, I've tried. I feel this is important because not all jerkiness is from Trolls - sometimes it's people genuinely trying to express themselves and struggling. Conversely, I think the pattern of boring repetition and refusing to engage with points raised - or even attempt to, proves the point.
YMMV of course.
AFZ
Yes, fair comment - people do sometimes struggle with words! - which is why I reckon that, in the particular case of Mr Mandid, Labour Party Candidate (Failed), there is nowt to be gained by attempting to engage, as the LPC(F) is clearly trying to pull our strings for his own amusement.
Full marks, however, to all those of who you have at least tried to get through to him.
We seem to have had a few similar characters on board lately. Whatever happened to That*her*ight?
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
I can believe he's had PMs supporting him. Probably from the likes of Deano who's a fellow fucknugget with a similar MO.
Well, there are other unbelievable statement he's posted. Do you really believe he ever stood as a Labour Party candidate? and, that there's anywhere in the UK that a Labour candidate wouldn't finish in the top four candidates within a constituency?
Oh yes, I have! Came 7/7. Not a lie. Local election.
Some observations though, asked why I thought Boris was great I gave opinion as to why. Asked what I was personally doing to "help", gave answer. It's not ALL about trolling Labour losers and the "not got anything else to do but bash the Tories" brigade.
It is fun here though and amusing.
I can believe he's had PMs supporting him. Probably from the likes of Deano who's a fellow fucknugget with a similar MO.
Well, there are other unbelievable statement he's posted. Do you really believe he ever stood as a Labour Party candidate? and, that there's anywhere in the UK that a Labour candidate wouldn't finish in the top four candidates within a constituency?
Oh yes, I have! Came 7/7. Not a lie. Local election.
Local elections (particularly in England with very small wards) are prone to strange results. But, an arsehole, even one in the rosette of a major party, coming last isn't that strange.
Some observations though, asked why I thought Boris was great I gave opinion as to why.
He won an election and is considered popular are not opinions. We all acknowledge that - angrily and even petulantly, but we acknowledge it.
If you want to discuss why he is popular, and why he won the last election, then there are plenty of threads in Purgatory to explore that. Being a one-note poster has drawn you attention, but it's not the good kind. If you want to stick around and make a contribution, then do so. If you're just here for the lulz, you've picked the wrong website.
Having read the Hell heading and the guidelines, all my comments are well within them. Suck it up buttercups you have a non Boris hater, a non Tory basher. Deal with it.
Hey dood. This particular buttercup (or perhaps you'd prefer snowflake? Or, I dunno, "doll"?) is situated within spitting distance of literally as far from London as it is possible to get without going into space, so you can believe me when I say I have no dog of my own in this very English fight. But if you're getting a persecution complex because of the kinds of responses you're generating, I'd say that has less to do with the flavour of your politics than you think. It won't have nothing to do with your style (and for fuck's sake please stop saying do crack on, it makes you sound like Graham Chapman at his pipe-smoking-tweediest-slash-camp-judg-iest), but the big thing is that this is (as least far as the internet is concerned) a surprisingly permanent and stable community. I've been posting here since 2008, and I'm not one of the hallowed early few. People aren't taking you seriously because there is no reason to. We have all seen this blurting one-note over-enthusiastic wankery before at least a hundred times. It doesn't represent an attempt to engage, and it doesn't last. On the other hand, if you have other things to talk about, large or small, and you stick around for six months or so, people may very well conclude that you're a decent sort of chap or chap-ess and actually be interested in your opinions and your contributions and you become part of the community. My experience was that it took about that long. You may not feel that it's worth it. Whatever. Your call.
Nothing wrong with pipe smoking or tweed. Or being camp. And from what I can see being judgey is de rigueur, particularly against Boris.
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit.
Shame he offered a referendum and then delivered a meaningless vote without a defined question. If he'd made sure we had a proper referendum we almost certainly wouldn't be in the total calamity we're currently in (in relation to EU membership ... we could still be in a covid related calamity because that's not directly related although the response by our so-called government to the pandemic shares similar amateurish characteristics; a failure to consider it a serious issue that will take a lot of time and effort to work through, a dismissal of those with expertise, a preference for slogans over concrete policy and action.
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Wow. An actual argument...
