Because the past several years haven't told us enough apparently. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Because the past several years haven't told us enough apparently. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Here's hoping for this one to be telling the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48596991
Do people actually get depressed about politics ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
A friend wants to know
I have a friend who had to fight several months to get his disability allowance continued. He's pretty depressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by makaveli1875
Boris Johnson as prime minister would be proof positive that accident of birth is still incredibly significant in Britain. Here is someone who believed from childhood that he would be prime minister; that he was born to it and it's his right. Imagine growing up being so secure of your place in the world, confident that, like so many Old Etonians, you are born to rule. What an embarrassment to this country, which totally undermines the lip service politicians pay to a supposed meritocracy and equality of opportunity. Our society remains medieval in so many ways, as the luck of draw continues to determine one's destiny. As a Conservative Johnson wishes to conserve this state of affairs. I despise him and the values he represents.
So if Boris gets his tax cut it means higher public spending in Scotland. Now hands up those who were fooled by the SNPs false claims that Scottish people would be funding it.
https://twitter.com/petermacmahon/st...689303558?s=19
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/14169
We hate it when parties don't tell us the truth don't we? I mean that includes all parties, doesn't it?
Tax cuts means higher public spending? So we're back to Laffer Curves and 'growing the cake' are we? Follow that to its logical conclusion: what happens to public spending if all taxes are cut to zero?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Who said anything about zero?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Just making the small point that sometimes what you are told by the SNP and what is splashed across the papers is not all it seems. I am sure if I never pointed this out quite a few would have never have known the truth. Happy to help.
Maybe we need an SNP are lying *******s thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I've always found the idea of lower taxes meaning more revenue amusing and Orwellian. Even Professor Laffer himself conceded that his idea related only to the tiny few at the very top of the income scale, not the mass of the population. It was/is a self-serving fantasy, which I'm sure Boris Johnson still believes the majority are stupid enough to accept as verisimilitude.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I liked Leadsom's comments about Indyref2.
Obviously I disagree with her opinion regarding remaining part of the union but it is refreshing that she spoke with respect about Scotland, the wishes of the people and respecting devolution.
Much better than the "get back in your box" tough talk preferred by all the others, talk that just gets your back up and makes your views even more entrenched.
You never know. It might be OK. I'd give it a while anyway before embarking on another referendum. No sense piling chaos on chaos although Sturgeon is grabbing her opportunity right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
It’s not really tho. The concept is pretty simple, put a tax too high and people do all they can to avoid it. Put it at a ‘sensible’ level and it’s not worth the effort so it’s paid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
I reckon IHT is a great example where the tax is too high so huge effort goes into avoiding it. Simplify and lower and the tax take would go up.
There is also plenty of examples of flat rate taxes raising more money than complex high tariffs. Georgia for example enacted a huge tax reform in the early 2000’s that removed taxes, lowered others and essentially simplified the whole system...it resulted in a doubling of revenue within 5 years.
BoJo’s proposal is crude and far too simplistic of course but hey what’s new when it comes to that dude...
Your friend just needs to try to imagine being one of the many losers in the system, as opposed to being in the minority of winners. It'll probably be pretty difficult for him/her to do that, as I'd guess he/she wouldn't know where to start.Quote:
Originally Posted by makaveli1875
Boris' candidature speech leaked.
https://youtu.be/xeiGLSy-1zU
It was Robert Peston who broke that story based on figures from another think tank. Guess it’s up to you which one you want to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m inclined to agree but while I hold Hunt in a healthy disregard I’m conscious that he isn’t unpopular in the safe Tory seats and would probably swing marginals if up against Corbyn.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
The Tories like a winner, even if unpalatable. They went a bit haywire after Major and there is no reason they won’t do again but Hunt trumps Corbyn in the marginals, at least in my book. And that was painful to post.
Esther McVey on LBC claiming that UK foreign aid money was used to build an airport "on one of those continents abroad"
Couldn't name the country
Couldn't name the continent
The runway was built in the the wrong direction, facing into the wind...............
How in the name of **** do these people function? Who is electing these people? How can someone so ****ing stupid be an elected representative of the British public.
The continent abroad she was referring to...? ST HELENA, a British Oversea's territory. (It's not even on a ****ing continent. she couldn't even get the basics correct).
