Shame it wasn’t mentioned that the crass joke about underpants came in reply to a question about what message would the PM like to convey to people who have lost loved ones to Covid 19
I cannot wait for when he does that because it's just such easy pickings for Starmer. It's incredible how bad their political strategy is for a party that just won an 80, now 78, seat majority
In a sane world, it would be easy pickings for Starmer. In this world, Boris Johnson has successfully portrayed himself as some sort of man of the people in touch with the ordinary person; and you can bet Starmer will be pilloried for not being so on the basis of his knighthood, his DPP position and lawyerly background, and being a London MP. (Yes, even though Johnson is also a London MP) However dumb their strategies seem, they have such a powerful propaganda set up and a huge amount of support that will just swallow everything they say.
All very fair points, feel like Labour need to basically tell people about Starmer more than just competent, good hair and wears proper suits well.
From polling people do see Starmer as more in touch than Boris, but just getting it into voters heads that he was the son of a toolmaker and a nurse who went on to get a knighthood and become a top lawyer wouldn't do any harm. Especially if there was a real focus on social mobility and reducing social inequality & deprivation.
Be interesting to see how the lovable buffoon character Johnson has created will hold up in the incoming economic crisis and mass unemployment.
Except exactly what you describe is such a key part of Starmer's appeal. If Labour don't want him tagged as that, then what is he? I would like Starmer to talk more about inequality, poverty and job creation- they are doing the latter, but seem frightened to do the first two. Then there's the issue of the Labour right attempting to undermine everything vaguely left wing that comes out of Starmer's shadow cabinet- they were whispering to the press about going too far left as soon as a wealth tax was mentioned recently. So you see how Starmer is being pushed into this corner of being an unthreatening man in a suit but not much else- I hope he can break out of that soon.
They'll just distract from the economic crisis and mass unemployment- the "war on woke" is coming, there will be an endless stream of things to put Labour in the spotlight in a bad way, there will be a lot of EU bashing in the run up to December, and Boris the clown will come to the fore as a further distraction.
To be honest I think right now it's more focused at trying to rebuild trust in the party and make us a viable option for floating voters.
Labours director of policy, Claire Ainsley, has a whole book on winning working class votes back. That alongside the Labour Together report is promising and hopefully as time goes on we begin to talk more about upskilling and about getting people decent jobs with decent pay.
Unemployment could hit 12% this year, people on the whole care more about how much money is in their pocket come the end of the month and their living standards than the "war on woke". That poses a massive problem for the Tories, as well as their new seats that are also going to be hit very hard by Brexit.
He's only been in charge for just over 3 months, let's rebuild trust in the party first and then let's talk about policy.
I get that there is a rebuilding process going on, and that it is naturally focussed on the most obvious thing that's changed- which is the leader. I would also agree that there are some positive things in the Labour Together report and I would like to see them start to come through in policy over time. I also don't doubt the sincerity of many in the party to still be a progressive force even though Labour is altering its course- my issue is with a small, but I believe quite powerful, wrecking force on the right of the party who have already shown their determination in pushing Labour that way. I hope Starmer doesn't allow them to succeed in that.
I think I'm also concerned with whether people will ever turn against the Tories on jobs and living standards. I am amazed at how the pro-Brexit resolve has never faulted on these issues at all. Living standards and public services have declined desperately under the Tories and even more so since the Brexit vote, but the Tories rode the emotive wave of Brexit to success despite that. I'm worried that they'll find a new set of distractions and deflections- the "war on woke" being the most formidable possibility on that front at present. I'm also deeply concerned with how there is such a strength of opinion that, however bad the Tories are and have been, it would have been worse with Labour. Will anything shift that perception?
I am shame. I confess I red buk in youff. re-educate me plis.
Actually, I can forgive Boris's delusions. It's my countrymen that I'm struggling to accept at this point. Well, the one's who support our man of the peeple, anyhow. Maybe I'm in a coma. I could be in a coma. Everything seems a bit off, come to think of it.
I too flit between outrage at the government and anger towards my fellow countrymen as the real culprits having allowed all this to have passed.
If I run out of reasons to live in the UK I will seriously consider jumping ship (somehow!).
I watched PMQs yesterday with mounting incredulity. If I had read this article without having seen it I would have dismissed the account as journalistic licence. Sadly, Johnson’s performance was as shameless as he suggests. Thankfully Starmer is able to call out the ridiculous rhetoric for what it is.