So, I'll play
1) Do you yet acknowledge that you contradicted yourself when you said that Boris was the 3rd best (after Churchill and Thatcher) but the only measure of a Prime Minister is electoral success? (As has been documented, Mr Churchill did not enjoy much in the way of electoral success)
2) Are you now stated that you support Mr Johnson because of Brexit?
Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit.
Shame he offered a referendum and then delivered a meaningless vote without a defined question. If he'd made sure we had a proper referendum we almost certainly wouldn't be in the total calamity we're currently in (in relation to EU membership ... we could still be in a covid related calamity because that's not directly related although the response by our so-called government to the pandemic shares similar amateurish characteristics; a failure to consider it a serious issue that will take a lot of time and effort to work through, a dismissal of those with expertise, a preference for slogans over concrete policy and action.
I disagree I think the shame was that Cameron thought a referendum over EU membership would go in his direction. So, I certainly would say the unpreparedness for a leave vote that he resigned over and May failed on were in the amateurish column. But the electorate had the chance to vote for a political party who were offering a referendum and they did. The remain part of the Conservative Party then didnt know what to do and saw their majority disappear. Step in Boris with his let's get Brexit done message and he gets a whopping 80 seat majority.
And, in other news. Several Conservative MPs, including a government minister, re-tweet far-right misleading propoganda. We all await the Prime Minister taking suitable action to discipline members of his own party. Otherwise we'll need to take up a campaign for the Conservatives to root out the far-right from their ranks, similar to the calls for Jeremy Corbyn to take more action against antisemitism within Labour (which involved less senior members of the party, and were much less worrying than the more wide-ranging antisemitism, islamophobia and racism of the far right).
And, in other news. Several Conservative MPs, including a government minister, re-tweet far-right misleading propoganda. We all await the Prime Minister taking suitable action to discipline members of his own party. Otherwise we'll need to take up a campaign for the Conservatives to root out the far-right from their ranks, similar to the calls for Jeremy Corbyn to take more action against antisemitism within Labour (which involved less senior members of the party, and were much less worrying than the more wide-ranging antisemitism, islamophobia and racism of the far right).
I felt that deserved a Hell thread all of its own.
And, in other news. Several Conservative MPs, including a government minister, re-tweet far-right misleading propoganda. We all await the Prime Minister taking suitable action to discipline members of his own party. Otherwise we'll need to take up a campaign for the Conservatives to root out the far-right from their ranks, similar to the calls for Jeremy Corbyn to take more action against antisemitism within Labour (which involved less senior members of the party, and were much less worrying than the more wide-ranging antisemitism, islamophobia and racism of the far right).
I felt that deserved a Hell thread all of its own.
It really does. I find myself rolling my eyes (This is hardly out of character) at the same time as being deeply angry that this kind of dishonesty (much like the £350m claim and the doctored videos used in the election campaign) have been mainstreamed (is that a verb?) by Johnson (among others).
I guess I am shocked without being surprised. I.e. it is deeply shocking and not remotely acceptable. Conversely it is also routine for this bunch of feckless populists. Who won a referendum and an election (Just in case Mr M thought I'd forgotten....)
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Corbyn wasn't elected leader until after the 2015 election. I'm a bit confused though. You like Boris, who has brought the hard right into government (remember Britannia Unchained?) with him, because you think he'll help move the country back to "the centre"? How exactly are you defining this "centre"?
And, in other news. Several Conservative MPs, including a government minister, re-tweet far-right misleading propoganda. We all await the Prime Minister taking suitable action to discipline members of his own party. Otherwise we'll need to take up a campaign for the Conservatives to root out the far-right from their ranks, similar to the calls for Jeremy Corbyn to take more action against antisemitism within Labour (which involved less senior members of the party, and were much less worrying than the more wide-ranging antisemitism, islamophobia and racism of the far right).
I felt that deserved a Hell thread all of its own.
Yes, the particular MPs who shared that tweet deserve their own Hell thread. My thoughts here were that the PM needs to take particular action to discipline them, more than just a rebuke by the whips (after all, the Tories were more than happy to join in saying that rebukes for antisemitism in Labour were inadequate and Mr Corbyn needed to take strong action).
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Corbyn wasn't elected leader until after the 2015 election. I'm a bit confused though. You like Boris, who has brought the hard right into government (remember Britannia Unchained?) with him, because you think he'll help move the country back to "the centre"? How exactly are you defining this "centre"?
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I had a Horrid Thought, just for a moment, that the toryshire council @Arethosemyfeet was thinking of might have been my local area.
