Boris Johnson

[Bjornebye]

10 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

You mean with when they got into bed with the Tories? If so, I think that's because there'd been a mood change away from labour and they were trying to give themselves the best chances of an extended stay. No dissimilar to now but in reverse obviously. Personally I want PR and if we go in that direction, a party like theirs is going to need to work out how to get along with people, it has no choice as they can't win outright now, but there's a chance they'll have more seats under that system. 

No I mean the last election when supposedly anti-brexit Swinson refused to work with Labour because of Corbyn. 

[Pidge]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

I think a coalition is the best chance of getting rid of them but the swayed or stay away tory regulars would jump right back into the ballot box with them if they had a fresh start. 

 

Any Lib Dems on here reckon a coalition is realistic? @Pidge I know it was your first vote for them but what do you think? 

It's not my first, I voted for them in 2010 (and had done previously). Which is why I stopped voting for them.

 

Floated between green and labour since then. As a ruling party, I have very little idea about them at this point, a Starmer/lib dem coalition would prob have issues in the long-run. As a local candidate Foord came across well. 

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, Pidge said:

It's not my first, I voted for them in 2010 (and had done previously). Which is why I stopped voting for them.

 

Floated between green and labour since then. As a ruling party, I have very little idea about them at this point, a Starmer/lib dem coalition would prob have issues in the long-run. As a local candidate Foord came across well. 

Aah misread an earlier post I thought you said it was your first time voting for them. 

 

Oh and fuck you for voting for them in 2010 you bastard. 

[magicrat]

24 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

You mean with when they got into bed with the Tories? If so, I think that's because there'd been a mood change away from labour and they were trying to give themselves the best chances of an extended stay. No dissimilar to now but in reverse obviously. Personally I want PR and if we go in that direction, a party like theirs is going to need to work out how to get along with people, it has no choice as they can't win outright now, but there's a chance they'll have more seats under that system. 

They wouldn’t get an overall majority under PR which at least would marginalise the utter cunts who want to destroy the country to make a fast buck 

[Anubis]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

Will they want him leading them into their conference though? That's not till October. And surely they won't want to pull the plug in September unless they've got a single candidate so they don't have to take it to the party members? 

My understanding is that as it stands they can’t have a leadership vote for another 12 months, but they could change the rules down to six months, which would be too late for September. I may be wrong if anyone else can assist.

[Barrington Womble]

32 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

No I mean the last election when supposedly anti-brexit Swinson refused to work with Labour because of Corbyn. 

I don't think that's a surprise though. I know Corbyn is loved by many, but he's seen toxic by the majority. 

[Barrington Womble]

3 minutes ago, Anubis said:

My understanding is that as it stands they can’t have a leadership vote for another 12 months, but they could change the rules down to six months, which would be too late for September. I may be wrong if anyone else can assist.

6 months feels a long way to go though. I don't know how easy it is for them to change the rules or if that needs to be at conference even. But I would just be surprised if there's now the numbers to move against him, they'd let him take them into another conference, they'll find a way to dump him and make him quit before then I suspect, but that would maybe need to be very quick or if they can somehow force him to resign and have a single candidate to take over after the summer recess. 

[Bruce Spanner]

6 minutes ago, Anubis said:

My understanding is that as it stands they can’t have a leadership vote for another 12 months, but they could change the rules down to six months, which would be too late for September. I may be wrong if anyone else can assist.

They can change it to whatever they want as long as it gets through committee vote.

 

They are currently trying to stack the committee with people sympathetic to their way of thinking, as are Alex’s people surprisingly.

 

Cats in a sack time.

 

A man in a grey suit will be walking around n to Johnson’s office soon with a revolver and a glass of single malt and that’ll be that.

[Arniepie]

6 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

6 months feels a long way to go though. I don't know how easy it is for them to change the rules or if that needs to be at conference even. But I would just be surprised if there's now the numbers to move against him, they'd let him take them into another conference, they'll find a way to dump him and make him quit before then I suspect, but that would maybe need to be very quick or if they can somehow force him to resign and have a single candidate to take over after the summer recess. 

I don't think he will go.

He is too arrogant. 

I also don't think there is an obvious successor. 

They may think he will be able to turn it round come election time.

Imagine him leading them to defeat in an election.

That would be rather enjoyable. 

[Barrington Womble]

2 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

I don't think he will go.

He is too arrogant. 

I also don't think there is an obvious successor. 

They may think he will be able to turn it round come election time.

Imagine him leading them to defeat in an election.

That would be rather enjoyable. 

It would indeed. But one thing the Tories are fucking brilliant at is putting the party before any individual or the national interest. They got rid of Thatcher, they'll shed no tears of getting rid of Johnson and they'll find someone they can all get behind at least till the next GE.

 

As someone else mentioned, he's been their useful idiot.  

[Arniepie]

5 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

It would indeed. But one thing the Tories are fucking brilliant at is putting the party before any individual or the national interest. They got rid of Thatcher, they'll shed no tears of getting rid of Johnson and they'll find someone they can all get behind at least till the next GE.

 

As someone else mentioned, he's been their useful idiot.  

I think they have been ruthless in the past but johnson has been an utter disaster for them,he has even stood up in Parliament and lied aswell as flouting the law,and he still has considerable support.

For the 1st time I am hopeful that a coolition can finally kick these cunts out.

[Stouffer]

3 hours ago, Chairman Meow said:

I don't see Gove as electable, he's so odd and barely even seems human. He has to be one of the creepiest people on the planet, absolutely makes my skin crawl every time I see him on anything.