That was yesterday. Today's Leadsom comments:Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
:rolleyes:Quote:
There will be no second referendums on my watch - not on Scottish Independance and not on EU membership. I respect the result of referendums!
From Andrea Leadsom Twitter (I note she cant spell Independence).
“There will be no second referendums on my watch - not on Scottish Independance and not on EU membership. I respect the result of referendums!”
That’s us told!
J
Edit - just seen the above reply. Seems to be the standard Tory line. Singing to the Shires Choir.
J
INTO the wind - Christ sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
I watched the video of it - absolutely staggering stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
*edit - deleted my parentheses - she didn't say "cross-wind" - she just has a horrific accent that I misheard "cause of the winds" as cross-winds.
Sir Alan Duncan MPQuote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
Quote:
Total rubbish. The runway in question is in St Helena. I was the DFID Minister who built it - completed early, under budget, and despite difficult wind conditions it operates well. It fulfils our legal obligations to a UK overseas territory and so is not "foreign aid".
Quite a turnaround.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
who cares what Leadsom has to say , Boris is going to win .
Mon the Bojo
Exactly who we need to deal with those pesky picanninies and letterboxes that plague our country.Quote:
Originally Posted by makaveli1875
Mon' the Etonians! :rolleyes:
Johnson has the thing sewn up as far as I can see.
Looking pretty unstoppable at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
:agree: Not looking good for Bojoke-doubters at the moment. Some time yet for his waffle to be exposed though. If Eddie Mair chairs a live debate and he turns up, perhaps Govey and Stewart could land some blows on him.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
If the polls show he will walk the next GE then he is unstoppable. Tory MPs will vote to keep their seats, much like the Republican Party refuse to turn on Trump. This leadership election is nothing to do with the best interests of the UK, it’s what’s best for the Tories.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
That's a fair sized leap from him being the current darling of the Tory Party membership (recently swelled by Brexit Party registered supporters joining it) and the ERG.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Not really, there are already polls being published that back this up:Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
https://news.sky.com/story/johnson-l...ctory-11740185
Anyone half popular will beat a Corbyn Labour. Tories are smart enough to dump hopeless leaders where as Labour need them to lose a couple of elections first.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I get that. The point i was answering though was that the tories will vote in whoever to save themselves. Polls are coming out now saying Boris would win a landslide - it is only going to go one way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Poll conclusions not universally accepted by other experts, but anyway sooner or later someone's going to do another poll including a different hypothetical question: Will you vote Tory with Bojoke as leader if he fails to deliver Brexit by 31 October.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Johnson v Corbyn in a post Brexit election.
What a time to be alive. Where's Lord Sutch when you need him?
Christ, It honestly makes you wonder why you get out of bed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Stewart now up to second in poll of Tory members' voting intentions. Which is not to say that's how they'll actually vote, as people sometimes lie about how they intend to vote. Bojoke streets ahead though.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Stewart may not make it through the morning. Needs to hope that the silent Tory mp’s are getting behind him.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Funny how Ruth Davidson is going Sajid Javid and yet not one of the Scottish Tory mp’s is backing him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've been listening to this unfold on BBC radio over the last few weeks. The presenters and MP's alike are actually giving BJ respect for staying out the limelight for as long as possible, in their minds, BJ himself has realised he's an erse and could cock things at any point, so because of his self awareness apparently he's playing a blinder. They've actually dubbed it Operation Ming Vase as everyone's waiting to see if he can carry it to the end. What an amazing country we live in :faf:
Speaking of Javid ... apparently he wasn't invited to the State banquet for Trumpy. He wasn't told why not and several more junior ministers were there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
If (as seems likely) he was deliberately kept off the guest list just because he's a Muslim and Trump is a racist ******** then surely that's unprecedentedly shameless, spineless behaviour, even for Tories? :confused:
Bizarre tweet from Jeremy Hunt:
Has Boris ****ged his missus? :dunno:Quote:
Woke up this morning and felt a bit like the morning of my wedding. Something big is going to change but don't quite know how it will unfold #HastobeHunt
Nothing to do with Islamophobia. It's a medical condition Trump has, like bone spurs, which renders him allergic to the sons of bus drivers: cf. Sadiq Khan.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Shouty Ruthie now claiming the SNP need to win an absolute majority at the next election before they can claim to have a mandate for another referendum. No Ruth, you don't get to dictate the rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
she's Hot, i doubt it
Had a quick look and about half the Tory mp’s hadn’t declared for anyone so there is a chance Hunt or Gove have bigger support than expected.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It would be encouraging to think Rory Stewart emerges with a genuine chance, but he seems far too reasonable in his outlook (and therefore nowhere near partisan enough in these polarised times) so will likely be an early faller.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
BBC are reporting that the expected support for BJ is huge, much bigger than expected - 3 figures.
