No one talking about the Cameron story?
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Would rather talk about the Boris story since there's clear evidence of illegal activity as well as a media cover up, if that's alright with you Sir.
Tell us about it
Is it not more less public knowledge that she got £126,000? From multiple sources? What source would you trust to provide this information?
I don’t think I explained myself properly regarding the last part. I think it’s a problem that the media refer to the prime minister as Boris likes he is your cuddly harmless mate, it never happened with any other PM Our previous PM’s weren’t called Tony, Gordon, David, and Theresa by the media and that shouldn’t happen now. It’s a very nothing point though and not what we’re discussing.
Depends how you interpret some pistd I guess, before you joined there were a couple of posts mentioning the affair but I read the conversation as Marr not talking about something that could damage the PM, especially as I had read the article. The first response to you and a couple after that spoke about the money.
Of course things should be investigated, won't hold my breath on anything coming from it though. I don't remember much happening over that daft bridge thing.
I’m not questioning the facts that she was paid the money for the business. That’s a well established.Is it not more less public knowledge that she got £126,000? From multiple sources? What source would you trust to provide this information?
I don’t think I explained myself properly regarding the last part. I think it’s a problem that the media refer to the prime minister as Boris likes he is your cuddly harmless mate, it never happened with any other PM Our previous PM’s weren’t called Tony, Gordon, David, and Theresa by the media and that shouldn’t happen now. It’s a very nothing point though and not what we’re discussing.
I think the two stories of the affair, and the month have got mixed up.
a kiss and tell story, is clearly subjective, and tit for tat, that’s what I thought we were discussing? And I questioning whether the source is reliable, and whether she had been paid/ how much she was paid by the mirror.
obviously The business payments and the affair are intertwined, but the focus was on the affair.
I think I’ve already pointed out that financial influence should be called to account, and surely that’s one point of having an opposition?
The David Cameron story had been on ice ready for a moment like this. Give the political commentators something else to talk about.
The whole "what about Cameron" thing just further highlights how disgusting it is that Boris is getting a free ride.
The Cameron thing is a disgrace and both stories should get maximum coverage (but obviously won't).
The fact a shonky financial company can pay an ex-PM stacks and get a direct line to the chancellor is outrageous. A taxpayer bailout could've saved the potential payments of millions Cameron has lost out on cos of Greensill's collapse.
In Brazil every ex-president ends up in jail for corruption. In Britain they earn millions on boards and doing after dinner speeches.
Our politics is just as corrupt as any other part of the world.
Difference is they give enough scraps back to the public - our taxes - to keep society running fairly smoothly and avoid an uprising.
TBF Cameron "allegedly" feked an actual pig... Boris just a bit of one
Did anyone happen to find any mention on the Beeb about the Arcuri question during the press conference? Seeing the spokespersons response about Boris being totes amazeballs on the Guardian but nothing from our public broadcaster. Funny that.
This is a gross post.
Who alleged that?
The whole British press if I remember rightly
https://www.gq.com/story/why-is-everyone-saying-the-uk-prime-minister-had-sex-with-a-farm-animal
I mean even wiki calls it piggate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piggate
You'll be a much better asset to democracy if you lose the 'fanboyism' side of politics. This 'cheering for my side' thing is one of the worst things for ruining how a democracy works. David Cameron might well have had sex with a pig, hell he may even have been Jack the Ripper but one man's deeds don't detract from another. Ed Gein was a horrible bastard but, you know what, that doesn't excuse the actions of Ted Bundy at all. So as far as I see it: Boris is an opportunist, relatively unskilled and idiotic leader who has no skills in diplomacy or leading a country at all. He and his friends have been proven to be lining the pockets of the rich while disenfranchising the poor and, as good as their vaccine response has been, they have used Covid to enrich their friends in utter corrupt behaviour. Now you can either refute those claims with valid arguments and tell me I'm wrong, or you can say that you are aware of this but just don't care because you like him and you support his goals of benefitting the rich but you certainly can't try to distract by talking about another bullshit PM that Britain have had, that funnily enough, I'm sure not many people on this board are a fan of.
whether you like Boris or not is immaterial, but he is a skilled politician. You don’t get to be Mayor or London, lead a campaign like Brexit and become PM with a big majority without being a good politician.
that’s not to say he’s not unorthodox, a liar and a cheat... but perhaps he does it better than others.
You've quoted the wrong poster. @sun_tzu doesn't follow politicians' cults, except the anti-cult of hating Corbyn. He's also not a Tory voter.
