For what it's worth Boris was a terrible mayor as well and a lot of his projects were unfinished or and left a bill to the taxpayer. And the London Mayor job is a bit of a redundant role as well and more of a figurehead.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
What a very good point.
Wait, you mean buying a load of water cannons you can't use and trying to build a pointless bridge across the Thames in order to give your mates money isn't the sign of being a good mayor?
I know. Wasted millions on hair-brained schemes. Claims the credit for the Olympics ffs.
I think what he lacks in competency he makes up for in charm. He makes mistakes by the score but acts like a naughty schoolboy - and he can be very self-depreciating. Rightly or wrongly, lots of people gravitate to those things. Maybe they identify with his fallibility.
Your point about the Olympics is certainly valid. All of the work was done prior to him becoming Mayor.
To the list we can add the Boris Bendy Buses.
And that is my biggest fear. He has a terrible habit of flitting from one bad idea to another.
One attribute that a true Leader should have is concentration, hard work and the ability to deliver.
Not something you can say about the blonde bombahell.
Now he had May and lack of time as excuses when this goes south. He was just covering his bases rather than tackle the problem.
Not so sure about those qualities for a leader. Maybe a manager. Teresa May had them in droves, just couldn't deliver.
I did mention the ability to deliver.
The reason I mention concentration is that the PM would be faced with many many new problems every day. They would need to be able to understand and prioritise each.
A strong work ethnic is also vital especially during the Brexit phase when leadership would consume so much effort.
They are managers' qualities or civil servants. Not necessarily those of a leader. It could be argued that leaders should be strategists and set the broad direction of things. The detail should be sorted by their staff with the leader having final oversight. The fact that Boris doesn't do detail and would prefer to paint very broad strokes probably makes him more of a leader than Teresa May. When Boris tries to do detail it always backfires - Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe case in point.
I will never understand the narrative that is being peddled about Boris having these much sought after leadership skills. He is yet to exhibit anything close to leadership. Even now he is doing his best to stay out of the public eye and scrutiny in case he says something that ruins it all. He is no leader.
Democracy doesn't work because it produces a result you don't agree with. Yeah, ok
It's modern politics isn't it. Arrogant prats telling everyone they're idiots for holding a different opinion to them. Everyone's an expert in 2019, despite people who know considerably more about politics than you or I voting for him by a massive margin.
You would rather have a dictator, hereditary monarch or religious loon making our laws perhaps?
Yeah, democracy occasionally gives us a Trump, a Brexit or a Boris, but I'll take any of those rather than lose my right to vote, and importantly, everybody else's right to vote as well.
I fail to see what's democratic about a tiny proportion of the population electing the PM.
Boris as PM, Raab as Chancellor and Farage as Foreign Secretary would be a hilarious spectacle from outside the UK. They can be responsible for the mess they've created.
Boris as PM, Raab as Chancellor and Farage as Foreign Secretary would be a hilarious spectacle from outside the UK. They can be responsible for the mess they've created.
It's shite but the new PM will still have to command a majority in the house or there will be a general election, and even if they do have the support of current MPs then there will still be an election on the scheduled date at the latest, with the whole country voting, so yes, the appointment will still be part of a democratic system.
Now if people think there should be an immediate general election whenever a prime minister is deposed by their own party, dies or whatever, then the answer is simple, campaign for that, get it in your party's manifesto, get it voted on and make it so.
We aren't allowed to call her a loony, just because she's a woman?
The issue is you don't have a opinion. You are simply liking a politician because they are a ''character''(Whatever that means) which is no different than someone liking a politician for the colour of their tie.Democracy doesn't work because it produces a result you don't agree with. Yeah, ok
It's modern politics isn't it. Arrogant prats telling everyone they're idiots for holding a different opinion to them. Everyone's an expert in 2019, despite people who know considerably more about politics than you or I voting for him by a massive margin.
Just because one thing doesn't work doesn't mean that the other does so it doesn't have to be either or. It could be just like the Irish border issue something completely new and inexistent.
Democracy in my opinion doesn't work because people are largely extremely ignorant on the issues that they are being asked to vote for.
It's not that democracy doesn't work, it's that people place it on far too high a pedestal.
Democracy is merely the icing on the cake for a society, it's not the cake itself. The latter is made up of customs, traditions and culture and then the rule of law; all of which are much more important that democracy.
The inherent flaw in democracy itself is that it sets groups of people (politicians) against each other, who then continually overpromise to the electorate in order to get votes. The cumulative effect of such 'bribery' is to plunge countries into ever increasing debt.
