The United Kingdom and the Death of Boris Johnson as we know it.

[Turkish]

Just now, whelk said:

Some of those committees can be engrossing if you have nothing better to do I would put watching Question Time as the bigger waste of time. 

Most people do 

[Turkish]

40 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

A part time job maybe?  Ease those money worries?

Can you imagine the interview?

me sog, can you give us an example of when you were faced with a challenging situation and how you overcame it?

well yes, I post on an Internet forum which is great way to share my incredible insights with the wider world and if anyone disagrees with me i just call them a Tommy Robinson supporting narcissists and if that doesn’t work pretend I’ve put them them on ignore 

[badgerx16]

9 hours ago, Turkish said:

Nad has spoken 

 

 

Where is this "economic advantage over the rest of the World" she speaks of ?

[Weston Super Saint]

39 minutes ago, whelk said:

Could he be your broom understudy?

You'd be too thick.

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

You'd be too thick.

Could you teach me the advanced geometry you must need to to sweep up that dust efficiently? 

[saint1977]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

That goes to Truss. Or Liz for Weston

There’s no competition in the modern era. Boris was always going to be an un-focused, dishonest lazy disaster and May was only ever an interim - and blew the Brexit negotiation straight away - but from any party Truss is in a different league of Frank Spencer ineptitude, unworkable ideas and sheer chaos. I know people through work who were involved in the party conference in Birmingham and I laughed when they predicted Truss and Kwarteng wouldn’t see the end of October in post as it was that chaotic and badly run. Turns out the laugh was on all of us and those renewing mortgages especially, thanks to the IEA, Daily Telegraph, Mail, Patrick Fucking Minford and John Twat Redwood. Oh, and all of the useless ‘think tanks’ in Tufton St with a combined IQ of 1. 

Yes, it still makes my blood boil. Corbyn would have been equally disastrous but impossible to be worse than Truss. Yet she and the likes of Simon Clarke, the male equivalent of Dorries and Boris, still spout off about growth in the idiot newspapers above. They couldn’t grow cress on a windowsill. They are the equivalent of the bloke selling Socialist Worker on Southampton High St in the 1990s - a relic out of their era - except their voices get amplified by the various non-dom and dubious owners of their party’s newspapers. 

Edited 25 March, 2023 by saint1977

[sadoldgit]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

That goes to Truss. Or Liz for Weston

I still give that crown to Johnson. As appalling as Truss was, she was out of the door very quickly while Johnson was given more time to f**k up the country, something he seemed to do with relish. James O’Brien on LBC went through a list of his worst moments the other day, as if we needed reminding, and although Truss was a spectacular failure and did a great deal of damage in a very short space of time, Johnson did more damage over a longer period of time. Truss is/was a deluded individual promoted well above her abilities. Johnson is on a whole other level when it comes to his unsuitability for any kind of position that involves responsibility for others and has been his whole life from the point that he declared that he wanted to be King of the World.

Truss will be a footnote in the history of the downfall of this country whereas Johnson will occupy several chapters.

Edited 25 March, 2023 by sadoldgit
Add text

[AlexLaw76]

3 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I still give that crown to Johnson. As appalling as Truss was, she was out of the door very quickly while Johnson was given more time to f**k up the country, something he seemed to do with relish. James O’Brian on LBC went through a list of his worst moments the other day, as if we needed reminding, and although Truss was a spectacular failure and did a great deal of damage in a very short space of time, Johnson did more damage over a longer period of time. Truss is/was a deluded individual promoted well above her abilities. Johnson is on a whole other level when it comes to his unsuitability for any kind of position that involves responsibility for others and has been his whole life from the point that he declared that he wanted to be King of the World.

You'd do well to not listen to the wisdom of that idiot

[Tamesaint]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You'd do well to not listen to the wisdom of that idiot

No . Be like Batman and get all your opinions from Twitter 

[whelk]

7 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You'd do well to not listen to the wisdom of that idiot

You should listen to some of his Full Disclosure podcasts. Lots of interesting people and he is a good interviewer. Can be annoying on radio though

[Tamesaint]

1 hour ago, saint1977 said:

There’s no competition in the modern era. Boris was always going to be an un-focused, dishonest lazy disaster and May was only ever an interim - and blew the Brexit negotiation straight away - but from any party Truss is in a different league of Frank Spencer ineptitude, unworkable ideas and sheer chaos. I know people through work who were involved in the party conference in Birmingham and I laughed when they predicted Truss and Kwarteng wouldn’t see the end of October in post as it was that chaotic and badly run. Turns out the laugh was on all of us and those renewing mortgages especially, thanks to the IEA, Daily Telegraph, Mail, Patrick Fucking Minford and John Twat Redwood. Oh, and all of the useless ‘think tanks’ in Tufton St with a combined IQ of 1. 

