UKH

Am I missing something?  Isn't this really, really someone completely out of their depth - a toddler who has been caught being naughty and is really upset that Mummy is cross with him?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52855208

Petulant, evasive, rattled, even physically incontinent. If he had been drinking red wine there would have been cleaning bills to pay.

Or do you see something different?

I think you might be on the wrong forum if you're after a response from a Johnson supporter. Maybe try your luck on the Dail Mail's comment section?

I have absolutely no idea but you may enjoy this article.

https://www.indy100.com/article/pmqs-keir-starmer-boris-johnson-barrister-9...

It's very clear that for the first time in a long time we have a leader of the opposition with a career outside of politics and the skills to elevate the debate above the schoolboy politicians. The emptier chamber plays to his favour, he doesn't need to talk over the jeering. The room falls quiet like a courtroom.

In my lifetime (40 years) I think the only other non career politician to lead the opposition was Michael Howard (also a barrister).

If it wasn't for the dire times the surgical dismantling of whoever stands on the conservative side of those boxes would be enjoyable to watch. Unfortunately there is a bigger battle to be won outside parliament if we are to get this country back to a state where those who can support those who can't and we all start to care more about society than our small bubble.

No Johnson supporters put an appearance in then?

This could be one of the shortest anti Johnson threads ever!  

Do you think that's why Jacob Rees Mogg is so keen to have MPs back in the house and is against remote voting?

I've certainly noticed meetings at work are far more productive and to the point when everyone's remote. If someone is filibustering, you can just mute them.

Well there were plenty of Johnson supporters and associated tories on here pre general election....clearly not wishing to show their colours now....

I’d say that perhaps the way your serious question is framed, suggests that it’s not one that anybody would really take that seriously. More a statement for popular digestion.

it just looked like a fairly mundane dispatch box exchange to me.

Actually it's pretty hard to find one on there at the moment. We're in one of those rare periods where even DM readers realise this Tory government is completely useless. 

No. He just likes being in the pantomime. 

I think you are right. Boris needs his vocal(though often incoherent) supporters to cover his back. However, the return of the MPs could be scuppered by this - 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52910303

Dave

It was a genuine question and you've given an answer which is that yes, I am missing something, that is how PMQs always is.

I disagree! I've not ever been a big fan of PMQs,  - even in the Blair vs ??? years when both parties knew that all they were doing was playing to their base, and trying to get a bit of that 'show business for ugly people' charge. For 20 years it really has been blah blah vs blah blah with a background chorus.

With Starmer it seems you have someone asking serious, factual questions - how many tests? When was this agreed? When did the status change? Why didn't he reply to my letter? Etc etc etc, and Johnson was patently unable to answer a single one, or even promise to do so. So he acted exactly like a petulant schoolboy; the banging of the dispatch box didn't look like theatre to me, it looked like a  pure tantrum. I've have sent my kids to the naughty step for less. (Not recently.)

That's what I saw; you obviously saw different!

Ah it's between elections, I assume the only reason they haven't targeted Stramer yet is that there holding punches until the election run-up, when it will be remembered.

OOOH, no he doesn't!!

To be fair, I think most of the hard core tory/Brexit supporters on here were negative or at best ambivalent about Boris. Much like most of the lefty remainers didn’t rate Corbyn. Boris appeals (or appealed) far more to the majority of the population who are disengaged from politics. 

"Johnson supporter" ? He's not a football team and it seems a little naive and immature to think of politics in this way. If I agree with him I support him, if I disagree with him I don't but the same would go for Starmer. I judge the policies not the personalities.  I support or reject the general direction not the individual. Yes Boris is out of his depth and obviously worried.  Who wouldn't be in his position? Added to that COVID has utterly destroyed what he would have liked to have thought of as his legacy i.e. Brexit.

Al

It is a bad  habit of Johnson to bang the table when he is frustrated in my opinion. Its happened a few times since during his press briefings etc.I am sure his team are well aware it does not look good.

The current format in PMQ is ideal for Starmer as it is almost like a courtroom, so plays to his strengths.

It is serious stuff at the  moment, and Johnson is out of his depth.He knows it, because he has to be very controlled in answering questions and not be flippant or present the wrong info ( like the BBQ's last week)in his response.

I have noticed over the years that when you get a new opposition leader the PM has to learn how to "manage" the new Leader at PMQ.

The phrase at the moment that I detest in Gov is when they say it is  " world beating". Prove it first.

I'm not a Johnson supporter but his performance in PMQs yesterday struck me as totally scripted in tone and directed at his base who love the "be optimistic/don't do this country down/get behind the government" tropes that we were brow beaten with during the Brexit negotiations and the general election last year. There's plenty of those supporters parroting the "move on" line, or are outraged by any criticism of the government's response to the pandemic. They are in a minority and everyone else thinks they have effed up however.