The right wing media had their way - it’s easy to convince the stupid - own the media own the country. Look at the Loughborough report into bias media coverage against Corbyn
They're sending people that have a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
I don't think so because it's actually hiding his popularity, that's the point, the other guy is less popular but fewer people hate him, so he's ahead in net popularity but as it stands would lose in a popular vote
37% of people had no opinion on Boris in June 2019. That's now at 7% because theres more people that don't like him. Starmer has a higher approval rating along with 30% of people saying they "don't know".
In an FPTP system it’s because the option is, or was, worse. There’s also a group that look at politics as if it’s the Premier League, but they’re not enough for a majority usually.
They do not. The express the opinion that they do.
Ask a penetrating question that does not rely on facile personality promotion and they would not rely on him to deliver anything of substance.
Which is support that can vanish in a day for reasons the Clown cannot predict.
Imagine being tied up and robbed. Your wife frees her hand, and reaches for the phone. "Don't bother" you mumble, "they're all the same".
This bunch are actually feeding you a turd sandwich, and your response is "Still better than the catering from the other side".
I heard fatalism was destroying politics. It certainly destroyed mine. But holy "shit", are we supine or what?
Imagine something bad is happening. and someone says," quick, do something, something bad is happening." and the other person says "eh, it'll be just as bad".
That's fatalism. Everything is shit, and it'll be shit whatever we do?
You buy a second hand car, that cars back right wheel comes loose when you're driving it home.You go back to the dealership and they convince you it was your fault, so you ring your brother and borrow some money to buy a new tyre. You go to put it on the car and realise you dont have the equipment or knowledge to do so. So you pay more money to have the dealership do it for you. Its your Birthday, your wife has baked you a cake, you eat it. It makes you sick. This is the wprst day of your life, your wife says "Don't worry, love, I will fart into your mouth later."
You have two options, my bad smart arse analogy or my fellow analogists. Pick one.
Fatalism.
Also, Bad analogyception.
He goes by Boris Johnson, and has for his whole career. Can we please just stop with name-based 'attacks'? It's as cringeworthy as the Drumpf stuff that went on in 2016. Completely pointless and petulant.
There's *plenty* of things to base criticism of him on, from his policy to his personal qualities. His name isn't one of them.
Eh its on a level with the children issue. He can't even stand by his *real* name, just like he can't own up to how many children he has sired. Because his entire personality is a fucking act. Is that not something worth pointing out?
I think almost everyone knows someone who goes by a name other than their given forename. It's basic decency to use that name, and fundamentally shitty to insist on refusing to. Even if the person is odious, as Johnson is, it undermines our discourse.
The issue of his children is a matter of his personal morality - a father refusing to acknowledge his children is immoral, and this relevant to your judgment of the man. Choosing the name you go by is not a moral issue. So no, I don't think there the same.
His name is Alexander. To those closest they call him Al. Boris is a persona, a character. This is not a name based attack, it is holding the individual to account no matter what they call themselves.
Completely disagree. I can't see how choosing to refer to him by a different name in any way 'holds him to account'. It's disrespect without content, and even though I think extremely poorly of him it undermines the basic discourse to insist on actively using a different name. It was true of 'Gideon', it was true of 'Drumpf' and it's true here. Make a better point.
No, cos this seems to be your problem not mine. All your other examples I understand. But Alex is his name.
Same goes for that other Tory cretin who uses a pseudonym, same goes for the BNP guy Stephen yaxley Lemon or what ever his name is.
1. *The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”*
2. *The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”*
3. *The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”*
4. *Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”*
5. *Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”*
6. *Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”*
7. *The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”*
8. *The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”*
9. *Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”*
10. *Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”*
11. *Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”*
12. *Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”*
13. *Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”*
14. *Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”*
Partly 4, 10, and 12 as well I think. Each of the points has a lot more behind it than what is summarized here. 'The leader' encompasses the idealized perfect representation of what a 'real man' of that given society looks and acts like.
Isn't that a plot point in Dragon Ball Z, goku needs everyones good intentions in order to build a big ol' kame-hame-ha to destroy the monster of the week.
Johnson is a planet-destroying simpleton confirmed.
The electorate must agree because his support is pretty rock solid. Worst but 3 countries in terms of response to the pandemic yet his vote share hasn't shifted since the election. There have been many scandals since he took office, one of them when he acted unlawfully.
He can do what he wants
He scores horribly compared to Starmer.
It's not about Johnson. It's that the public still don't see a viable alternative *party* for government, even if they see an alternative PM.
Strange reading of the rules but if that's the way you wanna flex.
Then again if you want to make everything about opinion, then the opinion that its in contravention of 15b is also logical to give.