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Wow. An actual argument...
So, I'll play
1) Do you yet acknowledge that you contradicted yourself when you said that Boris was the 3rd best (after Churchill and Thatcher) but the only measure of a Prime Minister is electoral success? (As has been documented, Mr Churchill did not enjoy much in the way of electoral success)
2) Are you now stated that you support Mr Johnson because of Brexit?
AFZ
Personally I think that Boris is a good PM because (and I'm sure I've said this before) he kept Corbyn out of power, united the Tory Party (over Brexit) and is leading a direction (bar all this covid-19 stuff) that I broadly approve of. Naturally others will have a completely different view and think he is a shit of the highest order. I should have included Blair in that list though, I should have said that I think the 4 best PM's in the last 80 years have been Thatcher, Blair, Churchill and Boris. My bad.
I think part of my support for Johnson certainly involves Brexit yes.
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
There is a whole board dedicated to Serious Discussion. If you want Serious Discussion, as opposed to rants about that floppy haired, bloody handed cockwomble, take them there.
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
I'm not going to get into a lengthy discussion about Brexit, that has been done to death so it appears here, and elsewhere. Suffice to say that short term pain is sometimes required for long term gain.
With regard to the golden mean, is it a fallacy? History demonstrates that the most significantly unpleasant regimes are those that follow an extreme path. But as I said in my summary - democratic. If the majority want to be ruled by idealists then so be it.
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
Stability, to me, is not a goal in itself. If the status quo is harming huge numbers of people, and it is, then change is essential.
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
@MrMandid since joining, apart from your disastrous maiden Hell thread, you've made just one post on one other thread, otherwise it's all here. This is not good.
You have now had a host warning about crusading, which is a breach of Commandment 8. We take these things seriously around here.
If your presence here is confined to a single thread focusing essentially on a single topic and banging a single drum, it will not last much longer.
Something slipped a few posts back and there was actually the makings of some intelligent discussion there. That's great, but a) intelligent discussion belongs in Purgatory b) we expect people to interact on more than one topic here. Get out on this forum more, and show us what you have to contribute. You're entitled to your opinions, provided you can provide adequate support for them. Now stop being a jerk and start to behave yourself.
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
Stability, to me, is not a goal in itself. If the status quo is harming huge numbers of people, and it is, then change is essential.
When you say the status quo is harming huge numbers of people and it is. Can you give a number of people that are being harmed, show the evidence and then outline what specific essential changes that are required, and how they will be achieved via our democratic process.
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
@MrMandid since joining, apart from your disastrous maiden Hell thread, you've made just one post on one other thread, otherwise it's all here. This is not good.
You have now had a host warning about crusading, which is a breach of Commandment 8. We take these things seriously around here.
If your presence here is confined to a single thread focusing essentially on a single topic and banging a single drum, it will not last much longer.
Something slipped a few posts back and there was actually the makings of some intelligent discussion there. That's great, but a) intelligent discussion belongs in Purgatory b) we expect people to interact on more than one topic here. Get out on this forum more, and show us what you have to contribute. You're entitled to your opinions, provided you can provide adequate support for them. Now stop being a jerk and start to behave yourself.
/admin mode
Hi, I have posted on the Keir Starmer thread in purgatory, on a heaven post and started a theological discussion in purgatory too. Today the conversation here has seemed to have moved onto a more general discussion of politics and approaches to them and conservatism in general whilst remaining close to the theme.
Ive moved away from opinion polls and election results to answering questions fairly and reasonably, discussing centralism as a political idea, the golden mean as an idea, and alternative approaches.
So when I was a troll and baited that was wrong. Now I am trying to discuss fairly and reasonably thats wrong too? I'd actually ask who is the real jerk?
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
Stability, to me, is not a goal in itself. If the status quo is harming huge numbers of people, and it is, then change is essential.
When you say the status quo is harming huge numbers of people and it is. Can you give a number of people that are being harmed, show the evidence and then outline what specific essential changes that are required, and how they will be achieved via our democratic process.
That's a stunningly easy question to answer. There's very robust data on austerity, or the effects of stupid policies like universal credit etc. etc.
But let's take a look at Covid-19. I can't believe I'm linking to the Daily Mail but even they're reporting the science here: Imposing Lockdown 2 weeks earlier could have prevented 80% of deaths. Even if we accept that such modelling will have large confidence intervals, the nature of exponential growth means we are inevitably talking about Tens of thousands of deaths
In January, scientists in the UK began working on a vaccine. In February and early March the catastrophe in Spain and Italy was evident.