Last edited:
What definitely doesn't work is saying nothing works. If you've a better idea than democracy then say what it is, maybe we could vote on it.
How do you know why I like him? I said he has character which has been severely lacking from British politics since Blair stepped down. I don't feel strongly about him either way but obviously people who count like him, hence the massive first round victory.
Plus I lived in London when he was Mayor, it was a damn sight better than it was under Ken Livingstone.
That's interesting, as if you live outside the south-east you don't really hear much about their local politics, although that will come as a surprise to many down there I suspect. So, what did Boris do that improved things for you?
Er.
Brown and Cameron where pretty much different versions of Blair. Also what do you mean by someone with some character ?
How did Boris improve London ?
boris bikes? - though i fecking hate cyclists at the best of times let alone the people on the boris bikes with no clue where they are going
Classic example of Boris getting credit for someone else work.
What a self-publicist:
'Boris bikes'
'Boris buses'
'Boris Bridge'
'Boris bikes'
'Boris buses'
'Boris Bridge'
Probably another reason why some people like him unfortunately. People buy into that bullshit quite easily.
Agreed, its a bit like playing Lukaku upfront as an hold up man, when really he is a ball over the top/channel runner type player. Bearing down on the EU goal with the ball at his feet, Boris will be a sight to behold!!
Hah! Hah! I was looking for this clip...great, Boris the bulldozer plays the man not the ball, send a copy to the EU Commission!
Some of Boris's better acts were supporting the city and getting the economy back on track, reducing crime, and the transport system is night and day from what it was when he took over. He was admittedly helped by Livingstone before him making it harder and more expensive to live in central London than ever before.
Charisma. Anybody in power has to be competent but that's no use on its own.
Don't let Blair's war record and latter years distract from the breath of fresh air he was in 1997.
boris island...
infact i wonder if he might cancel heathrow's new runway and go for the crazy island solution
Last edited:
Democracy doesn't work because it produces a result you don't agree with. Yeah, ok
It's modern politics isn't it. Arrogant prats telling everyone they're idiots for holding a different opinion to them. Everyone's an expert in 2019, despite people who know considerably more about politics than you or I voting for him by a massive margin.
Knowing a lot about politics doesn't really mean much, because it all still boils down to your own ideological views. If I decided to devote my life to learning about politics and championing National Socialism, does that mean my view holds more weight than the average person in the street who doesn't know a great deal but believes that, you know, Nazism is not the most desirable choice? I'm not an expert in politics yet my ideological views are pretty much fixed. A lot of reading is going to have an influence but it's not going to alter them substantially at this point in my life. Hence, it's strange to attach credence to people backing Johnson on the basis that they supposedly know a good amount about politics.
Last edited:
So with all these new conservative members being former Ukipers, what's the difference between the future tory PM and a brexit party PM? Isn't it effectively the same thing now?
Also, how long does one need to be member to have a vote in this upcoming election? Sensible Brits might consider joining them for this upcoming "vote". It's the only thing they can now (aside from rioting, which at this point also makes sense).
Also, how long does one need to be member to have a vote in this upcoming election? Sensible Brits might consider joining them for this upcoming "vote". It's the only thing they can now (aside from rioting, which at this point also makes sense).
had to be a member fr 3 months before the leadership election was called i believe
Hard as it is to read through that, i wouldn't expect The Guardian to paint any Conservative in a positive light. Still, looks like they begrudgingly agree that he reduced crime and improved transport. The single biggest thing was the unification of all London's rail systems and expansion of the network which they completely omit.
Not sure what your last link is referring to, but under Livingstone prices went through the roof with the introduction of the congestion charge and public services were continually on strike. He also had a funny habit of keeping things in the family when it came to appointments and funding.
How the feck did London vote for this charlatan?
True, but it doesn't really count for much in this current situation. All the candidates for leadership hold fairly similar views all things considered. The vote is for which of them do people think is the most capable leader and I'd guess the people who know them and work with them have a better understanding of that than any of us on here.
I dunno - I suspect a lot of MP's are voting for who they think is most likley to win an election (a mix of bringing back votes from UKIP and winning some of the floating vote) - in that respect boris is probably brexity enough and has the name recognition (plus seems to poll well against corbyn in match ups)... im not sure that many of them are voting on his capability
Coming from the same bunch who decided Theresa May was the most capable leader in 2016, I don't know why you're so keen to attach any faith to their decision this time round. Theresa May had a lot of faults, and her utter ineptitude as a leader was probably her greatest one.