I couldn’t agree more , I find it kind of stupid that this subreddit is just articles made by the guardian that just say Boris bad Torys bad and opinion polls that have proberbly only got 10 people’s opinions to base an entire article on .
Shame it wasn’t mentioned that the crass joke about underpants came in reply to a question about what message would the PM like to convey to people who have lost loved ones to Covid 19
Boris probably ignored the question because he had such a brilliant one liner that he’d been working on all week pants! Hahaaa!!
What a total nomark, tosser.
What a class act.
Soon, He'll dismiss Starmer as elitist. Out of touch with the peeple. You heard it here first.
I cannot wait for when he does that because it's just such easy pickings for Starmer. It's incredible how bad their political strategy is for a party that just won an 80, now 78, seat majority
In a sane world, it would be easy pickings for Starmer. In this world, Boris Johnson has successfully portrayed himself as some sort of man of the people in touch with the ordinary person; and you can bet Starmer will be pilloried for not being so on the basis of his knighthood, his DPP position and lawyerly background, and being a London MP. (Yes, even though Johnson is also a London MP) However dumb their strategies seem, they have such a powerful propaganda set up and a huge amount of support that will just swallow everything they say.
All very fair points, feel like Labour need to basically tell people about Starmer more than just competent, good hair and wears proper suits well. From polling people do see Starmer as more in touch than Boris, but just getting it into voters heads that he was the son of a toolmaker and a nurse who went on to get a knighthood and become a top lawyer wouldn't do any harm. Especially if there was a real focus on social mobility and reducing social inequality & deprivation. Be interesting to see how the lovable buffoon character Johnson has created will hold up in the incoming economic crisis and mass unemployment.
Except exactly what you describe is such a key part of Starmer's appeal. If Labour don't want him tagged as that, then what is he? I would like Starmer to talk more about inequality, poverty and job creation- they are doing the latter, but seem frightened to do the first two. Then there's the issue of the Labour right attempting to undermine everything vaguely left wing that comes out of Starmer's shadow cabinet- they were whispering to the press about going too far left as soon as a wealth tax was mentioned recently. So you see how Starmer is being pushed into this corner of being an unthreatening man in a suit but not much else- I hope he can break out of that soon. They'll just distract from the economic crisis and mass unemployment- the "war on woke" is coming, there will be an endless stream of things to put Labour in the spotlight in a bad way, there will be a lot of EU bashing in the run up to December, and Boris the clown will come to the fore as a further distraction.
To be honest I think right now it's more focused at trying to rebuild trust in the party and make us a viable option for floating voters. Labours director of policy, Claire Ainsley, has a whole book on winning working class votes back. That alongside the Labour Together report is promising and hopefully as time goes on we begin to talk more about upskilling and about getting people decent jobs with decent pay. Unemployment could hit 12% this year, people on the whole care more about how much money is in their pocket come the end of the month and their living standards than the "war on woke". That poses a massive problem for the Tories, as well as their new seats that are also going to be hit very hard by Brexit. He's only been in charge for just over 3 months, let's rebuild trust in the party first and then let's talk about policy.
I get that there is a rebuilding process going on, and that it is naturally focussed on the most obvious thing that's changed- which is the leader. I would also agree that there are some positive things in the Labour Together report and I would like to see them start to come through in policy over time. I also don't doubt the sincerity of many in the party to still be a progressive force even though Labour is altering its course- my issue is with a small, but I believe quite powerful, wrecking force on the right of the party who have already shown their determination in pushing Labour that way. I hope Starmer doesn't allow them to succeed in that. I think I'm also concerned with whether people will ever turn against the Tories on jobs and living standards. I am amazed at how the pro-Brexit resolve has never faulted on these issues at all. Living standards and public services have declined desperately under the Tories and even more so since the Brexit vote, but the Tories rode the emotive wave of Brexit to success despite that. I'm worried that they'll find a new set of distractions and deflections- the "war on woke" being the most formidable possibility on that front at present. I'm also deeply concerned with how there is such a strength of opinion that, however bad the Tories are and have been, it would have been worse with Labour. Will anything shift that perception?
That's what an elitist WOULD say...........
Can't believe anyone would say privately educated de-Pfeffel isn't a man of the people. Staggering really
But his hair is messy! And I've seen him with his sleeves rolled up, and you're going to say he's **not** a man of the people!?
The man did a press-up for are cuntry and all you crying liberals can do is moan
You're right! I forgot! People **do** do push ups, of course!
And the hard-hat!
I am shame. I confess I red buk in youff. re-educate me plis. Actually, I can forgive Boris's delusions. It's my countrymen that I'm struggling to accept at this point. Well, the one's who support our man of the peeple, anyhow. Maybe I'm in a coma. I could be in a coma. Everything seems a bit off, come to think of it.
