It'd be fun if there was a G.E tomorrow.
Enhance, enhance, enhance...
Thoughts?
He could always say it was a non alcoholic beverage!
Interestingly the story is pretty low down on the Mail Online (aimed at a younger audience). The print version is for the over 60's so it's just a bit of red meat for grandma.
Thoughts
Thought he was more of a Chardonnay man.
Will make people say "all politicians are the same."
It’s mojitos on the train again. Not surprised the Sun are trying it on (it’s originally their story… I presume they’ve passed it onto the Mail as part of operation Save Big Dog?) they have people who were at many of the no10 parties, and knew all about them… now the public know they’ve sat on those stories and kept quiet, they have more than just the PM to save.
Can someone explain the difference to a political Luddite ?
Why is this any different to what Boris and the Tories have done?
Honestly not being argumentative, I hate Boris and the Tories as much as the next man, but can’t see why this is ok whilst there is uproar over Boris.
Was there a BYOB invite to 100 people? Let’s start there. Did two large groups meet up and drink ‘till the early hours of the morning? A beer with your lunch in a meeting isn’t the same as planning and meeting up in large numbers to socialise.
The story was run last year by the sun
It was a zoom meeting at a constituency office, they broke for dinner with a beer, then resumed the meeting, Johnson even tried to use it in PMQs, but it didn't gain traction.
It was within the rules and its not like the 18? Parties in Downing St that went on until the early morning and involved people who weren't colleagues.
What's interesting is that the sun & mail have both run with it again today, defo smells like its part of OpereSave Big Dog!
think it operation save the party and minimise the collateral damage
There is a big push from the right to present politicians as all the same, just as bad as each other. They're all at it so its OK to vote for us who are definitely at it. Its not true but its a fairly easy sell.
Thanks for the detail guys, wasn’t aware of that.
If thats the best they can come up with, it's pretty bloody desperate.
Ultimately, I suspect it'll be counter-productive. Its hardly suitcases full of Chateauneuf Du Pape, is it? All it'll do is highlight the contrast
I thought he was just trying to show that he could get served.
The bigger question is what Kelvin points out, The Mail and The Sun editorial staff were at many of the parties in question. There's a revolving chair between the roles of Downing Street Staff and the papers in question (and revolving beds between the government and the Spectator).
It throws into focus not only the fact that ort 'free press' is not only extremely right wing, they are colluding with the government and in this case, illegally. Cresida Dick should be paying a visit to those publications offices as well.
Those allegations are not going to make any right thinking person that all politicians are the same, they are only there for the gammons who are outraged at Bozo to be as equally outraged at Starmer (even though anyone else can see they are clutching at straws)
Cresida Dick should be paying a visit to those publications offices as well.
The problem with that is that Dick got her job after her predecessor was forced out after.... investigating MPs
That won't have passed her by, Even as every other senior copper seems to think the met should be investigating
Cressida Dick is so utterly incompetent the only conclusion to be drawn is that she got the job owing to her preparedness to bend to the administration's will like Uri Geller's spoon.
She is the modern definition of a bent copper.
Cresida Dick should be paying a visit to those publications offices as well.
When it comes to rank incompetence, subsequent non-apologies, zero accountability, total lack of contrition and brazening it out, Cressida Dick is in the same premier league as Johnson. They're two cheeks of the same arse.
Surely, given her track record, her reluctance (or total refusal, more like?) to investigate the Downing Street parties can come as a surprise to no-one
If Boris Johnson were black she would have arrested him by now.
Cressida Dick is so utterly incompetent the only conclusion to be drawn is that she got the job owing to her preparedness to bend to the administration’s will like Uri Geller’s spoon.
Not only did she get the job but after seeing how dodgy she has been for the last few years she was given another 3 years at it.
Far from supporting the Police, this government has done nothing but heap problems upon their shoulders. With the timid assistance of the Met Commisioner, all they've succeeded in doing is covering the backs of the worst amongst their ranks.
They have pitted the Police against the public. Rather than concentrating on 'getting Brexit done' all the government has done over the last two years is think about ways they can control and criminalise the population. (I think even some Brexit supporters are beginning to see this.)
It all points to the government anticipating bigger problems down the line, as we move further towards the Logan's run scenario, where the rump of society does the bidding of the elders.