What the feck are you on about? First of all clearly I don't like Boris so there's no 'whether or not' at all. Secondly I never once commented on him being a 'skilled politician' or not at all, so your weird jumping is as his wife or husband is amusing to say the least. I said he is an unskilled leader and diplomat, which is nowhere near calling him a bad politician. In fact he's an amazing politician because he convinced an entire party and a majority of voters that he was a good choice. Now being a skilled politician makes you nothing more than a skilled politician. It doesn't indicate any other skills to lead a country so I stand by my original point. He is unskilled in every other part of leading. So he got to those positions by convincing people he could do it but proved by his actions he couldn't. Think Bebe, he got to Man Utd but that didn't mean he was a Utd level player.
See Isuppose the difference between me and you is that I think a proven liar and cheat shouldn't be allowed to lead a country. Maybe I'm an idealist but as far as I'm concerned, any politician who has proven to have lied about their life and especially about their intentions and policies should be disbarred from office forever. See the thing is that they work for us so lying about where the tax money goes, as the Tories and Boris have, should mean instant sacking and that you are unfit to work for the people again. So lets be honest the only reason Boris has gotten where he is, is because the system is just as corrupt as he is. Now you might celebrate that but I look at it as being one of the reasons that so many ordinary folks are struggling.
Edit: why are you such a fan of the Tories that you seem to think they can do no wrong? In fact why are you a fan of any politician like this? Is there anything Boris could do to turn you off, or are you blindly in the cult now?
You need to tone it down a bit. Your initial post made it sound like you think Boris is totally inept, now you're getting abusive saying he's obviously an 'amazing' politician.
ah forget it.
Last edited:
Thank you. Have to admit that I completely missed that. But then, nothing surprises me nowadays.
But he does read, absorb and then regurgitate, or even share, Guido articles. He is aligned with their opinions.
Which is probably why he thinks the pig joke is funny. When really it is deflection.
So by proxy, he is following and assisting the Tory cult.
But he does read, absorb and then regurgitate, or even share, Guido articles. He is aligned with their opinions.
Which is probably why he thinks the pig joke is funny. When really it is deflection.
So by proxy, he is following and assisting the Tory cult.
It always makes me laugh how much he follows Guido and introduces their talking points to serious political discussion. It’s the Sunday Sport without hilarious articles about blokes sucking off their pet gerbil.
I can't apologise for that I'm afraid. I said Boris was absolutely inept as a leader (which is clear from my post) but I never once said he was bad as a politician in my original post. So for me being a great 'politician' means nothing more than being able to lie yourself into a position you don't deserve and being an amazing one means you keep it after the general public has seen all your corruption. So again I will say that Boris is an inept leader and head of state for his actions while in power but an amazing politician because he isn't in trouble of losing his job. I also wasn't getting abusive I simply said that cheerleaders like @ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg are the worst thing for democracy because they treat it as a sport. I asked him what the conservatives would have to do to lose his vote, I asked him to change my mind and he hasn't bothered responding so far. So what part of my post was abusive to you? I think there is a massive difference between a good politician and a good leader, so should why should I be apprehended for that?
I won't apologise for thinking that being a good politician doesn't make you a good leader full stop. For example Trump is a brilliant politician. As for the 'husband' remark that I'm sure was the 'offensive' one then as far as I'm concerned people that support a party unconditionally like a romantic partner would are a scourge on democracy and they should learn to stop that shit if countries want to progress. I have no problem admitting my wrongs, I've done it many times on here, but as far as I'm concerned there was noting wrong with what I said, even if it was a but more forceful that it was needed. I absolutely welcome you pointing me towards the problem and if I agree with it then I will apologise with no problem.
Edit: FFS I already explained it in my response to him so I have no idea what the problem is. You seemed to imply it was about my position on Boris but I can't see where the confusion was to be honest.
Last edited:
thanks for the @
generally the discussion in this thread is reasonable, if not a bit spikey at times.
I’m not sure why you think I’m a cheerleader?
frankly, I don’t understand what you mean as treating it as a sport?
I don’t keep particular track of posters I’ve engaged with, but can’t remember engaging with you on this?