So I think it is by design, Cummings I expect, to push this over and over to try and steer the media narrative. They know they aren't going to win over all those who think they are incompetent so are trying to own the message instead with the  theme "it's your fault because you are being negative, you should be supporting us." 

Boris only appears to be floundering if you think he was making up his responses on the spot and you think he is incompetent. For his supporters they will see him as being strong and trying to lead while the opposition just negatively snipe. This worked very well against Corbyn. 

Any answers on R4 last Saturday showed that this media manipulation is working. When they discussed the Cummings affair it was alternate calls between detractors and supporters and the BBCs attempts at balance made it seem like the issue was 50/50 when in fact the majority want him gone and were very upset about what went on. The stone walling technique of lying, obfuscation and never admitting you are wrong eventually wears you down and people stop listening, worked very well for Trump. These bunch of conservatives are mainly interested in keeping power, I don't think they actually think they've done much wrong, they aren't wired like that, they don't have any humility, they will keep pushing this crap until we give up or spontaneously combust in rage. 

Johnson's PMQ performance was just more of that, relentless positivity and lies about how well they are doing cynically by design. 

​​​

I think many people were anti Corbyn. That's not the same as being pro tory. 

With Starmer in post, if the lib dems come out of hibernation, Boris will be out of a job in under 5 years. 

Maybe, but it looked indistinguishable from Boris' normal floundering and bluster to me.

And if they are going to so much trouble to prepare for PMQs they could try researching the answers to some of the more obvious questions.  I can't imagine a past leader like David Cameron being so patently unprepared.

More worrying is Boris' increasing irritation and bafflement at being challenged about anything factual at all.  He'll be accusing Starmer of being an enemy of the people if he carries on being so effective.   ​​​

It makes no difference, it's like Trump supporters, they don't care!

No matter how shit they both are people don't see their failings.

As someone posted above, have a quick look at the DM web site, then drink some disinfectant, obviously, but read five comments and then back away. This will demonstrate why people don't care,

Oh they have.

jk

That's a very particular BBC issue, the rest of the press are less constrained, even C4 are bolder despite similar concerns. Johnson's sacrifice of thousands more citizens with this week's muddled messages and tin ear for scientific advice has bought Cummings another few weeks on the puppet strings but if they keep this up they'll be retiring to walled compounds in exile rather than the dinner circuit. Sure some flag waving, chest thumping voters still buy it but as more and more of us choke to death for their lies and corruption the public's ire will become inescapable. I don't see the press swimming against the tide on that for long and I'm not sure the tories can pour enough money into social media to colour the narrative there more broadly in their favour, especially when their donors start to flee the sinking ship.

It might until the press smell change in the air, focus instead on what's being asked and evaded, not the bluster.

jk

Well with an 80 plus seat in Parliament and a legal fixed term I very much doubt the Torys will be gone. Johnson maybe.

I always think he might bail it with having had  a serious medical issue with Covid. It is not what he expected back in January.The political world has got alot tougher and he really can no longer "wing it".It is going to be a long term issue to resolve to get the country back on its feet and he really is not up to it.

Yes, we have truly been exceptional in our response.  

Will his self belief allow him to admit that though? I wouldnt be completely surprised if he walks away in December/Jan once no deal brexit has been assured. So he can say he delivered it and then leave the issue of making it work to others.

I hope you are right.

I am finding it increasingly hard to calibrate what I think about humanity, it's been one shock after another: Brexit, Trump, this lot. I kept hanging onto the feelings that they must have some scruples, they surely can't be messing up this badly or deliberately acting calluously, and must have some personal insight or regrets about any or all of it. But I keep being smacked in the face by a large percentage of the populace who not only cannot see how terrible these leaders are but actively support and enable them, whatever their personal politics surely the character of the people they vote for is important too. But it seems not.

For self protection I have had to recalibrate to believe that they actually don't have any scruples at all and a lot of people are so deluded that they really can't see what is going on and the team/tribe is always more important. Trump and how blind his supporters are has it writ clear.

I am very much hope I am wrong, and it is just a case of self preservation for my sanity's sake as it is all so terribly depressing but we keep getting hit with disappointment after disappointment and evidence to the contrary. I think I need to go and get some fresh air .

I deleted my first comment but go on then ill bite. I voted Tory.

The reason for that is simple, i disagreed with Boris less than i disagreed with Corbyn. For that reason i don't feel i need to defend his present performance, as i half expected it. 

Im not particularly right wing, but what i am not is whatever Labour thought it was.

The outlandish policies declared by Corbyn and the months of what amounts to abuse from the left didn't do much to align my thoughts with their cause i am afraid.

Its all well and good hailing the virtues of Starmer but where was he pre-election? Its easy to criticise from the side lines isn't it when you don't have to make the decisions. 