Yes, it still makes my blood boil. Corbyn would have been equally disastrous but impossible to be worse than Truss. Yet she and the likes of Simon Clarke, the male equivalent of Dorries and Boris, still spout off about growth in the idiot newspapers above. They couldn’t grow cress on a windowsill. They are the equivalent of the bloke selling Socialist Worker on Southampton High St in the 1990s - a relic out of their era - except their voices get amplified by the various non-dom and dubious owners of their party’s newspapers. 

Imagine being a Conservative party member and a season ticket holder at SMS.

Having both Liz Truss and Nathan Jones to support in the space of a few months. 😁😁

[whelk]

14 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I still give that crown to Johnson. As appalling as Truss was, she was out of the door very quickly while Johnson was given more time to f**k up the country, something he seemed to do with relish. James O’Brian on LBC went through a list of his worst moments the other day, as if we needed reminding, and although Truss was a spectacular failure and did a great deal of damage in a very short space of time, Johnson did more damage over a longer period of time. Truss is/was a deluded individual promoted well above her abilities. Johnson is on a whole other level when it comes to his unsuitability for any kind of position that involves responsibility for others and has been his whole life from the point that he declared that he wanted to be King of the World.

See Saint1977’s post above. 

[AlexLaw76]

12 minutes ago, whelk said:

You should listen to some of his Full Disclosure podcasts. Lots of interesting people and he is a good interviewer. Can be annoying on radio though

James O'brien is pretty vile on his LBC show (although, the anything hour - can't remember the actual title - is pretty good).

He arrogantly claims he is never wrong, yet he cosied up to the views of a lunatic (on air for many week) called Carl Beech (sentenced to 18 years inside). O'brien continued to host calls with lunatics lying on the air, about child abuse by 'named persons in the public domain' as claimed by Beech, despite being told the claims were untrue by his producers.

But he hates Tory's, so that is all fine.

 

Edited 25 March, 2023 by AlexLaw76

[badgerx16]

32 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You'd do well to not listen to the wisdom of that idiot

Which idiots do you listen to ?

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, whelk said:

Could you teach me the advanced geometry you must need to to sweep up that dust efficiently? 

Probably not.  As ever, you'd probably grasp the wrong end of the stick.

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

 

Truss will be a footnote in the history of the downfall of this country whereas Johnson will occupy several chapters.

Don’t be such a drama queen. “The downfall of this country” 😂. Sounds a pretty boring book if Boris is the subject of several chapters, the type of book written for sad sacks who spend all day watching The privileges committee hearings on a spring day.  
 

Lighten up, you could be in France or some other dysfunctional country. 

[Tamesaint]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

James O'brien is pretty vile on his LBC show (although, the anything hour - can't remember the actual title - is pretty good).

He arrogantly claims he is never wrong, yet he cosied up to the views of a lunatic (on air for many week) called Carl Beech (sentenced to 18 years inside). O'brien continued to host calls with lunatics lying on the air, about child abuse by 'named persons in the public domain' as claimed by Beech, despite being told the claims were untrue by his producers.

But he hates Tory's, so that is all fine.

 

How did I know that child abuse would be something to do with your dislike of him. 

Are you obsessed by paedophilia and transsexuals??

[sadoldgit]

On 25/03/2023 at 11:04, AlexLaw76 said:

James O'brien is pretty vile on his LBC show (although, the anything hour - can't remember the actual title - is pretty good).

He arrogantly claims he is never wrong, yet he cosied up to the views of a lunatic (on air for many week) called Carl Beech (sentenced to 18 years inside). O'brien continued to host calls with lunatics lying on the air, about child abuse by 'named persons in the public domain' as claimed by Beech, despite being told the claims were untrue by his producers.

But he hates Tory's, so that is all fine.

 

I don’t think it is true that he hates all Tories.He has been quite complimentary about some of the more old school Tories but I would agree that he has no time for Gammons (which is fair enough). It is quite funny listening to him make them look foolish when he gets them trying to defend Brexit, their view on foreigners and their reasons for hating “woke”. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. It is good to hear someone not holding back on their views about the likes of Truss, Johnson, Dorries, Raab, Hancock, Patel, Braverman, Anderson etc, etc, etc given the free ride that they are given in the Tory press. The are not only appalling politicians they are also appalling human beings and at least he has the balls to say on radio what many of us think about them.

