Boris Johnston

[EI255]

Words cannot describe how much I loathe this man. Hideous hunched tory git. The man just oozes lies. Arrgggghhhhh

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[SHODAN]

Why is Corbyn not calling him out for it? He just lets him talk *****. Nicola would be on every single lie.

[Bostonhibby]

Painful, absolute car crash of a bulls hitter and millions of folk just like him are very likely to put him in power, then wonder how it all ended so badly.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[wpj]

I'm watching now, later than broadcasted. BJ is a complete and utter prick, a liar, a snake oil salesman and a man without any moral compass. JC should be stomping all over him but just keeps missing the open goals. It's a s...e state of affairs and I genuinely despair about the future.
I live in England so obviously have different options to the Scottish electorate. I am voting Labour but for the man rather than the party. It's a mess. I will switch to Have I Got News For You in a bit. The thing I notice the most is they really hate each other

[lapsedhibee]

Why is Corbyn not calling him out for it?

Corbyn prides himself on not doing personal attacks, which probably includes face-to-face pointing out lies. But what good would it do anyway? Everyone knows by now that the overpromoted rubber bath toy lies. His base doesn't care.

[EI255]

He's very good at interrupting JC. Yet nothing he says delivers any truth. How anyone can take this moron seriously is beyond comprehension. Yet the Tory Party voted this bafoon in as PM! Presumably there are more cave men where he came from. Unfortunately, I fear the Tories will win next week. Not because they are a good party either.

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that BJ is an utter lair, through and through. I really fear going forward if the Tories win next week.

How refreshing it would be to wake up to a Tory loss though.

[CloudSquall]

Had to stop watching it, how anyone gets anything from that is beyond me.

[Killiehibbie]

The country really is ****ed when somebody as bad as him gets to be pm. Sooner i retire and gtf the better.

[EI255]

Ha, now we have the Jewish question put to JC by the racist Johnston!!!

Utter hypocrisy yet again by the Albino Erse.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

The answer to every question about all of society's ills in borisland seems to be let's get Brexit done.

Troubling to say the least.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[EI255]

Like Farage, please never show up in Scotland Johnston. You will never be welcome you arrogant twat.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[Mon Dieu4]

He's a total snide, likes talking about Sturgeon when she's no about but doesn't have the balls to face her

[Pretty Boy]

It's so frustrating that he's being allowed to get away with this. Both in the debate tonight and more generally. Why isn't the leader of the opposition holding him to account then picking him apart?

Johnson is a total ****. It's inarguable, even people who like him do so because of that fact. I'm probably more angry at that wet blanket Corbyn for rolling out the red carpet to 10 Downing Street for Johnson.

[The Harp Awakes]

That was Corbyn's chance to destroy him but he didn't attack enough. Having said that I thought Corbyn still skooshed it and I'm no Labour supporter.

[Mibbes Aye]

Corbyn had a couple of cameo moments but Johnson did all he needed to do to make him look weak and feeble.

Corbyn failed to make his position clear on Brexit and failed to resolve the anti-semitism question, and the Tories have successfully made this an election that highlights both those points.

Labour strategists are too caught up in navel-gazing than actually trying to beat the Tories.

[Bostonhibby]

That was Corbyn's chance to destroy him but he didn't attack enough. Having said that I thought Corbyn still skooshed it and I'm no Labour supporter.Fair comment.

Boris was mostly just reinforcing fairly simplistic bland statements that appeal to the hard core that he just needs to keep on board for a little bit longer, substance / trust / character really don't matter.

Corbyn's gone to a lot of trouble to evidence what Labour are saying and plan to maybe do but it's way too late, the one big phrase Boris is churning out steamrollers everything else in his mind, and probably enough of the electorates as well.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

The man is a horror. His party is a horror. Just how much damage will they do before an electorally-viable alternative shows up? Too late to be fixed? And, given “electorally-viable” probably means “centrist”, will there really be that much of a difference?

These are very bad days.

[Glory Lurker]

He's a total snide, likes talking about Sturgeon when she's no about but doesn't have the balls to face her

Plays to his audience both side of the border - English tories hate uppity jocks, and Scottish tories hate uppity jocks!

[Rocky]

That was Corbyn's chance to destroy him but he didn't attack enough. Having said that I thought Corbyn still skooshed it and I'm no Labour supporter.