Personally at the last election I voted for Corbyn, who I consider an inept ideologically driven cretin, but was the only slight glimmer of a remain option, however I am glad* Johnson who is a Psychopath is in charge, during this crisis, as opposed to Corbyn. 

Bearing in mind the choice we had at the last election, would you rather that Corbyn was Prime Minister now?

*glad, is very relative in this context

The worst I've come across is, "yeah! but he's a bit of a laugh, isn't he?" or "he's doing a better job than xxxx ( insert figure of hate ) would be." it's usually Corbyn or Diana Abbott. It's difficult to argue with that sort of "logic".

Since no one knows how good a job xxxx would have done, what's the point in saying it? and looking at our numbers, preparedness and continuing mayhem, I reckon next door's cat could do a better job, but he's not in charge, Johnson is and he's making a shit job of it.

Yes! What makes you so sure he'd wouldn't have done a proper job like Greece did?

We're second place in the world for deaths so far, how are you so certain it would be worse under Corbyn, or anyone else for that matter?

The problem with statements like yours is, you're letting Johnson off the hook, he's the one in charge.

All I can say is, if I had known there would be a Pandemic, I would have voted Johnson as I do not believe Corbyn is capable of decisive action. 

'Its all well and good hailing the virtues of Starmer but where was he pre-election? Its easy to criticise from the side lines isn't it when you don't have to make the decisions. '

Two points - Starmer was in an almost impossible position before the last election, he clearly disagreed with some key elements of party policy so had the choice between keeping a low profile or resigning from the front bench. If he'd done that I doubt whether he would be leader now.

I think we can safely assume that Johnson is NOT making decisions in any meaningful sense, he is spending money at a terrifying rate (I reckon Track and Trace must be costing probably £1 million per hour at the moment, and isn't working very well at all), and is responding to whatever the DM, Cummings or public opinion appear to want. He laid down clear rules for easing lockdown; they haven't been met; but he's eased it anyway.

I think the letter of 1982 from Eton to Stanley Johnson about Boris pretty much sums up the way Boris deals with situations and his style of just saying anything.

Extracts from the letter were published in the Independent last year and contained -

  “Boris sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility [and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the School...

“I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation which binds everyone else.”

Dave

I absolutely would. Johnson and his government of inadequates couldn't have done worse if they'd gone into hiding leaving the dog in charge. At almost every step their choices and instincts have actively made things worse not better, we truly are 'world beating' in this.

jk

And?

We will never know, however the people I think who should accept some responsibility are momentum, as it was their man that lost the election, because IMO Johnson did not win.

I think you are entirely missing how many people think.

For example. I am a fiscally conservative, socially liberal, staunch Conservative Party supporter.

It is my firm belief that they are the least worst option. 

I will support the leader of the conservative party because they have the position of leader of the conservative party. If they are doing a bad job then at some point a better leader needs to be selected, but I do not, and never will, see it as a need to change the Conservative party being in power. 

I am well aware my view is not popular on UKC, but at least, to a small degree, I prevent it from becoming an echo chamber. 

... as a result we have world beating expenditure, a world beating death rate and world beating lack of exit strategy.

In what sense did Johnson not win? He did, after all, gain a significant majority, he swept aside many long-standing Labour majorities, he won  43.6% of the vote, which for the UK, is a high proportion of the vote for a winning party. Johnson did win, and we are now reaping the consequences. 

Trying to blame Momentum is simply to try to avoid accepting responsibility for one's actions in voting for the Conservatives. It's not as if it wasn't obvious to any sentient being that Johnson is a serial liar incapable of acting in the best interests of anyone but himself. 

I didn't vote conservative.

And I did say he is a psychopath.

But in my opinion, he is still better than Corbyn.

So they are now spending too much? Okay, not the usual line directed at a tory but ok, fair enough. Should they do nothing instead, paint a red cross on your front door if you have covid?

Again all forum theory. I bet its Johnsons fault that thousands of people ignored the lockdown when it was first called for and for the thousands of people congregating on the beaches last week? Or the fact that we are queuing like lemmings everywhere only to abandon such practices and engage in a free for all once we are in wherever it is we were trying to get into? Its the attitude of the general populace that is to blame for our statistics, what can a government do about such behaviour, declare war on its citizens like Trump?

We are all to blame.

Very well said IMHO. I feel the same. Thanks for your words.

Did you back Johnson in the leadership election?
Hunt has sounded far better informed and professional, although he must take some of the blame for lack of readiness. Stewart was the first UK political figure to call for a lockdown, 2 or so weeks before it finally happened. 

'thousands of people ignored the lockdown when it was first called for' - They didn't though, did they? Compliance was surprisingly high until a number of factors kicked in, one of which was the fine weather, another was the incoherence and lack of clarity over what the rules actually were, but above all the flagrant disregard for the rules by Cummings, and the resulting publicity. I think it was legitimate for people to look at that event and not JUST say 'one rule for us, another for them', which is the cliche,  but to say 'well if Cummings doesn't think the rules make sense, then perhaps I don't either.' 

