Hands Up - Who backed Boris Johnson?

Totally get what you’re saying. She would be a total nightmare but like or loathe even Truss has more presence on the international stage than Sir Keir. Good policy on private schools, but he needs more, particularly on foreign policy. Now Brexit is here he would have to lead Great Britain not little England. I would love to see him have a go at the job to see if I’m wrong because I’m far from convinced at the moment.

I’m sorry, but in this thread you’ve said boris Johnson had respect internationally, and Liz Truss has presence on the international stage. I think you’ve got a misunderstanding of how the international political community view our ‘leading’ politicians.
 
Many did. At least a few have held their hands up admitting to a mistake since however.
You wouldn`t have thought it given he was hammered every time he even thought to post on a Political Thread.

Pretty sure on more than one occasion his name was mentioned even though he hadn`t even posted.

A few hands held up indeed, just hope the damage done is repairable and they are now on board for a change, not only in who governs this country but how that Party gets to govern.
 
Just a minor quibble here.

The "red wall" refers (politically) to those areas that 'should' vote Tory but don't (e.g. affluent areas of the Midlands). The media have begun using it to refer to the North-East as a short-hand convenience but it now means we're using the same phrase to describe diametrically opposed groups - those that 'should' vote Tory but don't vs those that 'shouldn't' vote Tory but do.

It's not quite at 'woke' levels of language-abuse but it's unhelpful.

Here endeth the whinge.
The ‘red wall’ is just lazymedia talk
Just look at Hartlepool ‘solid labour territory’
It missed going blue under Thatcher my a few hundred votes
 
Part of the justification for voting Conservative is usually what Corbyn might have done.

It’s very odd isn’t it.
We knew what Johnson had done (which by most objective standards made him unfit to lead a country).
But, people said ‘yeah I know that - but Corbyn ‘might’ do x’
 
I’m sorry, but in this thread you’ve said boris Johnson had respect internationally, and Liz Truss has presence on the international stage. I think you’ve got a misunderstanding of how the international political community view our ‘leading’ politicians.
Not at all, if anything the misunderstanding is yours (assuming my opinion is as valid is yours). Like it or not they are respected. Probably because other international leaders are sympathetic to the challenges every country has faced over the last couple of years, and continue to face. I work internationally and hear this all the time. I also tend to avoid extremist echo chambers, where its impossible to get a balanced view. Obviously this board being the exception. I should maybe stick to the non-politico threads....
 
What on earth did people expect when they voted for him? Those talking about the last 12 months - jaysus.

Here are a few highlights of what was in the public domain about the leader of the Conservative party when you/they voted for him (and dont you just love those who say I voted Conservation and not for Johnson)

Sacked for lying twice
4 possibly 5 children sired to other women whilst in a relationship
Jennifer Accuri - cash for sex
Homophobic language
Misogynist language
Racist language
Offered to get an address of a journo so his friend could get him beaten up
Cheated on his wife whilst she was having cancer treatment

Nice eh?
People voted for Blair when he was responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands in Iraq. Johnson seems pretty small fry compared to this.
 
WIkipedia is a great source of information but it isn't an authority (it also says the same thng about the original definition in the Demographics section).

I wasn't wanting to have a dig, mind. I just see this being used more and more (and I'm pretty sure it's a Tory/Media spin thing - much like the "they left a note saying they'd spent all the money").

The guy who coined the phrase has a decent thread explaining the point behind it here:
Sorry all, I wasn't trying to derail the thread, honest!
 
IOF: that 90% of the benefit would be absorbed by the govt., not workers; the de facto increase in Corporation Tax to 30%; and the impact on inward investment.
IOF? Are we talking finance transaction tax there? What does "the benefit being absorbed by the government" mean in that context (assuming that's what you're getting at)?

The whole point is to add regulation to the casino-style trading we've seen in the past couple of decades. It disproportionately affects the wealthy, not the workers.

Corporation Tax is a minnow compared to the effects of a hard-Brexit on inward investment. Even more reason to have voted for Corbyn's vision, surely?
 
Like it or not they are respected. Probably because other international leaders are sympathetic to the challenges every country has faced over the last couple of years, and continue to face. I work internationally and hear this all the time. I also tend to avoid extremist echo chambers, where its impossible to get a balanced view. Obviously this board being the exception. I should maybe stick to the non-politico threads....

We’ll have to agree to disagree.
You contribute to plenty of politico threads. In a large proportion, from memory, you bring up some thinly veiled criticism of Labour or ‘KS’. Even if the thread isn’t necessarily about Labour or ‘KS’.
You also frequently refer to this forum as a leftist echo chamber.
If not that, then you are over egging the odd catastrophic Tory, such as can be found on this thread.
Anyway, your opinion is, of course, as valid as mine, assuming you aren’t being disingenuous.
 
I also tend to avoid extremist echo chambers, where its impossible to get a balanced view. Obviously this board being the exception.

This board isn't an echo chamber. There's no algorithm at play to show you messages you'll like and agree with. You just see everything that's been posted whichever thread you click on.

You're disagreeing with someone in the same post that you're declaring this place an echo chamber! 🤣🤷‍♂️
 
People voted for Blair when he was responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands in Iraq. Johnson seems pretty small fry compared to this.