I agree that Corbyn came out of it better, but it isn't enough. You're right, he didn't attack enough, he needed to put Johnson down so hard that even the Brexit supporters who are currently backing him would see how dangerous he is.

[One Day Soon]

Johnson is a lardy bucket of egotistical narcissism withh delusions of adequacy. He's transparently a dishonest upper class prick long on self confidence and short on actual talent. A serial liar, utterly untrustworthy and a parody of a Prime Minister.

How completely ***** must Corbyn be if he can't even come close to winning this election against this charlatan?

[matty_f]

Boris Johnson is a ****.

[The Harp Awakes]

Corbyn had a couple of cameo moments but Johnson did all he needed to do to make him look weak and feeble.

Corbyn failed to make his position clear on Brexit and failed to resolve the anti-semitism question, and the Tories have successfully made this an election that highlights both those points.

Labour strategists are too caught up in navel-gazing than actually trying to beat the Tories.

I agree Corbyn has big weaknesses but Johnson is a total fraud. Quite scary that a buffoon like that is on the verge of a majority.

His tenure will no doubt lead to Scotland becoming an independent country. For that we should be glad but I hate the tories with a passion so I hope (albeit unlikely) that Corbyn is the next PM.

[Glory Lurker]

Johnson is a lardy bucket of egotistical narcissism withh delusions of adequacy. He's transparently a dishonest upper class prick long on self confidence and short on actual talent. A serial liar, utterly untrustworthy and a parody of a Prime Minister.

How completely ***** must Corbyn be if he can't even come close to winning this election against this charlatan?

I completely agree :faint: :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

I agree Corbyn has big weaknesses but Johnson is a total fraud. Quite scary that a buffoon like that is on the verge of a majority.

His tenure will no doubt lead to Scotland becoming an independent country. For that we should be glad but I hate the tories with a passion so I hope (albeit unlikely) that Corbyn is the next PM.

Couple of more personal things that jumped out for me in the debate.

I am sure I heard this right but at one point during the debate Corbyn seemed to refer to the Holocaust as having taken place during the 19th century. FFS!

At a later stage, Johnson referred to McDonnell as the intellectual powerhouse in the current Labour leadership. This sound like a not-too-unsubtle reference to something that doesn’t get widely reported but seems to be generally accepted as true. Corbyn isn’t very bright. The awkward squad challenge to the centrist Labour leader candidates rotated amongst the likes of McDonnell, Abbott etc and Corbyn struck lucky in timing with Miliband’s decision to open up the party, which allowed entryists galore to come in or return, with swivel head attitudes.

He is described on all sides as not exactly being an intellectual giant, more the opposite and actually not that intelligent or acute. It shows in his interviews, must drive Seumas Milne mad (or actually, probably not).

[Hibernia&Alba]

Boris Johnson is a ****.

:agree:

:top marks

[cabbageandribs1875]

bah


22773

[Glory Lurker]

The story of UK politics since 1951 has been of the right regathering, regaining its confidence, finding energy, and dictating the pace, and the rules, of the game. The left started by trying to brake the wheels dead, but gave up on that and chose the supine alternative of diluting the message for a gulp of power. It did nothing to change the direction of travel, though. Made it a bit slower, maybe, but stopping it was never the intention.

So, while Labour was “modernising” the voices that said the tide was running back towards the social and democratic inequities of the 19th century were cast out as lunatics. It was obvious how politics had shifted in the last 40 years and how the sand had moved so much that there was little under the left’s feet, but the leaders of the “left” wouldn’t address that because it might mean they wouldn’t get their shot at the top.

And here we are, days away from what is possibly the end-game in the flow since 1951. It could have been stopped, but that was too much like hard work.

If Corbyn had been someone else, it might have been delayed for a bit, but since Kinnock we’ve been inexorably heading to what looks like coming.

If Johnson wins, where we end up is only a small part Corbyn’s fault.

And where we go after that, I have no idea.

[Mibbes Aye]

The story of UK politics since 1951 has been of the right regathering, regaining its confidence, finding energy, and dictating the pace, and the rules, of the game. The left started by trying to brake the wheels dead, but gave up on that and chose the supine alternative of diluting the message for a gulp of power. It did nothing to change the direction of travel, though. Made it a bit slower, maybe, but stopping it was never the intention.