He does seem like a decent enough guy - therein lies the reason that they won't vote him in.Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
114 for BoJoQuote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Leadsom McVey and harper drop out
Johnson 114
Hunt 43
Gove 27
Javid 23
Raab 27
Hancock 20
Stewart 19
Harper 10
McVey 9
Leadsom 11
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
if boris became PM(oh god) who on earth would he get to speak for him at PMQ's, assuming he would still be quite reluctant to answer Q's
It looks like he's got the ERG onside. Tory party swings further to the right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
So Harper, McVey, Leadsom automatically out?
Johnson has enough to go straight to the final 2 on those numbers. Looks like Hunt v **** in the runoff.
Wouldn't bet on it. The vote is still open to wheeling and dealing. This is the tories after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Holy ****. What is going on here? BJ will be the next PM and I want to go and live on the moon.
just short of 200 voted against boris
To get through the next round Stewart will need to pick up most of Harper and Leadsoms votes. McVeys votes will go to Johnson I would think.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Johnson is in the final two on those votes and therefore our next PM. Let's hope he's the straw that breaks the Tories' back.
McVey, Leadsom & Harper all took quite a hard line on Brexit though - so you would have to think the likelihood is a lot of them will fall behind Boris now?Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Its going to be between Hunt & BJ.
He's managed to paint himself as some sort of centrist but his voting record suggests he is little different to the rest of themQuote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Quote:
Almost always voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK
Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
Voted against investigations into the Iraq war
Consistently voted for replacing Trident with a new nuclear weapons system
Generally voted against more EU integration
Generally voted for a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU
Generally voted against UK membership of the EU
Almost always voted against smoking bans
Generally voted for reducing housing benefit for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax")
Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
Almost always voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
Almost always voted for making local councils responsible for helping those in financial need afford their council tax and reducing the amount spent on such support
Almost always voted for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits
Generally voted against spending public money to create guaranteed jobs for young people who have spent a long time unemployed
Almost always voted against increasing the tax rate applied to income over £150,000
Generally voted against a banker’s bonus tax
Consistently voted against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)
Almost always voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
Almost always voted for reducing capital gains tax
Voted for raising England’s undergraduate tuition fee cap to £9,000 per year
Consistently voted for ending financial support for some 16-19 year olds in training and further education
Consistently voted for university tuition fees
Almost always voted for reducing central government funding of local government
Consistently voted for a stricter asylum system
Consistently voted for requiring the mass retention of information about communications
Consistently voted for stronger enforcement of immigration rules
Consistently voted for mass surveillance of people’s communications and activities
Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
Consistently voted for selling England’s state owned forests
Generally voted against financial incentives for low carbon emission electricity generation methods
Generally voted for culling badgers to tackle bovine tuberculosis
Generally voted against greater regulation of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to extract shale gas
Almost always voted against slowing the rise in rail fares
Generally voted against a publicly owned railway system
Almost always voted against greater public control of bus services
Consistently voted for phasing out secure tenancies for life
Consistently voted against greater regulation of gambling
Consistently voted for capping civil service redundancy payments
Generally voted for the privatisation of Royal Mail
Generally voted for restricting the scope of legal aid
Consistently voted for allowing national security sensitive evidence to be put before courts in secret sessions
Consistently voted against restrictions on fees charged to tenants by letting agents
Can't see that happening at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Wow - that is quite an interesting read.
Can i ask where that came from ?
Neither can I, unless he has an amazing debate on Sunday night he’s toast next Tuesday.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
These voting record things are usually a total waste of time. Most of these are whipped votes where the MP has to vote with the party or face disciplinary measures, ultimately being booted out.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Where an MP has departed from the party whip is much more interesting.