Of all the leaders of both major parties in my lifetime, Johnson and Corbyn are the last and second last people I'd want in charge at this time.

Wish we had Gordon Brown as PM right now. He would've been decisive and largely unconcerned about his approval ratings compared to the job at hand.

Can you explain how the general population should take responsibility for the woeful failures with regards to testing and to the provision of PPE? And to what extent should the general population take the responsibility for the timing of the decisions regarding the lockdown? And was Johnson forced by the general population to go walkabouts in a hospital, shaking hands willy-nilly, only to catch the virus himself? 

Does the Government have no responsibility for the paths taken so far? 

Agree with the Cummings sentiment, however is it not possible, for any half intelligent person at least, to be angry at that whilst still maintain your own integrity and abide by the rules? I don't think it was legitimate as you say, if that was the case and people did assume the attitude of "well if he can do it, so can we" then in my opinion that is plain thick, not legitimate. 

I don't think Cummings did think they didn't make sense, i think he just plain ignored them much the same as many other people.

Fine weather - no excuse. Neither is lack of clarity, we are in a pandemic for gods sake if you find yourself trying to justify your actions by nit picking the wording of a statement then the answer is probably no you shouldn't do it.

The point being we'll never know, we DO know what's happening now and 2nd in the world for deaths, doesn't strike me as doing very well.

Johnson saw it as some sort of jape, I would imagine Corbyn would have taken it more seriously, if only because he's not about appearance, Johnson seemed to think we could take it on the chin, in the good old British way.

It's irrelevant though, like I said, and deflects from what IS happening not some might have been!

How do you insert a 'roles eyes' emoji?

To answer your question, of course not. 

I'm afraid I can't tell which of my questions you are responding to. Are you trying to say that the Government has no responsibility for the paths taken so far? 

Perhaps you might like to clarify?

I think you might be surprised. The pain of the real recession yet to come and the ever increasing death toll, will give many people reason to switch back allegiance to the lib dems, Labour...  or even the greens. 

Not sure that any country has a real clear exit strategy. It looks to me like trial be error with a new disease.. Some have better public health systems and better ways of managing it.I will exclude Aus and NZ from this as they are so isolated it is not comparable.Others manage it better.

Maybe for the next election, but unless 80 plus MP's switch sides the HofC majority is rock solid for the next five years. Unless you know something about the way Parliament works which means others can force an election.

All of which may be true, but there will be no opportunity for those changed allegiances to have any effect at a national level until 2024. Prior to the 2019 election, the Conservatives had been proposing to scrap the Fixed-term Parliament Act, but I would not be surprised to see this proposal quietly abandoned.

Of course, it is a different matter in Scotland, where there are Holyrood elections next year, and where there is every likelihood that the Conservatives will fare badly. I'm afraid I don't know when the next Welsh elections, so I cannot comment on Conservative prospects there. 

Be interesting to see what happens if/when a constitutional crisis occurs over N Ireland and the border. This isn't going away. N Ireland won't be viable if there's a no-deal Brexit; something will have to give.

Physical isolation is almost irrelevant, borders can be controlled and even closed whether they're land or sea. Both have important tourism industries and Aus will additionally suffer a serious loss in mineral/energy sales as the world economy tanks.

Others will indeed manage better. We are almost unique in the developed world, having an exit strategy which seems to involve having the virus at large in high volume for the foreseeable. Basically little more than pretending it's not happening and hoping everyone else plays along at home and abroad.

That will change as we're shunned by the rest of the civilised world but the few months it's going to take for that to finally twig are going to cost us everything. The cynic in me wonders if this is actually proving helpful to those seeking to force a harder brexit, ultimately forcing us into inescapable and abusive ties to corporate America, the ratchet click which finally locks in brexit and prevents any return to Europe in the years to come, whatever the electorate might want.

jk

When I said under 5 years I meant the next GE. Although because of the desire for summer time elections I think the 5 year term may flex. 

Not especially. I don't think there is a good leader at the moment. I hope that Rishi Sunak steps up and remains pragmatic rather than falling foul of party bickering 

I can't quite agree with that but nor am I suggesting Corbyn wold have been good, too keen to surround himself with the like minded and much like Johnson in that but for me there is no choice between the two. Anyway, hypotheticals...

Yes. Or Major, or Blair.

jk

I think he'll be party leader before the next GE. He's just biding his time, so many other senior figures are now toxic to voters. 

In large part yes! That's leadership or in this case lack thereof. Can you imagine such muddled nonsense, such abdication of responsibility from a proper leader, whether boring and competent like Merkel or charismatic and competent like Obama? Johnson's inadequacy, his childish need to be liked ahead of responsible has condemned tens of thousands of us so far to horrific deaths.