So, while Labour was “modernising” the voices that said the tide was running back towards the social and democratic inequities of the 19th century were cast out as lunatics. It was obvious how politics had shifted in the last 40 years and how the sand had moved so much that there was little under the left’s feet, but the leaders of the “left” wouldn’t address that because it might mean they wouldn’t get their shot at the top.

And here we are, days away from what is possibly the end-game in the flow since 1951. It could have been stopped, but that was too much like hard work.

If Corbyn had been someone else, it might have been delayed for a bit, but since Kinnock we’ve been inexorably heading to what looks like coming.

If Johnson wins, where we end up is only a small part Corbyn’s fault.

And where we go after that, I have no idea.

If Johnson wins, then Corbyn is largely at fault.

I think you choose 1951 as a starting point to reinforce your argument. That seems to be a convenient vehicle for ignoring the Attlee government. Fair enough, we can ignore them.

You claim Labour governments were supine ever since.

Was decriminalising homosexuality supine?

Was abolishing the death penalty supine?

Was legalising abortion supine?

Was creating the Open University supine?

Was introducing the Race Relations Act, The Equal Pay Act, the Sexual Discrimination Act and the Health and Safety at Work Act supine?

Was introducing the minimum wage supine?

Was bringing about the Good Friday agremeent supine?

Were SureStart, child tax credits and pension tax credits supine?

I can throw in plenty more.

Maybe one thing from you though - how do you define ‘supine’ because at the moment you are struggling to show you understand the word.

[Glory Lurker]

If Johnson wins, then Corbyn is largely at fault.

I think you choose 1951 as a starting point to reinforce your argument. That seems to be a convenient vehicle for ignoring the Attlee government. Fair enough, we can ignore them.

You claim Labour governments were supine ever since.

Was decriminalising homosexuality supine?

Was abolishing the death penalty supine?

Was legalising abortion supine?

Was creating the Open University supine?

Was introducing the Race Relations Act, The Equal Pay Act, the Sexual Discrimination Act and the Health and Safety at Work Act supine?

Was introducing the minimum wage supine?

Was bringing about the Good Friday agremeent supine?

Were SureStart, child tax credits and pension tax credits supine?

I can throw in plenty more.

Maybe one thing from you though - how do you define ‘supine’ because at the moment you are struggling to show you understand the word.

Where to start with that?

Obviously I chose 1951 because that was the first time the Tories were in power post-war.

You mention things done along the way, and I don't dispute that. My point was though that the left got itself caught in the rightward slipstream.

We are about to tip into a situation that makes Thatcher's time look like sanity. We're here because the left scattered.

[Mibbes Aye]

Where to start with that?

Obviously I chose 1951 because that was the first time the Tories were in power post-war.

You mention things done along the way, and I don't dispute that. My point was though that the left got itself caught in the rightward slipstream.

We are about to tip into a situation that makes Thatcher's time look like sanity. We're here because the left scattered.

”Where to start with that.”

How about just starting you got it massively wrong.

And when you want come back to and argue that the more than a dozen examples I listed were supine, then we can try and establish why you think why.

Why do you think why?

Abortion, homosexuality, equal rights etc etc, all supine?

Action on child poverty, pensioner poverty, low-paid work all supine?

The minimum wage and civil partnerships and Good Friday, all supine?

You haven’t answered how you define supine and why the policies and acts I have mentioned, plus the dozens of others I could, are far from ‘supine’.

But like you say, where to start.......

[allmodcons]

If Johnson wins, then Corbyn is largely at fault.

I think you choose 1951 as a starting point to reinforce your argument. That seems to be a convenient vehicle for ignoring the Attlee government. Fair enough, we can ignore them.

You claim Labour governments were supine ever since.

Was decriminalising homosexuality supine?

Was abolishing the death penalty supine?

Was legalising abortion supine?

Was creating the Open University supine?

Was introducing the Race Relations Act, The Equal Pay Act, the Sexual Discrimination Act and the Health and Safety at Work Act supine?

Was introducing the minimum wage supine?

Was bringing about the Good Friday agremeent supine?

Were SureStart, child tax credits and pension tax credits supine?

I can throw in plenty more.