Personally I prefer Shelagh Forgerty though, not so full on. You are better off sticking with Nick Ferrari, Batman. He sounds much more like your cup of tea.

Edited 27 March, 2023 by sadoldgit

[AlexLaw76]

6 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t think it is true that he hates all Tories.He has been quite complimentary about some of the more old school Tories but I would agree that he has no time for Gammons (which is fair enough). It is quite funny listening to him make them look foolish when he gets them trying to defend Brexit, their view on foreigners and their reasons for hating “woke”. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. It is good to hear someone not holding back on their views about the likes of Truss, Johnson, Dorries, Raab, Hancock, Patel, Braverman, Chapman etc, etc, etc given the free ride that they are given in the Tory press. The are not only appalling politicians they are also appalling human beings and at least he has the balls to say on radio what many of us think about them.

Personally I prefer Shelagh Forgerty though, not so full on. You are better off sticking with Nick Ferrari, Batman. He sounds much more like your cup of tea.

You carry on intently tuning into a man that knowingly gave air time a peodo-fanstasist, who was sentenced to 18 years in jail.  A man who made outrageous claims against D-Day veterans.

Now, imagine if a radio host from the "far right" openly backed such a character......

 

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

 

Now, imagine if a radio host from the "far right" openly backed such a character......

 

Some on here would still listen to him/her.

[saint1977]

Truss’s four names for honours come from the same cesspit as her. Jon Moynihan has been wrong on every prediction he’s made, not least on Brexit, and still blames the mini budget crisis on the Bank of England. No, seriously, he does.

Mr Bean lookalike Matthew Sinclair from the Tory party’s very own Taxpayers Alliance is a preaching hypocrite and brow-nosed his way into a job paid by funnily enough us the taxpayer, the moment Truss handed it to him, and Littlewood is a fossil from another economic policy era, the inverse Derek Robinson. Ruth Porter was her campaign manager so the most understandable but still ex-IEA.

Four names too many and sums up the chronic failings of the Tory hard right.

The Daily Mail - ‘ At last, a proper Tory budget’. That should rammed down their columnists throats as a gobstopper for the next 30 years at least as a millstone around their necks. 

For balance, Andy Burnham just fined £2k for speeding. Shouldn’t have lost concentration like that but unlike Truss and her IEA/Tufton cronies, at least he can admit his mistakes. Truss still never believes she made any mistakes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65075328

Edited 25 March, 2023 by saint1977

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anyone who thinks Truss is “hard right” shouldn’t really be commenting on politics. 

[The Kraken]

Replace “hard” for “rarely” and you’re probably there.

[Turkish]

6 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t think it is true that he hates all Tories.He has been quite complimentary about some of the more old school Tories but I would agree that he has no time for Gammons (which is fair enough). It is quite funny listening to him make them look foolish when he gets them trying to defend Brexit, their view on foreigners and their reasons for hating “woke”. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. It is good to hear someone not holding back on their views about the likes of Truss, Johnson, Dorries, Raab, Hancock, Patel, Braverman, Chapman etc, etc, etc given the free ride that they are given in the Tory press. The are not only appalling politicians they are also appalling human beings and at least he has the balls to say on radio what many of us think about them.

Personally I prefer Shelagh Forgerty though, not so full on. You are better off sticking with Nick Ferrari, Batman. He sounds much more like your cup of tea.

Are you sure you shouldn’t be a Liverpool or Celtic fan Sog? I’ve just got back from a day out at Anfield with our u10s team trip to the Liverpool v Celtic legends game. Several times the entire ground sang “if hate the tories clap your hands” I think you’re better suited to these clubs sog. Perhaps you should join their forums? You’d fit in better there I think 

[sadoldgit]

9 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You carry on intently tuning into a man that knowingly gave air time a peodo-fanstasist, who was sentenced to 18 years in jail.  A man who made outrageous claims against D-Day veterans.

Now, imagine if a radio host from the "far right" openly backed such a character......

 

You muster up an awful lot of righteous injustice in the Beech case but not one iota of concern when Eleanor Williams falsely accused some Asians of rape. Perhaps a bit of consistency wouldn’t go amiss?