I don't think we have interacted on this to be fair. If I'm honest your pointing people towards Cameron's scandal screamed at me as being the typical way at attempting to distract from Boris' current ordeal. Hence I used the word cheerleader. If you will it refers, for example, to the likes of Trump supporters who now care about children in cages at the border now that Biden is president and also to Democrats who don't mention those children at all now that Trump isn't president. So that is the biggest stain on democracy for me right now. Basically people who only care about the wrongdoings of the other side, hence the sports fan reference. From your post I originally responded to it seemed to me the kind of post that was like who cares what Boris does when others have done things too. Now I probably jumped to conclusions about you being a Boris fan, who like Trump ones, are willing to overlook any fault he has because you support him like a United fan would support Fergie. I probably jumped the gun, which is never helpful in these discussions, but to be honest like I said I am an idealist to fault and as far as I'm concerned the likes of Boris and many other politicians worldwide who have been proven to knowingly lie should be disbarred from politics and never allowed hold office again. I felt your post was saying that ok Boris can have his gaffes but maybe the likes of Corbyn should hang for the same thing. Like I said politicians should be held to the highest scrutiny ever regardless of if we agree with their general policies.
I'm genuinely worried at this 'my team' aspect of politics that has arisen in many countries. Its alright if my side does it but if the other side does it its horrible. Politics should be fluid, it is very reasonable to vote for one person and then vote for a different one if the former has not reached your expectation. So in an ideal World there shouldn't be Tory and Labour voters, there should be people who vote for their best personal choice each time based on reality and any politician proven to be corrupt should be sacked and never allowed represent the tax paying public again.
I thought we had done the Boris news to death that day to be honest, and it seemed like repetitive, so thought I’d introduce the Cameron article which had got more traction on BBC
I’m certainty not a fan boy of Boris, or a cheerleader. I don’tthink he’s as bad as some of his opponents make out.
But that needs to be put in context. We are so far away from having ‘whiter than white’ politicians, there’s what you could call a scandal almost every week. We, the public have become immune to it, and politicians continue on regardless.
Is he what I would want in a PM? No. Does he have the morals I’d want in a PM, no. Does anyone have the morals I’d want in a PM, that’s questionable.
the benefit of Boris is that we all know he’s an adulterous, lying cheat. At least we can’t be disappointed in him...
I’m not sure what we get out of politicians these days, most interviews with any politician are largely pointless.
repeat the question - bridge - get across your message
rinse and repeat.
I wouldn’t treat a Labour leader any different to a Tory leader. I’m actually a big supporter of Kier Starmer, and think given time he could challenge theTories - only once Covid is out of the way, as I don’t think there’s a chance of any opposition having a big effect whilst this still lingers. I wasn’t a fan of Corbin, not for his gaffs and poor decisions, but for his ideology, it absolutely didn’t resonate with me.
i agree about voter fluidity, and it’s why I will say I’m a centralist, I’ve voted for both Tory and Labour candidates. I think our Labour MP is very good, and I’m not partisan to a particular party.
i won’t blindly follow or support a candidate/ party/ personality. I don’t feel the need to ‘stick’ by a candidate.
The medium of a forum exacerbates this team perception. If we got people in the Rashford vs Martial or Ronaldo vs Messi threads face to face, I expect we would have more reasoned discussions, rather than entrenched ideas.
They're all at it but Boris is so stupid that he gets caught...often. If he's that fecking inept at affairs then he must be really inept at difficult stuff.
That's fair enough mate and my apologies for branding you something off of one post. Like I said I'm definitely too much of an idealist. I guess the reason I believe that there is no one morally ok for being a PM is because we the people have never forced it. I believe that if you disbarred all the liars and jailed those that broke the law then eventually you would force a situation where politicians had to be squeaky clean or else they would be punished. All I see now is them being allowed to do what they want with blatant impunity. Of course is isn't just Boris and it certainly isn't just the right wing politicians worldwide but the standard has always been so low for all of them. I will be the first to admit my ideals are horribly naive but to be honest it feels like we have just accepted this behaviour as part of being a politician. For what its worth I don't care how many women Boris has fecked but rather how him and his party have misused public funds with no consequence at all. That is the problem for me, how we all know that these people are committing crimes but how they will never have to answer for it.
Appreciate the explanation. The problem was the unnecessary aggression in your reply, but seems we're all good now.
Debate is good, we just want the CE to remain civil, even when feelings are running high.
Yeah no bother mate. Looking back it definitely came across as too aggressive. Won't happen again (I hope!).
Johnson brings it out in all of us.
Andrew Marr shielding a colleague of the philandering hacks club, perhaps?
Christ that feels so dystopian.