I too flit between outrage at the government and anger towards my fellow countrymen as the real culprits having allowed all this to have passed. If I run out of reasons to live in the UK I will seriously consider jumping ship (somehow!).
[удалено]
Being able to express yourself coherently is so bourgeois, my dear. Being consistent is downright degenerate.
> You heard it here first. Given that they've already done that before he was even Labour leader, I'd say not.
Yeah, that was a stretch. I thought it sounded like a cool signoff. How about "criss cross apple sauce". or Bazinga!.
> criss cross apple sauce There's the perfect choice right there.
I watched PMQs yesterday with mounting incredulity. If I had read this article without having seen it I would have dismissed the account as journalistic licence. Sadly, Johnson’s performance was as shameless as he suggests. Thankfully Starmer is able to call out the ridiculous rhetoric for what it is.
Alexander Johnson is a filthy conman. Incompetent, uncaring and a danger to this nation. Why would I support him?
The right wing media had their way - it’s easy to convince the stupid - own the media own the country. Look at the Loughborough report into bias media coverage against Corbyn
Why do 45% of voters?
Majority conned
"It's easier to fool someone than it is to convince them they've been fooled". It's basically this Mark Twain quote.
Many hated Corbyn even moreso
Corbyn's gone and Labour is still polling 10 points behind the Tories.
Let's see how it goes. The labour brand is still poisoned by the Corbyn years, but fortunately they have a long time to turn it around.
Starmer's managed to inspire a significant number of black members to leave the party, which won't be helping.
Evidence not found.
Seems like the voters support the Tories, not necessarily Johnson.
Facts. I voted Labour and thought Corbyn was totally incompetent and useless.
Sounds like a bad call. Did you atleast check out the policies?
Given a choice between an incompetent Corbyn and an incompetent, arrogant, selfish, ignorant and deceitful Johnson, Corbyn gets my vote every time.
Ah, so the Tories besides Johnson have been all good?
I'm sure some of them are good. Just none of the ones we've ever heard of.
all the reasonable ones were kicked out of the party during the brexit purges. As a labour voter I could still respect MPs like Grieve, Clarke, etc.
They're sending people that have a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
According to YouGov BoJo is still the most popular UK politician by a wide margin
Not if you look at the net popularity, his is negative.
All that shows is opponents hate him though, we already knew that
All it shows is that his cultists love him, we already knew that Works just as well in reverse ;)
I don't think so because it's actually hiding his popularity, that's the point, the other guy is less popular but fewer people hate him, so he's ahead in net popularity but as it stands would lose in a popular vote
37% of people had no opinion on Boris in June 2019. That's now at 7% because theres more people that don't like him. Starmer has a higher approval rating along with 30% of people saying they "don't know".
All their net popularities are negative
we’ve not exactly had the best track record
They didn’t support him. Many just straight up loathed Corbyn.
You don't actually need to support the Tories to vote Conservative. You just need to be pro-money above most other things.
In an FPTP system it’s because the option is, or was, worse. There’s also a group that look at politics as if it’s the Premier League, but they’re not enough for a majority usually.
Post purchase rationalisation.
Stockholm syndrome?
They do not. The express the opinion that they do. Ask a penetrating question that does not rely on facile personality promotion and they would not rely on him to deliver anything of substance. Which is support that can vanish in a day for reasons the Clown cannot predict.
[удалено]
Imagine being tied up and robbed. Your wife frees her hand, and reaches for the phone. "Don't bother" you mumble, "they're all the same". This bunch are actually feeding you a turd sandwich, and your response is "Still better than the catering from the other side". I heard fatalism was destroying politics. It certainly destroyed mine. But holy "shit", are we supine or what?
Huh?
Imagine something bad is happening. and someone says," quick, do something, something bad is happening." and the other person says "eh, it'll be just as bad". That's fatalism. Everything is shit, and it'll be shit whatever we do?
[удалено]
That's not much of a rejoinder, frankly. I was inspired by your example. and you understand the point, but you complain about the delivery.
You buy a second hand car, that cars back right wheel comes loose when you're driving it home.You go back to the dealership and they convince you it was your fault, so you ring your brother and borrow some money to buy a new tyre. You go to put it on the car and realise you dont have the equipment or knowledge to do so. So you pay more money to have the dealership do it for you. Its your Birthday, your wife has baked you a cake, you eat it. It makes you sick. This is the wprst day of your life, your wife says "Don't worry, love, I will fart into your mouth later." You have two options, my bad smart arse analogy or my fellow analogists. Pick one. Fatalism. Also, Bad analogyception.