Lead! Earn trust with clear, reasoned instructions acting in the public interest. Openly own mistakes when they occur then rectify them rather than covering-up and bullshitting. Honesty, integrity, courage, leadership. Johnson suffers congenital lack of these of course so those around him less afflicted deserve their share of the blame for not promptly defenestrating him in April when the seriousness became apparent and the opportunity arose.

Christ, will the exceptionalism never stop, are we that different to the Dutch, the Kiwis or the Irish as a population? No. We've been failed by a government of liars and inadequate, one a minority knowingly voted into an inassailable position of power under a broken and abused electoral system. Brexit britain is rapidly becoming a failed state.

jk

Actually only just over half of 80 need change sides in order for the government to lose its' majority.

Good luck with that. Rishi has impressed me given his inexperience but he is only there as he is not a serious potential threat to Boris. When needed he parrots: the same blanket denial of any mistakes on C19 government efforts; that they are following the science; and the success of the government on C19 (when their notable achievements are the highest per capita excess deaths in the world,  second highest total deaths and highest care home excess deaths, for a standard western economy.).

They tried to smear him with the land ownership story which completely backfired. The comments section was pretty damning against the paper.

Rishi is more a technocrat than a political leader.

Fair point.

Fair enough, but I disagree with everything you have written. And i cant be bothered to argue with someone that believes having a leader absolves everyone else of basic common sense.

Also not sure how what you quoted me as saying is 'exceptionalism'. Please explain. 

But you can't deny we're exceptional in our exceptionalism!

Early days yet, but he rather proved your point by not distancing himself from Cummings the other week. 

Ah shit, misread your reply and mistyped mine.

'Of course' as in of course it has responsibility for the paths taken, rather than 'of course not'

There is nothing common about common sense. Almost everything we 'just know' someone once took time and care to teach us. 99.99% of us have no idea how to control a pandemic, even those that do will struggle to do so efficiently without feedback, clear trustworthy and timely data which even the ONS warns us we're not getting from the government propaganda presentations.

If ever there was a time for clear and bold leadership, Johnson's great Churchillian dream made real it is now, but no, we're being asked by our absentee dilettante PM to apply our common sense as individuals to guide us through a deadly f*cking pandemic. Shameful doesn't do that justice. I've never felt more let down nor vengeful, right now to my shame I'd gladly see Johnson and his whole team dragged from office and pilloried.

Duly noted you think I'm wrong, that happens and I'm sure I've not changed your opinion.

Well we're having a truly exceptional pandemic. One that's about to get worse again as almost everyone else's is wobbling toward some sort of recovery. If as you contend that's our fault as a population, not the result of a failure of leadership and policy then there must be something very unusual, exceptional even about the British people.

jk

You haven't, but on reflection perhaps i am being a little arrogant. Common sense to me means, not venturing onto the West Pennine Moors with a BBQ. The mind boggles, i would have thought such things where obvious, apparently not. Maybe assuming as such has been the leadership mistake.

Bollocks. I contend that yes, perhaps leadership could have been better but I will not sit here and present uneducated statements on socio-political management of an epidemic with the advantage of hindsight. Sure, slag Cummins off to your hearts content, cant really argue any different really, but as to the nitigrity of when and how etc its a pointless exercise. 

As a fiscally conservative voter, how do you square those values with the current Tory leadership's headlong rush towards a 'f*ck business' no deal Brexit? The leadership defines the policy direction of the party - are you really saying you couldn't ever imagine a point where poor leadership means that the party no longer stands for the values you hold, much as many Labour voters decided last December? I'm particularly intrigued having seen a lot on social media recently from the Republicans Voting Against Trump group, who seem to have decided that his actions are so far out of line with their traditional conservative values that they're actively campaigning against his re-election and endorsing Biden.

Not sure that bold is the right word for what is wanted in a pandemic. Steady or thorough maybe a better analogy.

It is going to be entertaining if Johnson has to self isolate again, that is going to set everything in a spin.More importantly it could serve as a useful and timely public health message.I await with bated breath the result of Sharma's test.

Easy mistake to make, we tend to assume people are broadly like us, they're not, they're very diverse and we tend to assume we're right, that in general we know what we're doing even when we don't.

This forum has an archive. What's easily derided today as 20/20 hindsight with our failure laid bare is also present throughout that archive (mainly from others not me, mostly I'm just rude and irritable) before the events and outcomes we warned of came to pass. Our warnings and criticisms are easily spotted, they're usually bracketed by claims we're alarmist or partisan, or uneducated armchair experts. Sometimes that's justified but even stopped clocks are right twice a day.

jk

New Zealand's approach was bold, that is what leadership looks like. Bold isn't necessarily reckless.

