MikeO Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 34 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said: Knowing him it was a tactical decision just so he could throw that sounbite out there himself in the eventuality he could be up to be the next leader. Or he couldn't be arsed to turn up to vote. pete0 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 39 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said: Knowing him it was a tactical decision just so he could throw that sounbite out there himself in the eventuality he could be up to be the next leader. True Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 33 minutes ago, MikeO said: Or he couldn't be arsed to turn up to vote. Or he was busy galavanting around the globe being the walking definition of a Brit abroad. Loud, racist and unapologetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Matt said: Amazing to think that Boris is the best of the bunch there Matt, I think the phrase you were looking for is 'least worst'. Matt and MikeO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 UK democracy, the cornerstone of our country for centuries, swings into action once again with the ageing and the wealthy (124,000 of them, that's 0.27% of the electorate) ultimately voting in bonkers Boris next month; nailed on imo. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48395211 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 1 hour ago, MikeO said: UK democracy, the cornerstone of our country for centuries, swings into action once again with the ageing and the wealthy (124,000 of them, that's 0.27% of the electorate) ultimately voting in bonkers Boris next month; nailed on imo. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48395211 “That's larger than some of the more pessimistic guesstimates...” the British Blogging Corporation strikes again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 13, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 2 hours ago, MikeO said: UK democracy, the cornerstone of our country for centuries, swings into action once again with the ageing and the wealthy (124,000 of them, that's 0.27% of the electorate) ultimately voting in bonkers Boris next month; nailed on imo. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48395211 Mike, I am not sure what your beef is about 'democracy'? I don't particularly want Boris in but am puzzled by your tirade against those voting Boris in. I don't see any difference between that and the left-wing Labour members voting in a left-wing Corbyn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, johnh said: Mike, I am not sure what your beef is about 'democracy'? I don't particularly want Boris in but am puzzled by your tirade against those voting Boris in. I don't see any difference between that and the left-wing Labour members voting in a left-wing Corbyn. It's not democratic to let the elite vote for a new leader without any one else getting a say. Would the same voters who voted Conservative under May vote for them under Boris? Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 30 minutes ago, johnh said: Mike, I am not sure what your beef is about 'democracy'? I don't particularly want Boris in but am puzzled by your tirade against those voting Boris in. I don't see any difference between that and the left-wing Labour members voting in a left-wing Corbyn. I would protest just as vociferously if it was any other party electing a PM in such an undemocratic manner. Corbyn being elected was quite different, it was members voting for a party leader, not for a PM. It's a fairly obvious difference. Puzzled by your puzzlement. Should 0.27% of the voting public really have that power? holystove and Matt 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 https://youtu.be/0hrTK-OWYIs pete0 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 2 hours ago, johnh said: Mike, I am not sure what your beef is about 'democracy'? I don't particularly want Boris in but am puzzled by your tirade against those voting Boris in. I don't see any difference between that and the left-wing Labour members voting in a left-wing Corbyn. This is because you believe the current system is "democracy". It isn'tttt. It's a form of democracy that deceives people into thinking their voice actually matters, when all you really need is to be rich with an Eton education, without morals and have a good social network to actually have a say. It's a very clever trick pulled by the rich and (presumably) inbred to rule with fear. British parliamentary democracy has gotten us to where we are today (no, it's not responsible for success and wealth, that came from centuries of command, conquer and exploitation) - an absolute farce of "freedom" and an international laughing stock. The people voting for Boris are less than 1% of the population. That isn'tttt representing people, it's playing a game of deception. Just as the Brexit referendum was; Choose a car - The red that you know that's not perfect but has many, many advantages and is constantly being upgraded by people who know the ins and outs of it better than any of us could. Or a blue one. Doesn't matter what blue model it is, or what features you'll get with it. Don't worry though, we'll decide that for you. Then you end up with a stock 1974 Vauxhall Cavalier with rust riddled throughout because you were led to believe you had a choice. If Labour was running this shit-show, and that's not necessarily a comforting thought by any means, and they had a leadership change, I'd be just as angry at the lack of a say. Any time there is a leadership change, there should be a general election, regardless of who is in charge. I was shocked when Blair stepped down and Brown stepped in - no one voted for him so why the fuck should he then run the country? Why - because parlimentary democracy is not a democracy, it's a veiled form of dictatorship. StevO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 Following on from Matt's post above. Be interesting if anyone could hold Boris to his old words. https://evolvepolitics.com/boris-johnson-said-it-was-a-scandal-fraud-for-an-unelected-pm-not-to-call-immediate-general-election-after-inheriting-top-job/?fbclid=IwAR0iSs3oKYFYRIX_AlpvhLIPB-m6uW3T3W9NppTqmDtsM8JmkLOpm24yCAk Matt, StevO and MikeO 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 13, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 2 hours ago, MikeO said: I would protest just as vociferously if it was any other party electing a PM in such an undemocratic manner. Corbyn being elected was quite different, it was members voting for a party leader, not for a PM. It's a fairly obvious difference. Puzzled by your puzzlement. Should 0.27% of the voting public really have that power? Mike, I presume you raised your concerns then when Gordon Brown was installed as PM? Its the way the cookie crumbles. Both parties have gained from it this century. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 13, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 56 minutes ago, Matt said: This is because you believe the current system is "democracy". It isn'ttttt. It's a form of democracy that deceives people into thinking their voice actually matters, when all you really need is to be rich with an Eton education, without morals and have a good social network to actually have a say. It's a very clever trick pulled by the rich and (presumably) inbred to rule with fear. British parliamentary democracy has gotten us to where we are today (no, it's not responsible for success and wealth, that came from centuries of command, conquer and exploitation) - an absolute farce of "freedom" and an international laughing stock. The people voting for Boris are less than 1% of the population. That isn'ttttt representing people, it's playing a game of deception. Just as the Brexit referendum was; Choose a car - The red that you know that's not perfect but has many, many advantages and is constantly being upgraded by people who know the ins and outs of it better than any of us could. Or a blue one. Doesn't matter what blue model it is, or what features you'll get with it. Don't worry though, we'll decide that for you. Then you end up with a stock 1974 Vauxhall Cavalier with rust riddled throughout because you were led to believe you had a choice. If Labour was running this shit-show, and that's not necessarily a comforting thought by any means, and they had a leadership change, I'd be just as angry at the lack of a say. Any time there is a leadership change, there should be a general election, regardless of who is in charge. I was shocked when Blair stepped down and Brown stepped in - no one voted for him so why the fuck should he then run the country? Why - because parlimentary democracy is not a democracy, it's a veiled form of dictatorship. Matt, I'm afraid that most of the above 'rant' (for that's what it is) is not worthy of a response, but I do agree on one point. A General Election should be held if there is a change to a PM during a term of government. However, I would restrict this to circumstances where a PM is replaced due to a vote of no confidence. This would also help to concentrate minds and head off ultra-ambitious would be PM's. A PM could be replaced by illness or death, what if this happened a few weeks after a General Election? Another one next week? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 13 minutes ago, johnh said: Mike, I presume you raised your concerns then when Gordon Brown was installed as PM? Its the way the cookie crumbles. Both parties have gained from it this century. Totally different. Brown was installed as deputy leader, no vote after Blair stepped down. I'll ask you again, do you believe that 0.27% of the voting public deciding on the next PM is a democratic process? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 13, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 1 minute ago, MikeO said: Totally different. Brown was installed as deputy leader, no vote after Blair stepped down. I'll ask you again, do you believe that 0.27% of the voting public deciding on the next PM is a democratic process? Its always totally different. Let me get this straight. For the Conservatives, 0.27% of the voting public (though its not the voting public, its the membership - same rules as Labour). For Labour it was 0% of the voting public (membership). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 14 minutes ago, johnh said: Its always totally different. Let me get this straight. For the Conservatives, 0.27% of the voting public (though its not the voting public, its the membership - same rules as Labour). For Labour it was 0% of the voting public (membership). 0.27% of the electorate (the voting public by another name) deciding on the new PM. First time it's ever happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 13, 2019 Report Share Posted June 13, 2019 1 hour ago, MikeO said: I'll ask you again, do you believe that 0.27% of the voting public deciding on the next PM is a democratic process? Feels like talking to Pete in the Gana thread, simple question to answer but nowt forthcoming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 16 hours ago, MikeO said: Feels like talking to Pete in the Gana thread, simple question to answer but nowt forthcoming. Mike, I've answered it. The rules for both Labour and Conservatives require the membership to vote. Bringing the 'voting public' in is hypothetical. I will state it again, if the Conservative hypothetical vote is 0.27% then Gordon Brown's was 0%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 14, 2019 Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 30 minutes ago, johnh said: Mike, I've answered it. The rules for both Labour and Conservatives require the membership to vote. Bringing the 'voting public' in is hypothetical. I will state it again, if the Conservative hypothetical vote is 0.27% then Gordon Brown's was 0%. No because Labour were voted in while Brown was deputy leader, so everyone knew if (actually common knowledge that it was when) Blair stood down he'd be PM. Completely different circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 14, 2019 Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 2 hours ago, johnh said: Mike, I've answered it. The rules for both Labour and Conservatives require the membership to vote. Bringing the 'voting public' in is hypothetical. I will state it again, if the Conservative hypothetical vote is 0.27% then Gordon Brown's was 0%. As Mike said Gordon Brown was deputy. He took over as is natural. What the Conservatives are doing is completely different. They've squandered a vote of no confidence in order to keep power and more they are picking the next leader between them. Given they then forced May out so they should be done for treason. Everyone of them who voted confidence in her were lying and done it for the benefit of themselves. Putting yourself before the country. MikeO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 14, 2019 Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 1 hour ago, johnh said: ...if the Conservative hypothetical vote is 0.27%... ....except it's not hypothetical, it's factual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 The fact remains, Gordon Brown was never voted in and you seem to have a sudden respect for voting after three years of trying to overturn the largest vote in our history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 14, 2019 Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 2 hours ago, johnh said: The fact remains, Gordon Brown was never voted in and you seem to have a sudden respect for voting after three years of trying to overturn the largest vote in our history. Sadly I don't have that power John, just expressing opinion and pointing out facts. You know as well as I do that Brown was as good as voted in because everyone knew that Blair was off. Are you suggesting the American VP has no mandate to step up if Trump walked under a bus? Sorry but you're being a total pedant here (that's normally my job). Nobody voted for Boris and this situation is totally unprecedented in our history however much you suggest otherwise. Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 14, 2019 Report Share Posted June 14, 2019 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/lord-sugar-backs-boris-johnson-16517934?fbclid=IwAR2ywRdzjxfHl5lAUQiRbK2vCM6nxP1Nkh6qg5Bm5unNSU5Ipbq7Vg2cPwk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 15, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2019 20 hours ago, MikeO said: Sadly I don't have that power John, just expressing opinion and pointing out facts. You know as well as I do that Brown was as good as voted in because everyone knew that Blair was off. Are you suggesting the American VP has no mandate to step up if Trump walked under a bus? Sorry but you're being a total pedant here (that's normally my job). Nobody voted for Boris and this situation is totally unprecedented in our history however much you suggest otherwise. Mike, no matter how much gloss you put on it, IF Boris is voted in by the membership he will have been 'voted in'. Brown wasn't, in spite of the fact that Labour Party rules state that the membership should vote. Brown was 'nodded through'. Democratic that. You state that 'nobody voted for Boris and this situation is totally unprecedented in our history - however much you suggest otherwise. As for 'pointing out facts' - Half of all Prime Ministers appointed in the last 100 years, were not appointed as a result of a General Election, ie voted in in accordance with party rules. Not exactly unprecedented. Not up to your usual standard Mike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted June 15, 2019 Report Share Posted June 15, 2019 43 minutes ago, johnh said: Mike, no matter how much gloss you put on it, IF Boris is voted in by the membership he will have been 'voted in'. Brown wasn't, in spite of the fact that Labour Party rules state that the membership should vote. Brown was 'nodded through'. Democratic that. You state that 'nobody voted for Boris and this situation is totally unprecedented in our history - however much you suggest otherwise. As for 'pointing out facts' - Half of all Prime Ministers appointed in the last 100 years, were not appointed as a result of a General Election, ie voted in in accordance with party rules. Not exactly unprecedented. Not up to your usual standard Mike. OK, drawing a line under this for me because I don't want to fall out with you; half the PMs in the last century may not have been appointed as a result of a general election but all were appointed because they were deputy PM or as a result of a vote confined to members of their parliamentary party. This is the first time (hence unprecedented without question however much gloss you put on it John) that as a result of the Tories changing their leadership election rules in 1998 a microscopic minority of "the people" get to choose the PM. Elected members choosing new PM? Democratic-ish. Deputy leader stepping up? Totally democratic. 0.27% of electorate choosing new PM? Democratic? Really? If it happened in Zimbabwe the World would be up in arms. For me that's above my usual standard given the heat I'm coping with, if you still want to give me a C- fair enough. I've spelt it out enough times, won't be doing it again (except maybe Wednesday night when I'm back in Blighty). Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 15, 2019 Report Share Posted June 15, 2019 https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-leadership-vote-firm-favourite-a8958211.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1sKnHBxZME7YtuR0qlcmIft8YiFbXgISmv5_HAWrwlu-KxsiTc2L1I7dM#Echobox=1560506575 Palfy and MikeO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palfy Posted June 15, 2019 Report Share Posted June 15, 2019 1 hour ago, pete0 said: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-leadership-vote-firm-favourite-a8958211.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1sKnHBxZME7YtuR0qlcmIft8YiFbXgISmv5_HAWrwlu-KxsiTc2L1I7dM#Echobox=1560506575 Good read Pete some weeks ago I said the best candidate to win this for the country’s sake was Rory Stewart, as a stalwart Labour voter the best Tory MP is an out of work Tory MP. But of all those who have thrown their hats into the ring Stewart is the only credible option the rest are lying bastards and won’t be able to unite parliament or the country over Brexit, Stewart who for a few years was a fully paid up member of the Labour Party will struggle as well of that I have no doubt, but I believe he has the best credentials to do the job not necessarily for his Party but for the country. Plus he can’t stand Boris which is good enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnh Posted June 15, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2019 3 hours ago, MikeO said: OK, drawing a line under this for me because I don't want to fall out with you; half the PMs in the last century may not have been appointed as a result of a general election but all were appointed because they were deputy PM or as a result of a vote confined to members of their parliamentary party. This is the first time (hence unprecedented without question however much gloss you put on it John) that as a result of the Tories changing their leadership election rules in 1998 a microscopic minority of "the people" get to choose the PM. Elected members choosing new PM? Democratic-ish. Deputy leader stepping up? Totally democratic. 0.27% of electorate choosing new PM? Democratic? Really? If it happened in Zimbabwe the World would be up in arms. For me that's above my usual standard given the heat I'm coping with, if you still want to give me a C- fair enough. I've spelt it out enough times, won't be doing it again (except maybe Wednesday night when I'm back in Blighty). Yes, me too. Don't want to fall out 'cos if we ever meet up you won't buy me a beer! MikeO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.