There is a big push from the right to present politicians as all the same, just as bad as each other. They’re all at it so its OK to vote for us who are definitely at it. Its not true but its a fairly easy sell
Yes I despise this line of debate especially given we've mostly known bent/incompetent/ruthless Tory governments for my 50 years.
One day we might get a genuinely progressive government ... But we're good at missed opportunities.
Progressive would be nice, right now I'd settle for non-regressive.
With an ever ageing population and declining birth rate I've put my hopes for a progressive government on hold. Our pensioners would need to have an moral and political epiphany for that to happen.
It's not that progressive ideas don't have traction with the working age population, it's that the numbers are stacked against them electorally. The divisions between the young and old will continue to exacerbate whoever is in power.
We can kiss good bye to progressive and dynamic politics in the West. If you want that sort of thing you'll have to move to the developing world, where average voting age is much, much younger. (Cue a queue of exeptionalist responses.....)
With an ever ageing population and declining birth rate I’ve put my hopes for a progressive government on hold. Our pensioners would need to have an moral and political epiphany for that to happen.
Not so - Look to Scotland where a political party that leads not follows runs a more progressive administration. Its perfectly possible in England as well but requires the labour party to throw of the shadow of Blair and become leaders not wethervane politicians. Fore me the worst part of Blairs legacy is this - following the public mood not setting it
Starmer doesn't explain how the Tories replacing Johnson with Sunak, Truss, or even Patel, serves "the national interests".
I agree that Johnson's authority has taken a massive blow but Starmer's generous advice to the Tories that it is, quote, "very important that the Tory party does what it needs to do and gets rid of him” doesn't impress me.
Urging the Tories to replace Johnson with a more right-wing Thatcherite pro-austerity Prime Minister is hardly going to serve the interests of ordinary working people, not that Starmer would particularly worry about that. And I frankly couldn't give a toss whether or not Sunak, Truss, or Patel, attended social events during lockdown.
Far far more important for me than wine time on Fridays is the attack on the right to protest and demonstrate.
https://amp.theguardian.com/law/2022/jan/13/how-will-the-police-and-bill-limit-the-right-to-protest
Why the **** isn't Starmer kicking up a stink about that? It represents the sort of oppressive restrictions associated with autocratic regimes and a fundamental attack on the existing liberal democracy which already has serious limitations.
There is no evidence that replacing Johnson with another Tory Prime Minister with more authority will kill the Bill.
Why the **** isn’t Starmer kicking up a stink about that?
Because he knows that if he does that Labour will be out in the wild longer.
The sinners cast the first stone comes to mind.
Then there is the party (both sides) infiltrated by CCP.
To me CCP infiltration is a much bigger threat than the current circus. CCP will create such havoc in the country without even needing to use threat like what they have done to many developing and 3rd world countries. UK have been warned. Wake up! Britannia you are sleepwalking into CCP's bed and CCP will hump you (Britannia) at will like the tennis star.
Get rid of CCP first and then you lot in Labour vs Tories Vs etc can argue or throw handbags at each others until the cows come home. Then install Angela Rayner as a PM (will she invite me to a party?)
Shoud starmer not call for his resignation then?
Shoud starmer not call for his resignation then?
He is the opposition and that's his job to do that but the public may not see it that way.
p/s: notice CCP wind up both sides?
Shoud starmer not call for his resignation then?
Not unless he thinks another Tory politician would be a better PM for Britian. And remember the only realistic choices are Sunak, Truss, or Patel.
If Starmer wants to exploit the Tories self-inflicted mess he should be declaring that the Tories are unfit to govern and calling for a general election to let the people decide.
Obviously the Tories aren't going to agree to that but it's not the job of Starmer to offer solutions that the Tories like.
He should be driving home the point that replacing Johnson is completely pointless as his behaviour is exactly what you can expect from the Tories, besides the alternatives are probably even worse, instead of offering them a solution to their self-inflicted mess.
Increasingly the right- wing of the Tory Party are calling for Johnson's resignation, Starmer should be focusing on the futility of that instead of trying to help them.
Edit : If Starmer was to launch an effective and sustained attack on the police and crime bill, along with similar attacks by the LibDems, an already weaken Tory Party with a leader lacking authority might struggle to get it quietly passed through parliament.
Obviously it will be much easier for a strong united Tory Party under a new leader enjoying widespread authority.
The truth however is that Starmer probably doesn't give a toss about the police and crime bill.