Anyway, Boris doesn't fit labels like left/right/centrist. His central mission is being a self serving ****.
As soon as someone comes along you think might have a bit of humanity about them something like this reminds us they're all just self serving, evil Tory *******s.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Big fat boost for Irish and Scottish nationalism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones28
There's a website called "they work for you" where you can check on any of themQuote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24...e_border/votes
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
I just cannot believe that this oaf has managed to fool his way to the top job. He doesn't appear to have any hard policies at all.
Even Thatcher had the facts at her fingertips and the plans all costed out. With Johnson it's vague supposition delivered with a public schoolboy's bumbling smirk.
Manna for the adoring media of course who, in my view, have behaved appallingly since this Brexit business began.
Instead of fully informing and educating us about the various options on offer - Norway Plus, Canada Plus, EFTA etc - it's all "Ooh will Theresa last till next week?" or "Has Boris snorted coke?" In other words, they've treated the situation like a soap opera instead of the deadly serious thing that it is.
Another Angry Voice on facebook making exactly the same point. They are all ****s.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
He's not quite in the top job yet. There's just a chance that if he turns up for the televised debate on Sunday (big if) he could get skewered by Gove and Stewart.Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
I read something along the lines as Boris will be more like the Chairman than the Chief Executive, so he will not really be in charge of much actual day to day management of things but will direct from a high level and be the public face of the Government, but not actually do that much!
As an aside I don't like him as he is a buffoon, but don't underestimate him either. He is obviously intelligent but seems to have little common sense. I predict he will not last long if elected to be PM, but I never thought Trump would see out the full term of his presidency but he looks like he will.
Since when was being Prime Minister similar to chairman. Hell, if I called a meeting I would be chairman.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
It's the same delusion the Republicans sold themselves about Trumpy: don't worry, it'll be ok there'll be sensible folk round about him. Hmmmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
The good news is the next PM puts themselves straight into the same corner May couldn't get out of. Unless the ERG nutters come on side just because its Boris then he is just as ****ed as she was.
Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
He won't turn up. He won't need to turn up.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Hasn't ruled it out. Might not want to be perceived as frit. What would Churchill have done in the circumstances? :dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Not turning up could be damaging for when he gets to the final two and party members are voting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That'll have nothing to do with anything he could say on stage and everything to do with backroom deals including tax cuts and hedge fund policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Didn't Georgia have to be bailed out by the federal government under Obama, when its tax 'reforms' went tits up and basic public services had to be slashed? I remember watching a report on The Young Turks about slashing taxes and its consequences, and I'm sure the state in question was Georgia! That's the state the Republican Governor was also responsible for overseeing his own re-election, refused to recuse himself, scrubbed hundreds of thousands of people in Democratic areas from the electoral rolls and won by a tiny margin? Brian Kemp.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeSloan
Those who defend this idea of lower taxes increasing revenue never tell us the optimum rate. As I said previously, if taxes are reduced to zero, income is zero; so what is the tax rate, as a percentage, which maximises income?
Also, flat rate taxation is totally regressive and massively favours the wealthiest, so what happens to the cherished equality of opportunity when ever more wealth, and by extension, power, is concentrated in ever fewer hands? I don't see how it is compatible with a thriving democracy, which requires some degree of equality. How does that sit with income maximisation? We have two issues running parallel. And I would add it's a situation we are once again seeing played out in Britain, where the leading contender for prime minister is yet another Old Etonian. A tiny number of very wealthy hereditary millionaires form the political establishment, which undermines democracy. 99.999 per cent of us didn't attend Eton, but we spend much of our lives governed by them and their interests.
What collection of amoral/immoral reprobates, careerists and cowards. I despise them all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I'm beginning to think he's a Russian plant who's fooled us all brilliantly. The clue is in the name - Boris. It's not rocket science.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...9851c85b7f.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree, but it will be the same self serving evil Tory *******s that will be doing the voting. RS has built up a fair bit of momentum and is neck and neck with BJ in polls from the Tory members. I can see him getting into the final two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bangkok Hibby
Hancock pulling out tomorrow. A help for Stewart likely.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's because it suits the press to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
Then there were six
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48631706
Urmmm the Country of Georgia not the state!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
As for the comment about those suggesting lower taxes never state what level the optimum rate is...well the flip side to that is the ‘little bit more’ never seems to be enough so what about the flip side that if higher taxes are good that must mean 100% tax rate is the ultimate outcome of that....you can’t make the rather outlandish alignment to a zero tax rate as an argument if you can’t see the opposite can be called straight back at it.