30000 elderly sent to their death in care homes by intentionally sending un vaxed covid sufferers from hospital to infect them
v
Fighting a war that most at the time (not me btw) thought was just.
 
People voted for Blair when he was responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands in Iraq. Johnson seems pretty small fry compared to this.
I don't know about small fry. We shouldn't belittle Johnson's achievements in the "unnecessary deaths" category. Does anyone really doubt he said "let the bodies pile high"?

But yes, people shouldn't have voted for Blair. It's the same principle, if your government or PM crosses a line then you should vote to kick them out of office IMO. Otherwise you're endorsing those actions or that behaviour.
 
a very interesting take on who will be the next leader of the money/nasty party.

I'm not optimistic in the slightest on the future largely for the reasons laid out in the documentary.

'You could get a story in any paper about Corbyn pre the 2019 election whether it was true or not but .........he couldn't get his article exposing Johnson as a liar printed anywhere'
 
People have every right to vote how they wish and should not face abuse or recrimination for the box they choose to cross, I, and plenty of others on this forum would condemn and pull up behaviour of that kind.

2019 was a strange election in that a man with who was genuinely seen as a security risk by MI6 due to his several unsolicited off the record meetings with foreign persons of interest, a man who had lost several jobs because of his dishonesty and his inability to tell the truth or take responsibility for his actions and an individual whose private life and financial affairs were in such a state that he has the largest dossier of any politician ever within MI5 and was undergoing HRMC investigation was deemed the best option to govern the UK, for me regardless of policy, his personal unsuitability for the role would have made it impossible for me to vote for.

That many unproven or exaggerated smears against Corbyn were believed, whilst proven and factual stories about Johnson were seemingly ignored by people is something that makes little sense, I can't personally square the circle that if Corbyn was unsuitable to govern then Johnson was, perhaps both were unsuitable, perhaps both were ok, but if you had to chose one surely the one without the security compromises was the better choice.

My personal view is that the Boris brand was helped massively by a predominantly right wing written press, his presence on the winning side of the Brexit vote was seen as a tipping point to success and with careful media management cast Johnson as someone with the Midas Touch of electability, he was pardoned grilling interviews and refused to appear at certain hustings, in his own mind he became bigger than the Party itself, I think some were convinced that given the role he had craved for so long would lead to a change in behaviour and that his maverick streak was actual brilliance rather than an inability to do detail and nail to the floor things of importance. The politically errant man settling down with the birth of his Premiership.

Johnson let down all those who put a cross against a Conservative candidates name, he acted in his own interests over the those of his country, his Party and his people, a consummate conman who has spent his whole political life in deception and plot, I think the main factor was that Johnson lied his way to power and many good people trusted his lies and excused him until the penny dropped that he was never going to change and that integrity was a concept that had bypassed him and wasn't ever going to be a part of his makeup.
As always a well balanced & honest post, agree with most of that AM
 
'Johnson let down all those who put a cross against a Conservative candidates name, he acted in his own interests over the those of his country, his Party and his people, a consummate conman who has spent his whole political life in deception and plot, I think the main factor was that Johnson lied his way to power and many good people trusted his lies and excused him until the penny dropped that he was never going to change and that integrity was a concept that had bypassed him and wasn't ever going to be a part of his makeup.'

There is a fine line here
As you said earler in the post - he had form. There was no doubt about the many reasons he was unfit to govern.
People still voted him (many would again btw).
But if you vote for a selfish, narcissistic,, corrupt guy to lead the country and he continues to be all of those things...... who is to blame?
Personally, as much as I detest his values and all he stands for I don't blame him for continuing to be what he was before.
 
I voted for the Tories under May, but I never voted for Boris in anything where he stood. I voted Lib Dem during the council elections and I'll most likely do the same at national level in 2024 (or sooner). Boris and his sycophants don't represent me in any shape or form.
 
'Johnson let down all those who put a cross against a Conservative candidates name, he acted in his own interests over the those of his country, his Party and his people, a consummate conman who has spent his whole political life in deception and plot, I think the main factor was that Johnson lied his way to power and many good people trusted his lies and excused him until the penny dropped that he was never going to change and that integrity was a concept that had bypassed him and wasn't ever going to be a part of his makeup.'

There is a fine line here
As you said earler in the post - he had form. There was no doubt about the many reasons he was unfit to govern.
People still voted him (many would again btw).
But if you vote for a selfish, narcissistic,, corrupt guy to lead the country and he continues to be all of those things...... who is to blame?
Personally, as much as I detest his values and all he stands for I don't blame him for continuing to be what he was before.
I don't disagree at all but, and here I'm second guessing a bit, I think that some thought that it was ambition that created the 'Boris' monster and once he had reached the position he had so long craved that he might change, in footballing terms giving the captaincy to the previously most undisciplined player in the hope that the additional responsibility brings discipline to them.

I also think that the inference of the EU hamstringing national government was a narrative that was allowed to propagate and gave Johnson and co the offer of change despite being the party in situ, when Labour have ideological division they tend to split, when the Conservatives had similar issues surrounding Brexit they morphed from a Pro-European austerity party to a high tax slightly more moderate UKIP, how they did that without falling into an implosion of mass division is something, whilst at odds with my own political beliefs, that Labour should learn a lesson from.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top