Scrutable

I just listened to James O'Briens interview with Rory Stewart. In the sane timeline he obviously won the leadership election. He's still a Tory, but at least he acknowledges reality and doesn't come across as a total careerist c.nt like Johnson.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 01, 2020 1:13 pm

snoozeofreason wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 01, 2020 11:36 am

I'm not sure that the fixed-term parliaments act will survive that long. I think the intention was to make it impossible for a government to call a snap election when it still had the confidence of parliament. The events of 2019 showed that it could also work the other way. In other words it could be used to compel a government remain in office even when it arguably did not have the confidence of parliament. I don't think any party is going to want a repeat of that situation.

It's certainly been rumoured to be going - Johnson was frustrated that Corbyn held the cards on that matter last year, and we all know Johnson doesn't like any form of challenge or oversight or criticism. I mean, obviously, Corbyn chucked his cards in the shredder and then let his gerbil sh.t all over them and then through them into a fan where the sh.tty card shreds promptly blew back into his face and made a mess everywhere.

Sorry, I digress.

Point is, under either the FTPA or a scenario where it disappears, the next election will not be as late as December 2024. It will be only as late as May 2024.

Surely it would depend what FTPA got replaced with. If we reverted to the previous legislation then Johnson could hang on to December 2024. I suppose FTPA might survive through inertia, but it's hard to see anyone rushing to the barricades to defend it. Johnson has no reason to love it, but Starmer probably has enough imagination to have developed reservations of his own - the way it played out for the Conservatives in the context of brexit could easily be replicated with a Labour government in the context of some other issue. And it would be hard for anyone to argue that FTPA had worked in the way that was originally intended.

Lots of rumours that Johnson is still ill w/ Covid and will step down in the next few months for health reasons.

snoozeofreason wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:21 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 01, 2020 1:13 pm

snoozeofreason wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 01, 2020 11:36 am

I'm not sure that the fixed-term parliaments act will survive that long. I think the intention was to make it impossible for a government to call a snap election when it still had the confidence of parliament. The events of 2019 showed that it could also work the other way. In other words it could be used to compel a government remain in office even when it arguably did not have the confidence of parliament. I don't think any party is going to want a repeat of that situation.

It's certainly been rumoured to be going - Johnson was frustrated that Corbyn held the cards on that matter last year, and we all know Johnson doesn't like any form of challenge or oversight or criticism. I mean, obviously, Corbyn chucked his cards in the shredder and then let his gerbil sh.t all over them and then through them into a fan where the sh.tty card shreds promptly blew back into his face and made a mess everywhere.

Sorry, I digress.

Point is, under either the FTPA or a scenario where it disappears, the next election will not be as late as December 2024. It will be only as late as May 2024.

Surely it would depend what FTPA got replaced with. If we reverted to the previous legislation then Johnson could hang on to December 2024. I suppose FTPA might survive through inertia, but it's hard to see anyone rushing to the barricades to defend it. Johnson has no reason to love it, but Starmer probably has enough imagination to have developed reservations of his own - the way it played out for the Conservatives in the context of brexit could easily be replicated with a Labour government in the context of some other issue. And it would be hard for anyone to argue that FTPA had worked in the way that was originally intended.

Johnson could indeed hang on to December 2024. But, in reality, he won't.

plodder wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:48 am

Lots of rumours that Johnson is still ill w/ Covid and will step down in the next few months for health reasons.

There were lots of rumours that Cummings would step down by now, and look at that. I don't reckon Johnson will step down, he's wanted this for f.cking years.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 8:32 am

plodder wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:48 am

Lots of rumours that Johnson is still ill w/ Covid and will step down in the next few months for health reasons.

There were lots of rumours that Cummings would step down by now, and look at that. I don't reckon Johnson will step down, he's wanted this for f.cking years.

Yep. He's sacrificed country, party and principles for it. He ain't going to give it up easily.

Cameron hated the hard work of being PM, but he still hung for ages.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 8:32 am

plodder wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:48 am

Lots of rumours that Johnson is still ill w/ Covid and will step down in the next few months for health reasons.

There were lots of rumours that Cummings would step down by now, and look at that. I don't reckon Johnson will step down, he's wanted this for f.cking years.

I agree. Unless he has a serious health problem I don't see any reason why he'd want to step down. He's purged the main opposition within his party and he has a decent sized majority. Who is left who could successfully challenge Johnson?

I think Putin is happy with things as they are. Seems no reason why he'd want to change personnel right now?

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 12:39 pm

I don't see any reason why he'd want to step down.

It's hard work, it's badly paid, people expect him to do things, people blame him when things go wrong, he can't just lie his way out of trouble* with a joke and a wink, people hate him.

I don't think it is what the glorified panel-show host was expecting when he signed up to be World King and his temperament, work-ethic, background and personality make him uniquely badly-suited for the role.

the state of him at #pmqs today !

PeteB wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:57 pm

the state of him at #pmqs today !