I'm with Ernie, of course Johnson shouldn't be PM but the whole Tory party is at fault for facilitating him despite knowing him to be a lazy, drunken, amoral narcissist.
Starmer et al will like the idea of a more right wing conservative leader as it will allow them more space to move the Labour party further to the right. Truss or Patel would be ideal.
Stop being silly
Starmer wants Johnson gone because he knows that Johnson out charismas Starmer
Truss or Sunak or whatever wet fish the Tories slip in will be easier for Starmer to handle
With an 80 seat majority whoever comes in has a lot of opportunity to do what they like but, they have to contend with some pretty swivel eyed backbenchers
Meanwhile in Scotland Labour overtaken Tories... https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1475460375810301955?t=cOCWvEQn7eMbdWTsZhp6Kw&s=19
Labour are opposing the police and crimes bill in the lords - and as you know the right wing press will label him" the criminals friend" if he states his opposition as "No to the bill" He has to be nuanced
Of course he should be calling for Johnson to resign. By doing so he will increase tory supoport for Johnson as they do not want to be seen doing Starmers bidding thus Starmers call for resignation just increases the infighting in tory ranks
Pointless posturing to call for a GE at this point
Pointless posturing to call for a GE at this point
Yup that'd be a ridiculous position right now as it will never happen
Johnsons exit, however.....
as you know the right wing press will label him” the criminals friend” if he states his opposition as “No to the bill".
Oh no that's terrible......he really mustn't upset the Tory press! 🙄
The forensic lawyer can't risk making the case against Priti Patel's oppressive new laws.
Of course he should be calling for Johnson to resign. By doing so he will increase tory supoport for Johnson as they do not want to be seen doing Starmers bidding
That is such a bizarre stance - to claim that Starmer is calling for Johnson's resignation to stop the Tories getting rid of him.
The bottom line is that there is no credible opposition parties as all are in the same melting pot i.e. with ideology driven nonsense. The only outcome is more struggles for ordinary mortals.
If Starmer wants to exploit the Tories self-inflicted mess he should be declaring that the Tories are unfit to govern and calling for a general election to let the people decide.
If you never ask for what you want, and what the country needs, you'll never get it.
Pointing out what the country needs repeatedly, might just start some of the electorate that he's on to something.
An ideology is a system of ideas, they develop to represent different class positions, those who control and own capital and those who sell their labour. Yes, Starmer's ideology aligns with Tory ideology but there's not a non-ideological, 'grown up' or technocratic alternative way of understanding a society where one class exploits another, you have to take sides. So, yes ordinary mortals have to fight their own corner. So, yes you're right in your conclusion but I'm not sure if you understand why.
So you prefer pointless posturing - calling for an election that will never happen rather than calling for the resignation / defenestration of Johnson which will happen and sewing more confusion in tory ranks?
And yes - Labour does run scared of the tory press. It been this way for decades. another legacy of Blair who pandered to them and refused to reign in their power when he had the chance
Pointing out what the country needs repeatedly, might just start some of the electorate that he’s on to something.
Exactly. Labour's theme for the next two years should be that the Tories are unfit to govern and that only solution is to kick them out, not, to find a better Tory leader.
In fact Labour should be focusing precisely on the claim that changing leaders is completely pointless as it doesn't solve the root problem at all.
Labour needs to encourage the British people to be hungry and inpatient for a general election. It needs to make the Tory government feel insecure and living on borrowed time.
Apart from the obvious benefit of a demoralised Tory government and groundswell of support for change it is far more likely to result in serious concessions from a defensive government.
Blimey, all those hungry inpatients and the NHS will crash.
So you prefer pointless posturing
Lol! So what sort of posturing is this?!?
Of course he should be calling for Johnson to resign. By doing so he will increase tory supoport for Johnson as they do not want to be seen doing Starmers bidding
To focus on the fact that the only actual solution is to kick out the Tories, not leadership changes, is not posturing. It makes the point that the Tories are not the solution, whoever the leader might happen to be.
Publicly making the case that Britain needs a change of government not simply a change of prime minister is a perfectly reasonable case to make, however unlikely it is for the government to call an early election.
People need to hear that.
It is pointless posturing when a GE will not happen! I agree clobbering them on competence is the right way but calling for a GE is just pointless it achieves nothing bar making Starmer look stupid calling for something that will not happen.
all those hungry inpatients
Thank you Bill 😊
I won't edit!