Good and decisive leadership would have made a difference.
So in a very direct way, that is tens of thousands of people being harmed by our government.
He may have won an election but it remains a terrible, terrible Prime Minister.
Comments
As for your expressed (but thus far unsupported by the evidence) claim that, golly gee whiz, you’re just hoping to discuss differing views, we have a forum for that. It’s called Purgatory, and you are welcome to engage in reasoned discussion there. If you want to be a snot, this is the place, but be aware that there are limits.
And it appears those limits are "don't disagree". Sorry, not buying it. It's a forum it's not a special ooooohhhh look at us we're so different and radical place. Your post is a code for "go away please, you're not saying OUR stuff". Sorry but that's just plain daft.
But then, whenever we get new conservative voices, they’re the ones like this... or the other two with recent Hell threads.
The fact that one of our Admins, @Marvin the Martian is politically conservative, and is respected and loved by most of us, and that @Lamb Chopped, is one of the wisest people on the Ship, and a Republican, says that insightful conservative people can do well here. I wish there were more of those.
Like this? Please explain.
Thousands of pounds. I buy PPE with it then roll on it rather than distribute it to those in need, being a Tory and all ;-)
Ooh, I know this one! It's a song. "The Lurkers Support Me in Email"
Second you really have not discussed. Popularity is not the same as good, one does not lead to the other. Up till the point of the virus there were (and still are ) many voice raised in concern over how the Conservatives have dealt with public services etc due to austerity and even before. There are reasonable voices calling for a delay in Brexit. Boris is not listening.
I pointed out some of Boris’ big mistakes, you failed to comment. His suitability for being PM is not based on the vote. It is judged by his actions.
Hey dood. This particular buttercup (or perhaps you'd prefer snowflake? Or, I dunno, "doll"?) is situated within spitting distance of literally as far from London as it is possible to get without going into space, so you can believe me when I say I have no dog of my own in this very English fight. But if you're getting a persecution complex because of the kinds of responses you're generating, I'd say that has less to do with the flavour of your politics than you think. It won't have nothing to do with your style (and for fuck's sake please stop saying do crack on, it makes you sound like Graham Chapman at his pipe-smoking-tweediest-slash-camp-judg-iest), but the big thing is that this is (as least far as the internet is concerned) a surprisingly permanent and stable community. I've been posting here since 2008, and I'm not one of the hallowed early few. People aren't taking you seriously because there is no reason to. We have all seen this blurting one-note over-enthusiastic wankery before at least a hundred times. It doesn't represent an attempt to engage, and it doesn't last. On the other hand, if you have other things to talk about, large or small, and you stick around for six months or so, people may very well conclude that you're a decent sort of chap or chap-ess and actually be interested in your opinions and your contributions and you become part of the community. My experience was that it took about that long. You may not feel that it's worth it. Whatever. Your call.
He has nothing at all to say that we haven't heard before, ad nauseam.
I'm always a bit torn on that one. Erin always insisted we shouldn't feed Trolls. I do think some kind of attempt to engage in good faith (even in Hell) is important. If, when it's been pointed out more than once that the issue is the style of posting rather than holding a differing position, the poster continues to be a jerk, well then, I've tried. I feel this is important because not all jerkiness is from Trolls - sometimes it's people genuinely trying to express themselves and struggling. Conversely, I think the pattern of boring repetition and refusing to engage with points raised - or even attempt to, proves the point.
YMMV of course.
AFZ
Does sound unlikely, doesn't it?
Maybe somewhere deep in toryshire there is a council election where they actually have a Labour candidate and they get beaten by UKIP, Green, tory and lib dem but it seems unlikely.
Yes, fair comment - people do sometimes struggle with words! - which is why I reckon that, in the particular case of Mr Mandid, Labour Party Candidate (Failed), there is nowt to be gained by attempting to engage, as the LPC(F) is clearly trying to pull our strings for his own amusement.
Full marks, however, to all those of who you have at least tried to get through to him.
We seem to have had a few similar characters on board lately. Whatever happened to That*her*ight?
(That was a rhetorical question, BTW).
Not so - on looking back at last year's election results (O! So long ago! Back in the dear, dead days, beyond recall!), I see that our two new councillors were from the tory party, and the Labour party. The others came nowhere near...