Maybe one thing from you though - how do you define ‘supine’ because at the moment you are struggling to show you understand the word.

I'm not sure that I agree with your first sentence.

Corbyn was appointed leader by Labour party members, most of whom support his form of Keynesian Economics.

The appointment of a left wing leader of the Labour Party came about for number of reasons but the main reason was because regular party members had become detached from Tony Blair's moderate Labour Party.

The single biggest issue facing the Labour Party is that their members are predominantly well left of centre and their prospective supporters are moderates. It's a real catch 22 issue for them and something they have grappled with (unsuccessfully) for years now, culminating in the appointment of a poor ultra left wing leader.

The rise of the right and highly likely and frightening prospect of a Johnston led majority Government has little to do with Corbyn and a lot to do with a Conservative Party ripping itself to bits over Europe culminating, sadly, in a right wing cabal taking Scotland and the wider UK into uncharted territory.

[Cataplana]

If Johnson wins, then Corbyn is largely at fault.

I think you choose 1951 as a starting point to reinforce your argument. That seems to be a convenient vehicle for ignoring the Attlee government. Fair enough, we can ignore them.

You claim Labour governments were supine ever since.

Was decriminalising homosexuality supine?

Was abolishing the death penalty supine?

Was legalising abortion supine?

Was creating the Open University supine?

Was introducing the Race Relations Act, The Equal Pay Act, the Sexual Discrimination Act and the Health and Safety at Work Act supine?

Was introducing the minimum wage supine?

Was bringing about the Good Friday agremeent supine?

Were SureStart, child tax credits and pension tax credits supine?

I can throw in plenty more.

Maybe one thing from you though - how do you define ‘supine’ because at the moment you are struggling to show you understand the word.

All laudable, but failure to fundamentally alter the way in which wealth is distributed or dismantle the apparatus of professional privilege such as the monarchy, or public schools, is a failure for a socialist party.

[Glory Lurker]

”Where to start with that.”

How about just starting you got it massively wrong.

And when you want come back to and argue that the more than a dozen examples I listed were supine, then we can try and establish why you think why.

Why do you think why?

Abortion, homosexuality, equal rights etc etc, all supine?

Action on child poverty, pensioner poverty, low-paid work all supine?

The minimum wage and civil partnerships and Good Friday, all supine?

You haven’t answered how you define supine and why the policies and acts I have mentioned, plus the dozens of others I could, are far from ‘supine’.

But like you say, where to start.......

It's all about the flow to the right though, the trend, the direction of travel. It's accelerated since the 80s, since Labour sounded the retreat.

[WeeRussell]

Couple of more personal things that jumped out for me in the debate.

I am sure I heard this right but at one point during the debate Corbyn seemed to refer to the Holocaust as having taken place during the 19th century. FFS!

At a later stage, Johnson referred to McDonnell as the intellectual powerhouse in the current Labour leadership. This sound like a not-too-unsubtle reference to something that doesn’t get widely reported but seems to be generally accepted as true. Corbyn isn’t very bright. The awkward squad challenge to the centrist Labour leader candidates rotated amongst the likes of McDonnell, Abbott etc and Corbyn struck lucky in timing with Miliband’s decision to open up the party, which allowed entryists galore to come in or return, with swivel head attitudes.

He is described on all sides as not exactly being an intellectual giant, more the opposite and actually not that intelligent or acute. It shows in his interviews, must drive Seumas Milne mad (or actually, probably not).

You did hear it right, it was shortly after one of Johnson's many errors and misuse of words, as I recall commenting on them both.

But are you seriously telling us that Corbyn's slip of the tongue in saying 19th century instead of 1900s and him being "not that intelligent" are the big things you took from that. No thoughts at all on Boris?

Did you say previously that you have no political leanings and just like to see balanced debate? I may have that wrong and it might be that you just said you weren't a conservative voter.

[Mibbes Aye]

You did hear it right, it was shortly after one of Johnson's many errors and misuse of words, as I recall commenting on them both.

But are you seriously telling us that Corbyn's slip of the tongue in saying 19th century instead of 1900s and him being "not that intelligent" are the big things you took from that. No thoughts at all on Boris?

Did you say previously that you have no political leanings and just like to see balanced debate? I may have that wrong and it might be that you just said you weren't a conservative voter.