Entertaining is one word for watching through slits in my fingers trying not to scream into my hands. Either herd immunity works and he needn't isolate or we're all just getting sick and dying for no reason. Looks like he'll have to decide which it is pretty soon if Sharma tests positive, whether he's once again deliberately pursuing natural 'herd immunity' (survival of the fittest) or simply inept, enacting bad policy against his own government's public health guidance that on day one has likely exposed parliament. Again. All so he can have his wall of braying wankers back for PMQ's.

jk

The Tories talk a lot about fiscal responsibility, but in reality they are incredibly wasteful and spend far more than supposedly "free spending" Labour governments. They are just very good at making people believe the opposite.

I think most of us that are not generally supportive of the Conservative Party, probably think that the one thing that they have got nearest to getting right is the economic package of support to individuals and businesses. It was needed and whilst its not perfect, I'm not going to complain too much. They have got virtually everything else wrong though, wasting lots of money as well as costing thousands of lives. A lot of it seems to be backed by English exceptionalism, why use systems that the rest of the world has shown to work, when we can start from scratch and throw money are party donors and friends of the Dom.

As soon as anyone talks about common sense you know they’ve lost the argument. It doesn’t exist, never has. I’m sure heard a prominent politician using recently, can’t think who that could have been.

I must admit, the one positive for me in having the Tories in government during this crisis is that Labour don't get the blame for the economic damage. Sunak has done a lot to try to support businesses and individuals and has been rightly praised for it, including by a lot of people who'd have been outraged about profligacy if these actions were being taken by a Labour chancellor. And I'm enjoying the experience of hearing long time Conservatives suddenly expounding the benefits of Keynesian economics and fiscal stimuli, though it's a shame they couldn't have figured that out before inflicting the last 10 years of ideological austerity on us...

As the saying goes, everyone's a Keynesian in a crisis.  Although wasn't Keynes a massive promiscuous shagger? I suppose in that respect Johnson has followed his lead too. 

And I'm enjoying the experience of hearing long time Conservatives suddenly expounding the benefits of Keynesian economics and fiscal stimuli, though it's a shame they couldn't have figured that out before inflicting the last 10 years of ideological austerity on us...

Context is everything. Bit of an unusual situation going on around us I believe. Past 10 years don't really pass muster in comparison. 

Simple. Least worst option. 

Quite. In the same way that responding to the 2007 global financial crisis and preventing the banks from going bust was an unusual situation. Funnily enough that bit seems to get missed out of the right-wing narrative about Labour's economic incompetence.

I'm not talking about the response to the current crisis, I'm talking about how the exchequer is going to deal with this increased debt in the future. Why was austerity the answer in 2010 but economic stimulus the answer in 2020? The biggest difference I can see is the political environment and the need to keep red wall Tory voters onside.

Your politics clouds your perspective. 

Austerity was bad, but not nearly as bad as shutting down the country and destroying (literally) the economy.  One needed to be addressed, the other could be lived with. 

Labour have forever been economically incompetent, it isn't linked specifically to the 2007 crisis response. (if you want to be charitable you can preface that with 'in the right wing narrative)

On the basis of economic conservatism? Would it make a difference if we didn't have a two party system and a more viable centrist party existed? I probably end up voting for the same reason but from the other side - my Labour vote over the last few elections has been to support the candidate most likely to unseat the local Tory MP.

Additionally, if you are interested in this stuff, you need to go and read around MMT - modern monetary theory. It has evolved significantly over the last 10 years and will likely effect how governments and central banks try and run their economies significantly. 

(starting with the fact that QE should have caused large amounts of inflation, but didn't. Hence the bazookas for the 2001-2008 era have turned into enormous rockets in 2020)

On the basis of their overall position for running the country.

A more centre conservative party would be a good thing, a more centre labour wouldn't as it would be vulnerable to being hijacked by those of a more 'left wing persuasion'. (my opinion)

Everybody's politics affects their perspective. It's a bit of an arrogant presumption to say that it only affects those on the opposing side of the political spectrum to you.

I'm glad you're recognising that your politics also clouds your perspective. I'm not saying that Labour are perfect and they've certainly made mistakes. But somehow people always seem to skip past the really economically damaging things that the Tories have done (e.g. devaluation in the '60s, ERM crash out, Brexit) and accord them a mystical competence that is undeserved.

Why is Labour any more likely to be hijacked by left wingers than the Tories are with the right? One could argue that the Blukip takeover has been much more successful than the Momentum attempt - Labour have at least managed to get rid of Corbyn now!

Thanks for the tip. Anything specific you'd recommend?

The Tories being hijacked by the right are likely to be less damaging to me than Labour being hijacked by the left. 

The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton is good. But be aware, if the government prints money it doesn't need the electorate to provide it with funding. That has implications. 

I'm not sure the ERM crash out (perhaps entering it in the first place), or Brexit, are or will be economically damaging. Devaluation in the 60s is more complicated.

Brexit is yet to be played out. If, for example, we ended up like a Singapore or a Hong Kong that could be a very good thing. Or it could be very bad. We shall see. 