As for James O’Brien, was he the only media person to “cosy up” to Beech? Was he the only person to be duped by Beech? Clearly not. But given that O’Brien makes daily mincemeat of the values and the people that you hold dear, you feel the need to dump on him. Have you ever had the bottle to call him up and express your views? No, I doubt if you have the back bone because you know you would would be embarrased even more than you are on here.

[AlexLaw76]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

You muster up an awful lot of righteous injustice in the Beech case but not one iota of concern when Eleanor Williams falsely accused some Asians of rape. Perhaps a bit of consistency wouldn’t go amiss?

As for James O’Brien, was he the only media person to “cosy up” to Beech? Was he the only person to be duped by Beech? Clearly not. But given that O’Brien makes daily mincemeat of the values and the people that you hold dear, you feel the need to dump on him. Have you ever had the bottle to call him up and express your views? No, I doubt if you have the back bone because you know you would would be embarrased even more than you are on here.

James O'Brien was the prominent media person to cozy up to him, even when it was known the stories - which people have committed suicide over - were untrue.

Hating Tory's is a murky business at times!

[Weston Super Saint]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

You muster up an awful lot of righteous injustice in the Beech case but not one iota of concern when Eleanor Williams falsely accused some Asians of rape. Perhaps a bit of consistency wouldn’t go amiss?

Consistency? Seriously?

The girl told lies and didn't get away with it, rightly so, but you seem to be making a big fuss about it.

Do you remember another girl who told lies, ruined a football career and was rightly found out. You didn't make such a big fuss about those lies, in fact I seem to remember the term "rape apologist" bandied about willy nilly by you.

Talk us through how this consistency thing works....

[Lord Duckhunter]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

 

As for James O’Brien, was he the only media person to “cosy up” to Beech? 

Pretty much, yes. O Brien himself complained that the “mainstream media” wasn’t taking it as seriously as they should have been. Claiming the story needs “injections of enthusiasm from outside because it still isn’t dominating front pages or securing splashes”. Between him & Watson they made innocent people’s lives a misery. Like you, their hatred of all things “Tory “ clouded their judgement. Unfortunately, their warped hatred had far more serious consequences than your spamming of threads does. 

Edited 26 March, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[whelk]

11 hours ago, Turkish said:

Are you sure you shouldn’t be a Liverpool or Celtic fan Sog? I’ve just got back from a day out at Anfield with our u10s team trip to the Liverpool v Celtic legends game. Several times the entire ground sang “if hate the tories clap your hands” I think you’re better suited to these clubs sog. Perhaps you should join their forums? You’d fit in better there I think 

I hope you made your son clap?

[whelk]

4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

James O'Brien was the prominent media person to cozy up to him, even when it was known the stories - which people have committed suicide over - were untrue.

Hating Tory's is a murky business at times!

No idea what you talking about but the apostrophe shouldn’t be used

[Turkish]

30 minutes ago, whelk said:

I hope you made your son clap?

He was too busy reading the Sun 

[saint1977]

15 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Anyone who thinks Truss is “hard right” shouldn’t really be commenting on politics. 

Kraken just nailed it - she’s rarely right on anything. For most normal people, the IEA and Tufton St are economically hard right.

PS - ready to elaborate on those Brexit benefits yet Ducky? Looking forward to those.

Edited 26 March, 2023 by saint1977

[sadoldgit]

6 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

James O'Brien was the prominent media person to cozy up to him, even when it was known the stories - which people have committed suicide over - were untrue.

Hating Tory's is a murky business at times!

And hating liberals is a murky business all the time. You don’t see the irony in O’Brien being taken in by Beech and you being taken in by the likes of Farage, Johnson, Patel, Braverman?

The difference is that liberals are initially inclined to look for the best in people whereas the people that you zone in to always seek the worst. A prime example is the way that you let the idea floated by our Home Secretary that these shores are about to be invaded by billions of migrants (who are by implied definition terrorists, rapists and all round bad eggs) go without censure. Beech is evil because he targeted people you admire. Eleanor Williams on the other hand doesn’t get a mention for doing the same thing to Asians.

I think you hate James O’Brien so much because he holds a mirror up to you and makes it hard for you to live with your mindset. It must be hard to have your deep seated values challenged so strongly every day but fair play to you and your small group of like minded knee jerk reactionaries (good morning Turkish and friends) you keep on managing to fight your ever more indefensible corner.

[Lord Duckhunter]

20 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

Kraken just nailed it - she’s rarely right on anything. For most normal people, the IEA and Tufton St are economically hard right.