No, I have said a number of times on here that I am a paid-up Labour Party member.

[Mibbes Aye]

You did hear it right, it was shortly after one of Johnson's many errors and misuse of words, as I recall commenting on them both.

But are you seriously telling us that Corbyn's slip of the tongue in saying 19th century instead of 1900s and him being "not that intelligent" are the big things you took from that. No thoughts at all on Boris?

Did you say previously that you have no political leanings and just like to see balanced debate? I may have that wrong and it might be that you just said you weren't a conservative voter.

And I didn’t say they were the ‘big things’. I made a post with the ‘big things’ then I made a second post, which you quoted saying ‘couple of more personal things’, which you decided to use.

Get it right.

[WeeRussell]

No, I have said a number of times on here that I am a paid-up Labour Party member.

Ah I see - cheers.

[WeeRussell]

And I didn’t say they were the ‘big things’. I made a post with the ‘big things’ then I made a second post, which you quoted saying ‘couple of more personal things’, which you decided to use.

Get it right.

You're correct actually, that was the wrong post to quote.

Ok, now that I've got it right.

Were none of your 'big things' about how much of a lying, stumbling buffoon Boris comes across as? I appreciate that's nothing new but if we're criticising Corbyn on this performance, I just don't see any way that Boris comes out smelling of roses. (With the exception of the blind "let's get brexit" done followers who would applaud his performance regardless - but I'm well aware you're far too intellectual and politically astute for that.)

It may well just be that it goes without saying that Boris is what Boris is, and you're just pointing out (as a labour supporter) Corbyn's failings on the other side.

I was just interested.

[Mibbes Aye]

You're correct actually, that was the wrong post to quote.

Ok, now that I've got it right.

Were none of your 'big things' about how much of a lying, stumbling buffoon Boris comes across as? I appreciate that's nothing new but if we're criticising Corbyn on this performance, I just don't see any way that Boris comes out smelling of roses. (With the exception of the blind "let's get brexit" done followers who would applaud his performance regardless - but I'm well aware you're far too intellectual and politically astute for that.)

It may well just be that it goes without saying that Boris is what Boris is, and you're just pointing out (as a labour supporter) Corbyn's failings on the other side.

I was just interested.
Yeah, something like that.

[Dalianwanda]

How people can say corbyn is unelectable but johnston is is beyond me...

[matty_f]

How people can say corbyn is unelectable but johnston is is beyond me...

100% this, it's almost inconceivable that people would decide that a proven liar, racist, sexist, you-name-it-ist is the better option.

I'm no fan of Corbyn at all, but if it was a straight choice between the two I'd side with my morals every single time and Boris wouldn't get a look in.

[Future17]

How people can say corbyn is unelectable but johnston is is beyond me...

I heard this being discussed this past weekend; the rationale given was that, if Corbyn wins the election he'll be running the country, if Johnson wins he won't be.

[lapsedhibee]

I heard this being discussed this past weekend; the rationale given was that, if Corbyn wins the election he'll be running the country, if Johnson wins he won't be.

If Johnson wins I'm fully expecting him to be ditched, having served his purpose, and replaced by something much worse. Redwood maybe, or at least someone far more ideologically pure than Johnson.

[Future17]

If Johnson wins I'm fully expecting him to be ditched, having served his purpose, and replaced by something much worse. Redwood maybe, or at least someone far more ideologically pure than Johnson.

I think he'll get a majority and be gone within a year.

[Bostonhibby]

Not many more loyal Tories than Max Hastingshttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191209/c5b429ae2e077181caf153942323e299.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191209/46c4299c3ff755ab77fb3b8bcd1827cd.jpg

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

Not many more loyal Tories than Max Hastingshttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191209/c5b429ae2e077181caf153942323e299.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191209/46c4299c3ff755ab77fb3b8bcd1827cd.jpg

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

Max Hastings also said "the only people who like Boris are those who don't know him". He was Johnson's boss at the Evening Standard and says Johnson was completely untrustworthy.

[Dalianwanda]

I heard this being discussed this past weekend; the rationale given was that, if Corbyn wins the election he'll be running the country, if Johnson wins he won't be.
Makes sense, although I’m not sure half the folk i’ve heard it from have thought about it that way.