As for the optimum rate of any tax, all depends on the taxes being levelled. No one is suggesting there is a magic number for all taxes and all situations. That would be daft.
All I was saying is that there is plenty of evidence that simplified and flatter tax rates can, and have, increased revenue where they have been applied correctly.
That doesn’t even begin to remotely suggest a reversion to zero rates or does it mean the removal of progressive levels where they are desirable.
And when you think about it is actually supporting higher levels of overall taxation, just in a more effective and easier manner. And further more it’s a concept that can result in those that can currently afford to pay to avoid (those pesky rich eton types) being brought back into paying the tax.
My apologies, I thought you meant the state of Georgia, as I know that was used as a poster child for right wingers in the States. The only problem was it all collapsed in on itself and had to be saved from bankruptcy, much like when the same experiment was tried in Chile under Pinochet. I believe Kansas went down the same route, with the same result.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeSloan
But again, there are two issues. What is this magic tax rate which optimises revenue, and, is it even desirable, given the consequences on the social fabric of a country? For sake of argument, let's say a very low tax rate does increase revenue; well, is revenue the only thing we should be concerned with? What about the other consequences of very unequal societies in terms of social cohesion and social mobility? Great concentrations of wealth and power inevitably lead to plutarchy, and how does that sit with a functioning democracy? Democracy is egalitarian: you get one vote, whether a prince or a pauper. Great inequality puts the democratic process under strain, as positions of influence will inevitably be filled by the rich and powerful. I would say progressive taxation is always preferable in terms of both raising revenue and social desirability. The Scandinavians and Germans seem to get it right, and I think we should be looking more towards their model, not the American model.
We've had four decades of this neoliberal/supply side nonsense in the UK and look where it's gotten us: food banks, a million people waiting for social housing, increased homelessness, household debt higher than ever, student debt, falling social mobility, to name just a few consequences. It's all ideological: policy changes always benefit some and harm others; the question is who benefits and who loses?
Milton Friedman and his pals offered a form of alchemy: by reducing taxes, the tax revenue increases. By having less of something, you actually have more. As I said, it's Orwellian in its dishonesty. Also it has no interest in the wider consequences of such changes and only thinks about the bottom line. I suppose this is natural for economists, but the world isn't about economics alone.
Bojoke skips Sunday's debate because there are too many people in it. Running scared of being picked apart by Stewart, more like, and hoping he gets knocked out before Tuesday. Such a transparent liar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Funny how different people see things. I realise the Sunday debate is different, but I think he has a point. I think he might struggle to get many more supporters among the party MPs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48638758
He's a fat fool. Had daddy not had the money to pack him off to Eton, he'd be unemployable.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
How can you say he's a fool when this very day he's solved Brexit. Just drop the backstop and replace it with alternative arrangements! What a guy! :not worthQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
https://media.giphy.com/media/kLGEjXf6yEMog/giphy.gif
He won a scholarship to Eton. If that paid for all the fees I am not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Feel the love!A poem published by Boris Johnson when he was editor of Spectator magazine.
The Scotch - what a verminous race!
Canny, pushy, chippy, they're all over the place.
Battening off us with false bonhomie;
Polluting our stock, undermining our economy.
Down with sandy hair and knobbly knees!
Suppress the tartan dwarves and the Wee Frees!
Ban the kilt, the skean-dhu and the sporran
As provocatively, offensively foreign!
It's time Hadrian's Wall was refortified
To pen them in a ghetto on the other side.
I would go further. The nation
Deserves not merely isolation
But comprehensive extermination.
We must not flinch from a solution.
Thought this was a wind up!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
Found that he did publish it but its not 100% clear he was the author, either way he was involved.. Oh what a wonderful PM he'll make.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
He was not the author but he did publish it, which is a horrendous thing to do. Not as bad a writing it, but comes close.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Alf
Boris is a gift for the SNP, I wonder if they can take advantage.
https://youtu.be/UN3e-aYUusc
I saw this earlier.
It beggars belief that people see this guy and think he's Prime Minister material.