 

You’re just labelling people you don’t agree with as “far right”, which is the modern way I’m afraid. The opposition parties and commentators do it all the time, and that leads to ordinary joes (and unordinary Soggys) labelling anyone connected to Brexit or The centre of the Tory party as such. You have the ridiculous spectacle of people calling Boris, a classic wringing wet pinko, hard right. 
 

The hard right, don’t throw tax payers money at peoples energy bills, they don’t try and speed up growth via immigration, they don’t expand the state,  and they certainly don’t loosen fiscal policy to fund tax cuts. Reagan & Maggie both raised taxes when needed to control debt, this lot just borrow more. As Peter Hitchens never stops saying “the biggest hindrance to conservative policies is The Conservative party”. Whether you borrow to spend or borrow to reduce taxes, you’re still borrowing. There’s no coherent right wing of the Tory party any more than there’s a coherent left wing of the Labour Party. There’s a few wannabes on each side, with a blob of professional politicians  in the middle, basically 2 checks of the same arse.  

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

He was too busy reading the Sun 

I hope he put it down for God Save the King which surely was sung before the game?

[Lord Duckhunter]

29 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

 A prime example is the way that you let the idea floated by our Home Secretary that these shores are about to be invaded by billions of migrants (who are by implied definition terrorists, rapists and all round bad eggs) go without censure. 

Could you point us in the direction of where the  Home Secretary floated this idea? You know, the idea “billions” of migrants, because I must have missed that . I’d hate to think you made it up, so a link would be great. 

“Billions” 😂

[Turkish]

9 minutes ago, whelk said:

I hope he put it down for God Save the King which surely was sung before the game?

Ran on the pitch grabbed the mic and screamed “I refuse to sing for an unelected leader to be saved by a false deity” 

and dropped the mic 🎤 

Edited 26 March, 2023 by Turkish

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Could you point us in the direction of where the  Home Secretary floated this idea? You know, the idea “billions” of migrants, because I must have missed that . I’d hate to think you made it up, so a link would be great. 

“Billions” 😂

She wrote in the Daily Mail ; ""There are 100 million people displaced around the world, and likely billions more eager to come here if possible".

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-11832523/SUELLA-BRAVERMAN-British-people-migrants-pouring-Channel.html

Edited 26 March, 2023 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

She wrote in the Daily Mail ; ""There are 100 million people displaced around the world, and likely billions more eager to come here if possible".

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-11832523/SUELLA-BRAVERMAN-British-people-migrants-pouring-Channel.html

He claimed she said   our shores “are about” to be invaded by Billions. She didn’t say that at all, she said “billions eager to come here if possible”. Completely different things. 

Im sure there’s billions that would rather live in England than the hell holes they live in, but billions aren’t going to invade us, and she didn’t say they were. 

[saint1977]

28 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

You’re just labelling people you don’t agree with as “far right”, which is the modern way I’m afraid. The opposition parties and commentators do it all the time, and that leads to ordinary joes (and unordinary Soggys) labelling anyone connected to Brexit or The centre of the Tory party as such. You have the ridiculous spectacle of people calling Boris, a classic wringing wet pinko, hard right. 
 

The hard right, don’t throw tax payers money at peoples energy bills, they don’t try and speed up growth via immigration, they don’t expand the state,  and they certainly don’t loosen fiscal policy to fund tax cuts. Reagan & Maggie both raised taxes when needed to control debt, this lot just borrow more. As Peter Hitchens never stops saying “the biggest hindrance to conservative policies is The Conservative party”. Whether you borrow to spend or borrow to reduce taxes, you’re still borrowing. There’s no coherent right wing of the Tory party any more than there’s a coherent left wing of the Labour Party. There’s a few wannabes on each side, with a blob of professional politicians  in the middle, basically 2 checks of the same arse.  

Correct about Thatcher - she raised VAT and other indirect taxes when needed - not so sure on Ronnie in later years. SDI cost a fortune and made a Mount McKinlay of debt. Truss’s plan was bananas and plenty said at the time me included that it would require sweeping cuts to public spending after a couple of years if the economy didn’t totally tank and markets spook as they did. Simon Clarke pretty much said as much, one of her closest allies. She didn’t have a mandate for it either and the Tory has a massive issue with 50 and under voting for them. Millennials just wouldn’t tolerate austerity Mk2. And Austerity Mk1 helped push Red Wall towards Brexit in the first allied to social differences with New Labour. 