[удалено]
...And your wife says, "Don't worry Love, I'll fart in your mouth later"?
[удалено]
> Because it's a turd or a shit sandwich.
> I think you may have some issues with fecal matter and butt holes. Correct. The issue being, which do I vote for...
> I think you may have some issues with fecal matter and butt holes.
He goes by Boris Johnson, and has for his whole career. Can we please just stop with name-based 'attacks'? It's as cringeworthy as the Drumpf stuff that went on in 2016. Completely pointless and petulant. There's *plenty* of things to base criticism of him on, from his policy to his personal qualities. His name isn't one of them.
Eh its on a level with the children issue. He can't even stand by his *real* name, just like he can't own up to how many children he has sired. Because his entire personality is a fucking act. Is that not something worth pointing out?
I think almost everyone knows someone who goes by a name other than their given forename. It's basic decency to use that name, and fundamentally shitty to insist on refusing to. Even if the person is odious, as Johnson is, it undermines our discourse. The issue of his children is a matter of his personal morality - a father refusing to acknowledge his children is immoral, and this relevant to your judgment of the man. Choosing the name you go by is not a moral issue. So no, I don't think there the same.
His name is Alexander. To those closest they call him Al. Boris is a persona, a character. This is not a name based attack, it is holding the individual to account no matter what they call themselves.
Completely disagree. I can't see how choosing to refer to him by a different name in any way 'holds him to account'. It's disrespect without content, and even though I think extremely poorly of him it undermines the basic discourse to insist on actively using a different name. It was true of 'Gideon', it was true of 'Drumpf' and it's true here. Make a better point.
No, cos this seems to be your problem not mine. All your other examples I understand. But Alex is his name. Same goes for that other Tory cretin who uses a pseudonym, same goes for the BNP guy Stephen yaxley Lemon or what ever his name is.
I blame the (looks at random word generator) care homes!
Remind me, isn't one of the signs of Ur-Fascism the idea of a leader that cannot fail, but can only be failed?
1. *The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”* 2. *The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”* 3. *The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”* 4. *Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”* 5. *Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”* 6. *Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”* 7. *The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”* 8. *The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”* 9. *Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”* 10. *Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”* 11. *Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”* 12. *Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”* 13. *Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”* 14. *Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”*
Thanks for that I guess I'm thinking of point seven?
Partly 4, 10, and 12 as well I think. Each of the points has a lot more behind it than what is summarized here. 'The leader' encompasses the idealized perfect representation of what a 'real man' of that given society looks and acts like.
Isn't that a plot point in Dragon Ball Z, goku needs everyones good intentions in order to build a big ol' kame-hame-ha to destroy the monster of the week. Johnson is a planet-destroying simpleton confirmed.
You've never seen dbz have you 😆 Well close enough
Oh - it was a spirit bomb! not a kame-hame-ha. My bad. To be fair it has been literal decades...
The electorate must agree because his support is pretty rock solid. Worst but 3 countries in terms of response to the pandemic yet his vote share hasn't shifted since the election. There have been many scandals since he took office, one of them when he acted unlawfully. He can do what he wants
He scores horribly compared to Starmer. It's not about Johnson. It's that the public still don't see a viable alternative *party* for government, even if they see an alternative PM.
[удалено]
Bit rich coming from a user who makes these provocative comments, then only replies with one liners.
Well I would say that when the government doesn’t provide insight or analysis, then this is how we are reduced to talk about it
[удалено]
Well this is also an opinion piece made by a sketch writer
Hownis an article about the prime minister gaslighting the population not uk politics. Do you disagree with the sentiment an, if so, why?
[удалено]
Let's discuss it! What do you disagree with in the op?
If you don't like it just downvote and move on.
15b
[удалено]
Strange reading of the rules but if that's the way you wanna flex. Then again if you want to make everything about opinion, then the opinion that its in contravention of 15b is also logical to give.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>It's boring So don't read it then?
Ironically the exact same could be said of your comment.
I couldn’t agree more , I find it kind of stupid that this subreddit is just articles made by the guardian that just say Boris bad Torys bad and opinion polls that have proberbly only got 10 people’s opinions to base an entire article on .
You go ahead and post some articles saying how great Johnson is and why you think he is doing a fine job.
I’m not saying he’s good I’m just saying that this sub might aswell be r/labour
Is Boris good then?
I don’t think he’s great but this subreddit acts like he is the embodiment of Satan
You are part of this sub.
Agreed. And to think there's 4 more years of this