...but it may be that there was some peculiar place, in deepest toryshire, where the Labour candidate was outrun by the others. Yes, unlikely - but not impossible.
Maybe that's what turned Mr Mandid into a raving loony Boris fan? The thought that only by jumping onto the Boris Bus was Success™ to be somehow, somewhere, achieved?
Ex-Admin. I quit a few months ago. Thanks for the love though 😁
Oh yes, I have! Came 7/7. Not a lie. Local election.
It is fun here though and amusing.
Sadly, though, some of the arseholes come first...
He won an election and is considered popular are not opinions. We all acknowledge that - angrily and even petulantly, but we acknowledge it.
If you want to discuss why he is popular, and why he won the last election, then there are plenty of threads in Purgatory to explore that. Being a one-note poster has drawn you attention, but it's not the good kind. If you want to stick around and make a contribution, then do so. If you're just here for the lulz, you've picked the wrong website.
Nothing wrong with pipe smoking or tweed. Or being camp. And from what I can see being judgey is de rigueur, particularly against Boris.
Actually I moved from being a Labour supporter and voter in 2010 after Corbyn was elected leader. Cameron was average but got my support for offering a referendum on Brexit. May I thought was hopeless. Boris warmed in my affections by uniting the Tory Party in favour of implementing Brexit and then ensuring the left wing of the Labour Party didn't form a government, which in turn has seen a shift in Labour towards the centre. If (or when) they shift a little bit further to the middle and have a leader such as Dan Jarvis I think i'll probably revert back to Labour. So, I like Boris mostly because I think he will help move the country to the centre.
Wow. An actual argument...
So, I'll play
1) Do you yet acknowledge that you contradicted yourself when you said that Boris was the 3rd best (after Churchill and Thatcher) but the only measure of a Prime Minister is electoral success? (As has been documented, Mr Churchill did not enjoy much in the way of electoral success)
2) Are you now stated that you support Mr Johnson because of Brexit?
AFZ
I disagree I think the shame was that Cameron thought a referendum over EU membership would go in his direction. So, I certainly would say the unpreparedness for a leave vote that he resigned over and May failed on were in the amateurish column. But the electorate had the chance to vote for a political party who were offering a referendum and they did. The remain part of the Conservative Party then didnt know what to do and saw their majority disappear. Step in Boris with his let's get Brexit done message and he gets a whopping 80 seat majority.
MMM
I felt that deserved a Hell thread all of its own.
It really does. I find myself rolling my eyes (This is hardly out of character) at the same time as being deeply angry that this kind of dishonesty (much like the £350m claim and the doctored videos used in the election campaign) have been mainstreamed (is that a verb?) by Johnson (among others).
I guess I am shocked without being surprised. I.e. it is deeply shocking and not remotely acceptable. Conversely it is also routine for this bunch of feckless populists. Who won a referendum and an election (Just in case Mr M thought I'd forgotten....)
AFZ
Corbyn wasn't elected leader until after the 2015 election. I'm a bit confused though. You like Boris, who has brought the hard right into government (remember Britannia Unchained?) with him, because you think he'll help move the country back to "the centre"? How exactly are you defining this "centre"?
Sorry, poorly worded. I voted Labour 2010, was mostly indifferent during the coalition years and abandoned Labour when Corbyn became leader.
I don't think Boris is "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination, I consider him a one nation conservative. I think if there was a hard right conservative govt rather than a pragmatic mix the opposition would be hard left which would polarise the nation.
For me centralist is exemplified by individuals like Dan Jarvis and on domestic policy people like Blair.
Personally I think that Boris is a good PM because (and I'm sure I've said this before) he kept Corbyn out of power, united the Tory Party (over Brexit) and is leading a direction (bar all this covid-19 stuff) that I broadly approve of. Naturally others will have a completely different view and think he is a shit of the highest order. I should have included Blair in that list though, I should have said that I think the 4 best PM's in the last 80 years have been Thatcher, Blair, Churchill and Boris. My bad.
I think part of my support for Johnson certainly involves Brexit yes.