You got your big majority in 2019 through Boris’s pledges on levelling up for the Red Wall. Very costly to implement and to replicate schemes like Interreg with the Shared Prosperity Fund. Boris’s compromise was centrist economics with social conservatism and Brexit to appeal to English nationalism. I could see the appeal but outside of the single market sustainability was an issue hence what Sunak has done in changing the NI deal. However, that means not having the full cake in terms of a IEA deregulated vision of Singapore on Thames which would suit London and the SE. Brexit was an attempt IMO by certain elements eg tabloid owners and segments of the ERG to pass that through without a GE but it doesn’t have the level of electoral support without being tucked within a referendum.

Corbyn and Labour hard left are nowhere too and thrashing around after 2019 was 1983 re-made. Truss and co simply have more outlets to express their own discontent with centrist economic policies.

The one area I did agree with Liz on was on economic immigration and the need for it to grow the economy and mitigate an ageing population. Hence she got rid of Leaky Sue. Asylum is a different matter and keen to avoid re-opening that can of worms…

 

Edited 26 March, 2023 by saint1977

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

He claimed she said   our shores “are about” to be invaded by Billions. She didn’t say that at all, she said “billions eager to come here if possible”. Completely different things. 

Im sure there’s billions that would rather live in England than the hell holes they live in, but billions aren’t going to invade us, and she didn’t say they were. 

I suspect the vast majority of the world would rather live somewhere else than where they do if it was possible. For example I’d rather live on the Amalfi coast than North Yorkshire but it’s not possible for me to do that for many reasons.  

It’s almost like in a hysterical rant he completely misunderstood what was being said, but we all know he wouldn’t do that and he makes sure he had his facts right before going into meltdown 

Edited 26 March, 2023 by Turkish

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

No idea what you talking about but the apostrophe shouldn’t be used

Maybe you could borrow it and correct your own error?

[AlexLaw76]

15 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

He claimed she said   our shores “are about” to be invaded by Billions. She didn’t say that at all, she said “billions eager to come here if possible”. Completely different things. 

Im sure there’s billions that would rather live in England than the hell holes they live in, but billions aren’t going to invade us, and she didn’t say they were. 

Sadoldgit is having another mare, isn't he.

[Lord Duckhunter]

17 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

 

You got your big majority in 2019 through Boris’s pledges on levelling up for the Red Wall. 

 

I’m not a Tory, so don’t understand where this “you” comes from. I’ve voted Tory, when it’s suited my needs, but I’ve voted against them more times than for them over many General and local elections.

One such occasion was 2019, purely along Brexit grounds and I suspect that was more a factor than “levelling up” in the Red wall (it’s a load of old pony anyway). There used to be a party for these red wall working people, a party that was socially conservative, patriotic, and euro sceptic,  but would throw a bit of money around. Unfortunately,  they got taken over by middle class metropolitan liberals who struggle defining what a bird is, want to welcome every Tom, Dick & Mo to our shores & brand people who don’t agree with them racists and thick . 

[badgerx16]

32 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

He claimed she said   our shores “are about” to be invaded by Billions. She didn’t say that at all, she said “billions eager to come here if possible”. Completely different things. 

Im sure there’s billions that would rather live in England than the hell holes they live in, but billions aren’t going to invade us, and she didn’t say they were. 

It isn't what is explicitly said, it is how you expect it to be implicitly read.  Braverman deliberately uses terms that will be inflammatory for a certain audience; "billions", "invasion", etc,  just as Farage used his poster about the population of Turkey. They know, ( hopefully ), that what they say is factually inaccurate, but also know that a section of society will rabidly devour it.

Edited 26 March, 2023 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

6 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

but also know that a section of society will rabidly devour it.

Soggy? 

[badgerx16]

11 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Soggy? 

Not sure he would ever vote for Braverman or Farage.

[Tamesaint]

2 hours ago, saint1977 said:

 

PS - ready to elaborate on those Brexit benefits yet Ducky? Looking forward to those.

It's funny isn't it. Duckie seems to have missed this part of your post. He has contributed 5 times to this thread since you asked the question but he hasn't answered.

You don't think by any chance that he is unable to locate any Brexit benefits ? 😁😁😁

 

[Weston Super Saint]

57 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

It's funny isn't it. Duckie seems to have missed this part of your post. He has contributed 5 times to this thread since you asked the question but he hasn't answered.

You don't think by any chance that he is unable to locate any Brexit benefits ? 😁😁😁

 

Shouldn't this be on the Brexit thread?

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Shouldn't this be on the Brexit thread?

Which, of course, had nothing to do with Boris Johnson, nor, as some would argue, the decline of the United Kingdom.