Haven't seen/heard it, but the Guardian commentary was damning

First, Johnson doesn’t seem to even be trying to get better. He has had the whole summer to think about how he could improve at PMQs, but today there was no evidence that he has done so. It is one thing to be bad at a particular task; but to try not to get better is less forgivable. This would not matter much if it were just lefty journalists saying that he has been poor at PMQs, but even in the rightwing press it is hard to find anyone saying he has been a success.

From Dan Hodges - (Mail on Sunday) that sometimes thinks (inexplicably to me) Johnson does well at these


(((Dan Hodges)))

Boris got a proper kicking there.

Starmer genuinely angry.

Starmer hammering Boris on the IRA jibe. Labour. Under new management.

“His replies to Sir Keir were incoherent, irritable, and often bewilderingly irrelevant. He had the air of a man who has slept through his alarm, dressed in a panic, and discovers only during the mad dash to the station that his trousers are inside out”. Telegraph

PeteB wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:36 pm

“He had the air of a man who has slept through his alarm, dressed in a panic, and discovers only during the mad dash to the station that his trousers are inside out”. Telegraph

Which TBF could have been written about Johnson at any point during his entire career.

It’s interesting that the “Boris Johnson” persona is a complete fabrication, a deliberate affectation of a hapless, bumbling, shameless, lazy toff to disguise that the core “Al Johnson” persona is in fact a hapless, bumbling, shameless, lazy toff who is also an unpleasant c.nt.

PeteB wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:36 pm

“His replies to Sir Keir were incoherent, irritable, and often bewilderingly irrelevant. He had the air of a man who has slept through his alarm, dressed in a panic, and discovers only during the mad dash to the station that his trousers are inside out”. Telegraph

Does it matter?

PMQs mattered 30 years ago when most of the country watched the news every evening and excerpts of the PMs performance in parliament had an audience of millions.

PMQs also matter when there isn’t a large majority as a good performance will help to keep wayward backbenchers on side.

But these days people are reading conspiracy theories on Facebook instead of watching the TV news, and with a majority of 80 Johnson doesn’t give a sh.t what his backbenchers think.

He looks disheveled and bored because he doesn’t see the point of participating in an irrelevant ritual.

It's a good source of short soundbites for the press / viral video clips for social media, so there's some motivation for injecting the odd moment where you look good even if the rest of it is dross. I think that's what's Johnson's been trying to do by shoehorning in those obviously scripted gags.

PMQs still matters because a relatively small number of people influence a much greater number. The bore in the pub, the facebook know-it-all, the dinner party droner, the forum obsessive. These guys pay attention to things like PMQs and it slowly and imperfectly filters through to the rest of us.

plodder wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 9:55 pm

PMQs still matters because a relatively small number of people influence a much greater number. The bore in the pub, the facebook know-it-all, the dinner party droner, the forum obsessive. These guys pay attention to things like PMQs and it slowly and imperfectly filters through to the rest of us.

Those guys are important, perhaps especially the 0.1% of them who have particularly influential positions in the media (be it traditional journalism, "blogging" sensu latu, billionaire cryptofascist shareholders, etc). They can do a lot with a little.

Business idea: the cash-for-questions bribery was lucrative, and ongoing long after the initial exposé. Surely there's a market for cash-for-answers: bribe the PM to say a particular phrase during his PMQs defence of a well-known scandal, and use it in a pre-written article to corner the all-important first 45 minutes of a tweeted newstorm, solidifying your lead with ~hourly releases of interviews with tame, quasi-important talking heads. Reap bazillions of wannabe political influencers. Then feed them paid propaganda, which is the real income-earner.

If performance at the PMQs is going to hurt Boris, then you are importing a very effective PMQ performer who ticks all the right (geddit?) boxes for the hard Brexit crowd - Tony Abbott.

Yes, that’s why he’s been chosen, it’s the Norman Tebbitt thing (for the older readers)

Little waster wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:51 pm

PeteB wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:36 pm

“He had the air of a man who has slept through his alarm, dressed in a panic, and discovers only during the mad dash to the station that his trousers are inside out”. Telegraph

Which TBF could have been written about Johnson at any point during his entire career.

It’s interesting that the “Boris Johnson” persona is a complete fabrication, a deliberate affectation of a hapless, bumbling, shameless, lazy toff to disguise that the core “Al Johnson” persona is in fact a hapless, bumbling, shameless, lazy toff who is also an unpleasant c.nt.

Yup, I'd said elsewhere that he'd cultivated an image of an amiable buffoon when he was actually a ruthless, calculating buffoon

plodder wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 9:55 pm

The bore in the pub, the facebook know-it-all, the dinner party droner, the forum obsessive.

Hey.

oh noes it's hard tiny violin

In other news; failures in Universal credit mean people are expected to live on no income at all for up to 11 weeks, annual food bank usage reaches 1.9m and 2% of UC claimants are undergoing some form of sanction of up to 6 months without any support at all, for such horrific infractions* as “bus being 5 mins late”, “having their CV on a USB stick rather than pointlessly printed out on the printer they don’t have” and “not using their worthless Universal Jobmatch website on the Tuesday before starting a new job on the Wednesday”.


*I should know I fell foul of all three when I had the joy of going through the kafkaesque farce for a couple of months.