 

If he turned out to have a fridge full of heads and was caught wearing other people's skin I wouldn't be surprised at all.

I'd have Hancock over Gove.

 

That's how much of a spooky cunt Gove is.

[Barrington Womble]

14 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

I think they have been ruthless in the past but johnson has been an utter disaster for them,he has even stood up in Parliament and lied aswell as flouting the law,and he still has considerable support.

For the 1st time I am hopeful that a coolition can finally kick these cunts out.

I think though he rode some luck to survive. When the wheels started to fall off, Ukraine came along just as it looked he couldn't survive and they took their foot off the gas. Then they basically fucked up as they got the no-confidence letters in before they had someone to mobilise behind. I don't think they will make that mistake again. The only real issue you've got is it would probably trigger it if a senior cabinet member quit.... But then nobody wants to be seen as the person making the kill as most of them will want to be able to run. I think if one candidate can get support behind the scenes, another cabinet member quits just to trigger the move but knows they can't win, then I think that's when it'll happen. 

 

And if course Dominic Cummings might have another trick up his sleeve yet. 

[Arniepie]

4 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

I think though he rode some luck to survive. When the wheels started to fall off, Ukraine came along just as it looked he couldn't survive and they took their foot off the gas. Then they basically fucked up as they got the no-confidence letters in before they had someone to mobilise behind. I don't think they will make that mistake again. The only real issue you've got is it would probably trigger it if a senior cabinet member quit.... But then nobody wants to be seen as the person making the kill as most of them will want to be able to run. I think if one candidate can get support behind the scenes, another cabinet member quits just to trigger the move but knows they can't win, then I think that's when it'll happen. 

 

And if course Dominic Cummings might have another trick up his sleeve yet. 

I genuinely couldn't see who would take over?

Gove is too unpopular 

Does hunt have much support In the party?he seems a bit of an outlier?

Truss?raab?surely not?

Sunak would seem the most likely until he got torpedoed. 

[Section_31]

[Creator Supreme]

29 minutes ago, Stouffer said:

I'd have Hancock over Gove.

 

That's how much of a spooky cunt Gove is.

I'd have Tony Hancock over Gove and he's been dead for over 50 years.

[Bjornebye]

She's off

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

1/3 Last night was a reminder that we must be relentless in cracking on with the job of delivering. Under

@BorisJohnson

we are massively investing in digital infrastructure which is accelerating growth and employment in our rapidly expanding tech sectors.

 

1,032

 

284

 

188

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

2/3 However, History tells us how useless by election results are as an indication of absolutely anything at all. Margaret Thatcher would not have won 3 GEs and would have served for a very short time as PM if some of the claims I’ve heard today were based on a shred of substance

 

129

 

69

 

105

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

3/3 This gov will remain relentlessly focused and continue to deliver for people during a post pandemic, mid-war, global cost of living challenge which no Prime Minister or gov has faced the likes of since WW11.

[Creator Supreme]

World War 11, when the fuck did that happen? How long was I asleep?

[Barrington Womble]

25 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

I genuinely couldn't see who would take over?

Gove is too unpopular 

Does hunt have much support In the party?he seems a bit of an outlier?

Truss?raab?surely not?

Sunak would seem the most likely until he got torpedoed. 

Sunak can't have it as he got fined over the parties too, they're not that stupid to go for him and have the chance that particular story will rumble on. I think Truss, Patel, Morduant, Hunt & Tugendhat are the riders at the moment. My guess Tugedhat and Morduant are the real front runners. 

[Arniepie]

15 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

She's off

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

1/3 Last night was a reminder that we must be relentless in cracking on with the job of delivering. Under

@BorisJohnson

we are massively investing in digital infrastructure which is accelerating growth and employment in our rapidly expanding tech sectors.

 

1,032

 

284

 

188

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

2/3 However, History tells us how useless by election results are as an indication of absolutely anything at all. Margaret Thatcher would not have won 3 GEs and would have served for a very short time as PM if some of the claims I’ve heard today were based on a shred of substance

 

129

 

69

 

105

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadine Dorries

 

@NadineDorries

·

51m

 

3/3 This gov will remain relentlessly focused and continue to deliver for people during a post pandemic, mid-war, global cost of living challenge which no Prime Minister or gov has faced the likes of since WW11.

Someone should tell her ,We aren't at war,the utter fucking crank

 

[Bjornebye]

3 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

Someone should tell her ,We aren't at war,the utter fucking crank

 

WW11 .... 

[polymerpunkah]

6 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Not all heroes wear capes.

The X-Men (and Women)

[Bjornebye]

 

 

[Colonel Bumcunt]

7 hours ago, Arniepie said:

I genuinely couldn't see who would take over?

Gove is too unpopular 

Does hunt have much support In the party?he seems a bit of an outlier?

Truss?raab?surely not?

Sunak would seem the most likely until he got torpedoed. 

Gove is actually a phenomenal public speaker, he just doesn't have a cause that fires him up very often I guess.  I mean, I think he's actually closer to a Labour man than the current Tory identikit. 

 

I think his personal life is an indicator of him looking for highs and excitement, which in itself is an incredibly risky game to play as a high profile government minister, nevermind as an MP,  but he still manages to avoid trouble.  

 

That's just my theory on him, but if he did go for leadership he'd have to knock the late night antics on the head, but I'm not sure he's arsed about being a 1922 committee shill.  I hope not, because he'd be a real problem for us. 

[Section_31]

6 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Gove is actually a phenomenal public speaker, he just doesn't have a cause that fires him up very often I guess.  I mean, I think he's actually closer to a Labour man than the current Tory identikit.