I don't think Johnson is hard right either. I think he's a Groucho Marxist. The people he has brought into government are hard right, unless you think Britannia Unchained describes a centrist (not centralist, that implies centralising) vision. Blair's domestic policy covers quite a wide range. There's not necessarily a clear link between supporting the creation of SureStart, devolving power to Scotland and Wales, centralising power within England over education, shifting the burden of funding Higher Education to students, shifting the balance of taxation in favour of indirect taxes and away from progressive direct taxes. How would you summarise "centrism" and why do you consider it to be a good thing?
There is a whole board dedicated to Serious Discussion. If you want Serious Discussion, as opposed to rants about that floppy haired, bloody handed cockwomble, take them there.
Go. Go now. Do not look back.
Not read Britannia Unchained so not able to comment on that.
I think overall that there is a wide range of opinion and view regarding politics - and of course extremes. Central, centralism, whatever I believe leads to stability, is it "good", well define that! I personally prefer it to the alternatives.
I favour as close to a functioning society as we can get given we are all flawed. Only the Kingdom of God will give utopia, so go the middle course until that happens.
Summary of centrism (mine): a non ideologically driven system of government that is mostly pragmatic, agrees and promotes some degree of interventionism, is broadly utilitarianist, democratic and balances the sometimes competing issues of state dependency with individual liberty and choice.
If you're in favour of stability why on earth would you support the huge upheaval involved in Brexit? As to the best path being the middle one isn't that simply the fallacy of the golden mean?
I'm not going to get into a lengthy discussion about Brexit, that has been done to death so it appears here, and elsewhere. Suffice to say that short term pain is sometimes required for long term gain.
With regard to the golden mean, is it a fallacy? History demonstrates that the most significantly unpleasant regimes are those that follow an extreme path. But as I said in my summary - democratic. If the majority want to be ruled by idealists then so be it.
As an add on, and of course I have no idea how you voted at the last GE, but if stability is something you too also favour why would anyone vote for a socialist as PM?
Stability, to me, is not a goal in itself. If the status quo is harming huge numbers of people, and it is, then change is essential.
@MrMandid since joining, apart from your disastrous maiden Hell thread, you've made just one post on one other thread, otherwise it's all here. This is not good.
You have now had a host warning about crusading, which is a breach of Commandment 8. We take these things seriously around here.
If your presence here is confined to a single thread focusing essentially on a single topic and banging a single drum, it will not last much longer.
Something slipped a few posts back and there was actually the makings of some intelligent discussion there. That's great, but a) intelligent discussion belongs in Purgatory b) we expect people to interact on more than one topic here. Get out on this forum more, and show us what you have to contribute. You're entitled to your opinions, provided you can provide adequate support for them. Now stop being a jerk and start to behave yourself.
/admin mode
When you say the status quo is harming huge numbers of people and it is. Can you give a number of people that are being harmed, show the evidence and then outline what specific essential changes that are required, and how they will be achieved via our democratic process.
Hi, I have posted on the Keir Starmer thread in purgatory, on a heaven post and started a theological discussion in purgatory too. Today the conversation here has seemed to have moved onto a more general discussion of politics and approaches to them and conservatism in general whilst remaining close to the theme.
Ive moved away from opinion polls and election results to answering questions fairly and reasonably, discussing centralism as a political idea, the golden mean as an idea, and alternative approaches.
So when I was a troll and baited that was wrong. Now I am trying to discuss fairly and reasonably thats wrong too? I'd actually ask who is the real jerk?
As pointed out, there's nothing wrong with fair and reasonable discussion, but this is not the place to have it. Purgatory is.
Moreover, failing to respect the Crew acting in that capacity is a Commandment 6 breach.
Commandment 6 also states that any posts disputing a Crew ruling belong in the Styx.
You indicated earlier that you were familiar with the 10Cs. Now's the time to demonstrate that, and by now I mean now now.
/admin mode.
That's a stunningly easy question to answer. There's very robust data on austerity, or the effects of stupid policies like universal credit etc. etc.
But let's take a look at Covid-19. I can't believe I'm linking to the Daily Mail but even they're reporting the science here: Imposing Lockdown 2 weeks earlier could have prevented 80% of deaths. Even if we accept that such modelling will have large confidence intervals, the nature of exponential growth means we are inevitably talking about Tens of thousands of deaths
In January, scientists in the UK began working on a vaccine. In February and early March the catastrophe in Spain and Italy was evident.
Good and decisive leadership would have made a difference.
So in a very direct way, that is tens of thousands of people being harmed by our government.
He may have won an election but it remains a terrible, terrible Prime Minister.
AFZ