Not nearly as much as it clouds yours it seems.

”Brexit is yet to be played out. If, for example, we ended up like a Singapore or a Hong Kong that could be a very good thing. Or it could be very bad. We shall see”

We are far to large and diverse to be anything like the two city states Quoted, it’s this Unsuitable emulation that’s the part cause of inequality In the UK

if you could somehow move the “city” to the isle of white and get it to declare independence then you might have a point.

I support my own Johnson. 

I am ambivalent about other people's Johnson's.

Or yours for not seeing my point of view. Don't be a dick. 

This is why I drop off posting on here. 'laters.

It does make you wonder if democracy can exist with a population that's easily swayed. Being sceptical of government should be our defult setting, even if we voted for them.

I see you're point, but if i was about to get on my usual bus and noticed a new driver who was drunk the wheel I wouldn't get on it. I'm not criticising, more just questioning. The conservative party no longer seems to be the same rational right of center party they once were, how much does the party need to change before they're a new party in all but name?

Rather than assuming the other poster is being a dick, you might take a moment to consider if you have, or have not, presented a clear and compelling point of view for others to see.

Bloody hell, you are precious aren’t you. You  obviously don’t feel like you should be judged like you judge others. 

You see, this is the problem. I haven't judged anyone, whereas you have. 

As for Wintertree, I'm not trying to present a compelling point of view. 

People on here occasionally ask for a right wing, or conservative, POV. I often give it. But I don't give it to persuade or discuss, merely to inform (i.e. this is what we think), as it seems very difficult to most people on here to see it. (I don't mean agree with it, just see it.). I understand a left wing perspective, I just think it's wrong. I don't go attacking people for holding it. 

I said a “clear and compelling point of view”.  One possibility you jumped to is another poster “being a dick” for not seeing your point of view.  Another is that they can’t see it because it’s not clear.

No Ed, the problem is your complete lack of self awareness. You accuse others of letting their politics cloud their judgement, whilst making pronouncements rather than a coherent argument. When someone points this out you call them a dick and act the victim. Then you claim that you aren’t judging, but someone who used the same words, except they did not call you a dick, is judging.

sigh. You are missing the point.

I'm not trying to make an argument. I am trying to make pronouncements.

'You' (plural) want a right wing point of view (or answer to the question 'who supports Johnson') and I will give it. I'm giving the point of view from the perspective of someone who believes it.  I'm not wanting to discuss it as I know we won't agree. I don't give it to be told I am wrong - and know that's what you'll think already so why would I bother - and I don't do it to tell you that you are wrong either.  I'm trying to educate as to the right wing point of view. Not whether it should be agreed with or not, simply what it is. 

So when I am told I am wrong, I am pointing out that that is a clouded perspective. I can't be wrong for stating my position when that's what I am doing. If you want to argue about the actual position start another thread/ask another question, which I won't bother to get involved with. 

No Ed, you don’t get to make pronouncements then complain if they are politely critiqued. Argue it or leave, don’t try and play by another set of rules.

I hadn't said you were wrong though. You replied to my post about Keynesian economics with special pleading for the Tories in the current situation. I was merely making the point that other parties have been criticised for the economic effects of policies they'd had to make in a crisis and that whether you choose to stimulate or cut to recover from a recession is a political choice. At which point you made your comment that my view was 'clouded by politics'. Although I would actually argue that my politics is informed and influenced by my perspective and experiences, rather than the other way round, I'm not going to argue that I'm totally unbiased or neutral, as long as you accept that your perspective is also influenced by your beliefs in the same way.

There was no pleading.

Does anyone on here ever go climbing?

What that got to do with anything?

Aren't 'Johnson Supporters' some sort of erectile dysfunction correction device?

So far the stimulus is not Keynesian economics. The goal of the latter is to provide the people with money in order to stimulate spending and consumption and thereby to encourage economic growth. The covid response is the opposite: the goal is to have people sit at home and not spend money (because that would lead to more infections) in order to hibernate parts of the economy so there is something left when covid is gone/reduced. So Keynesian economics is about controlling the demand side of economics, the covid response is about protecting the supply side. If the government would do more stimulus once the lockdown is completely lifted, that would be Keynesian economics.

From a Keynesian point of view, the last 10 years of austerity make sense. Those were the good years in which you save money. Now we are going to get a number of bad years in which spending the money makes sense.

PS. For clarity: I use austerity as running budget-neutral government finances. It seems to me that a lot of people also use austerity as a description of cutting public services. The latter I don't agree with. I think the UK should have expanded public services in the last 10 years, but paid for it by raising more tax revenues.

No they're just pricks

Of course not.

This is UKC.

I'm making the obvious guess you are German. 

Austerität is what you think it is. Balanced budget in German.

Austerity isn't! Public spending cuts in English, often with promise of tax cuts so not balanced budget.

I just live there, am Dutch, but same difference

this is the first sentence on Wiki though: "Austerity is a set of political-economic policies that aim to reduce government budget deficits through spending cuts, tax increases, or a combination of both"

Is this a UK English vs US English thing or more of a gradual shift in meaning because the conservatives never considered increasing taxes?

Hah! Should not have trusted the obvious.

Yes.

I know - that was what I was referring to, not the government's current activity to prop up the economy. Protecting incomes and preventing the economy from completely falling over is creating a huge amount of debt. In 2010 we were told that the way to address public debt that had arisen as a result of the financial crisis was to cut spending - something that arguably had the opposite effect on the economic recovery by suppressing demand side activity. However, whenever I've heard Tory politicians interviewed about how they plan to deal with the debt created by the Covid rescue package they all talk about incentives and investment and the importance of demand side stimulus - hence the point about them being Keynesian now.

I think perhaps there's a difference between austerity and Austerity. Generically the above definition is true but the way it was implemented in the UK went far beyond efficiency savings and was much more ideological and punitive.

So Corbyn won the argument

Joking aside, I think Johnson won the election by positioning the conservatives more towards the center than Cameron did. All the arguments about money for the NHS etc. And now the move towards stimulating demand... From a more cynical point of view, Johnson is like Trump in that populists love to spend money and not worry about who's going to pay for it.

I'm glad he managed to win one at least!

He wants to be liked and that generally doesn't happen when you're taking stuff off people. And I think they genuinely want to stick to their levelling up and regional agenda - it's key to retaining those red wall voters. If it wasn't for the whole Brexit thing and the constitutional vandalism they're hellbent on pursuing I'd probably be relatively supportive of this government's aims, though I'd still have deep reservations about their actual competence...

Yes, the Conservative party won but at least some part of that win can be placed at the door of a woefully inadequate Labour party.

In 2016 Labour saw the result of the EU referendum that told them many of their strongest supporting constituencies had voted to leave the EU.

In the 2019 general election Labour, instead, of accepting the majority of those who voted(albeit a very small majority) wanted to leave embarked on a policy that more or less said,"We know you have voted to leave but if you vote us in we will negotiate a new deal with the EU and the we'll ask you to decide if you want it."

I just hope with the new leader Labour can start building themselves again.

Dave

With hindsight we might have been better sucking up the referendum result and campaigning to implement it effectively.

But it would have been bl**dy hard to concede a battle that we all know was won by world class cheating and lying, let alone knowing just how much damage it had already done, and will still go on to do. 

I wonder whether we will still be eligible for the G7/8 when this pandemic and Brexit have truly made themselves felt?

LOL! Thanks, I needed that.

jk

Probably better IMO to think of them as populist now, no real overarching economic strategy, they're just blowing with the wind to keep the votes coming. Nationalism and low taxes for the mill towns and shires, spending sprees for the northern cities, incoherent as a whole but eminently saleable in small chunks locally.

jk

Maybe we shouldn't be? Maybe we should just be a little island In a big world and stop trying to influence everything. I know we used to have an empire but maybe we should grow up and move on?

(When reading the above, please note I am grumpy because the surf looks bin bag this weekend.)

Stay safe folks,

BB

With global warming we might soon find that the "city" has to move somewhere else anyway, either that or drown.

Your angst is almost palpable. To understand that there are many people with an alternative outlook to your own you should read a Comment article in today’s The Times. Ian Martin wrote an article entitled Hyper-liberals are the true bigots of our time. 

It is correct to feel angst at the behaviour of some politicians and by default their supporters , there are well trodden paths being headed down and non of them lead to a nice place.

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try and understand but that can be difficult if your in a car with them and they’ve got their foot down And hand on the steering wheel heading towards a cliff. 😏

Read the article

What up Phil?

I tried to find the article you mentioned but couldn't find it online. Have you got a link so I can read it and have my mind expanded hugely like one of them epiphanies people used to have? 

Cheers

BB

You’ve provided no link and the Times is behind a paywall, maybe  a quick summary and what you took from the article.

also in these feverish and devisive times Being implored to just “watch the video”/“read the article“ has a slightly off putting implication and rarely leads to enlightenment.

If it helps, Ian Martin, the writer of the article, appears to have a major hard on for Saint Nigel of Farage.

how much of a part? how much of a part was played by the media? How much of a part by the part of the Jewish community which drowned out the other part of the Jewish community, which were accusing Labour or being rife with AS? How much of a part, by the right of Labour attacking Corbyn and undermining him at every possible chance?

About a third, IIRC so not a majority

I don't see this as a bad thing, suppose we had another referendum on what we look like we're going to get out of this, Chlorinated chicken, and AFAIK not much else.

Me too!

Do you mean he simply lied? As I don't see any sign of £350m a week for the NHS.