PMQ - Boris v Starmer - Spider And The Fly

[Deleted member 2719]

Now you know Mouldy you old rascal no one knows how or what Labour would have done differently in this unprecedented situation. They may well have been an absolute car crash of a governing party or they may have handled the situation with calm, calculating and thoughtful actions. No one knows and let's hope this scenario never plays out, not because I would not like to see a Labour government but because I hope this situation never occurs again.
In the mean time The Conservatives are in power and it is Labour's duty to the electorate and more widely citizens of the U.K to question The Prime Minister at PMQT. It is only what The conservatives would be doing with a labour ruling party. How would you be feeling if labour was in power atm and the Tory ministers never uttered a word at PMQT when they had the opportunity to challenge detail in the government's handling of this awful virus, you and many others including me, a leftie as you like to call us, would be questioning the elected M.P's ability to debate, healthfuly for the good of the country. It's not entirely political to ask questions about the health of the country, everyone wants the most successful conclusion to a hideous situation.

It's why I very rarely venture onto political threads on here. One thing is I am not so politically minded as some so called experts on here and another is it usually ends in mudslinging and name calling, which to me achieves nothing. Even you must concede the questions asked by Starmer are cool,constructive, polite, and decisive a far cry from past exchanges with the baying crowd supporting both sides.



Hope you and your family are well mate.....will be nice when we can chew the fat over football rather than the P word.

Sticking to the theme that I am an old rascal.

I want to quote a famous saying from a older rascal, Starmer is "talking from a position of comfort".

Of course he can ask questions, but he is just looking to stab the knife in, he is not looking to engage in constructive talk going forward.

He has one mission is for revenge because his push to stop Brexit failed miserably.

#Bitter barrister.

I hear you had your barnet cut, how is the mower now?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

What I'd like to know is, who does Starmer think he is, criticising the government (which he is part of, don't forget) at this time of national crisis that Mr Johnstone has brillinately prevented with his leadership?

 

[Danny Wilson Said]

It's basically one on one right now in an empty Chamber, where Starmer will thrive.

Once Parliament is full of cheerers, guffawers and hear, hears then the impact will be less, as will Starmers slow, methodical delivery lose its novelty.

And in the end, the Tories and their tame media partners will shout about Labour plans to raise taxes (while the Tories will promise not to do the same but will do it anyway) and flocks of scared voters will tick a Conservative box again.

Posters who claim that PMQs doesn't matter to most people are right. Beyond the Labour and Remain-voting university cities is a large area of the country where the Sun and Daily Mail set the agenda and people hate the Today programme and what they see as the smartarses on Have I Got News For You. Starmer has a big task on his hands.

 

[*Gullsworth*]

Sticking to the theme that I am an old rascal.

I want to quote a famous saying from a older rascal, Starmer is "talking from a position of comfort".

Of course he can ask questions, but he is just looking to stab the knife in, he is not looking to engage in constructive talk going forward.

He has one mission is for revenge because his push to stop Brexit failed miserably.

#Bitter barrister.



I hear you had your barnet cut, how is the mower now?

Done it with the dog clippers.....no more trips to the barbers.

Mate your seriously wrong IMHO if you think Stamer is on a mission of revenge. Brexit is only one policy that he doesn't agree with, he would not have been unprofessional enough to let it influence his ability to question the government's decision making now or in the future. Consensus has always been that it is easier to be in opposition than in government but that should not stifle the opposition into inactivity. It's not good and not healthy for the country the opposition just to agree with the government and not ask questions that will highlight either their ability or maybe inability to run the country. I am sure Churchill was asked similar searching questions in peace & wartime and he probably welcomed alternative solutions to his and his government's own. It's what drives leaders to better things if they are right and fall on their swords if they are wrong.
It's only what we are seeing now, if Boris has belief in his own ability to be a good leader against fine opposition he has little to worry about Starmer, he should be embracing the challenge. Unfortunately for him I think he has met his match in Starmer, admittedly without his hordes of braying conservative compatriots but nevertheless his leadership is currently being exposed as what a lot of people predicted it to be, far from the truth, bluster and false scenario's that he himself has endorsed exposed for all to see. Now all this doesn't mean he would lose his popularity lead in the polls now or in the future and it doesn't make Starmer certain for next Labour Prime minister but what it does show is that if Boris Johnsons Premiership will be scrutinised at a level not seen in the commons for a long time. He is going to have to up his game to survive that is for sure. If he is good enough he will survive, if he doesn't rise to Starmer's level he is toast.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

I don't believe it was an utter binfest when Johnson's hero put together a cross party cabinet for the good of the nation

...as a footnote to that it can be pointed out that when Churchill called the four other members of his inner war cabinet together 80 years ago this month to consider whether to sue for peace or fight on to the death, two backed his position and two didn't. The division was, as it happens, along party lines - the two Labour politicians supported Churchill in insisting we fought on and the two Conservatives found themselves outnumbered. The rest, thankfully, is famous history.

 

[vegster]

...as a footnote to that it can be pointed out that when Churchill called the four other members of his inner war cabinet together 80 years ago this month to consider whether to sue for peace or fight on to the death, two backed his position and two didn't. The division was, as it happens, along party lines - the two Labour politicians supported Churchill in insisting we fought on and the two Conservatives found themselves outnumbered. The rest, thankfully, is famous history.

Well well, I never knew that. I was always led to believe that only the Tories cared passionately about the UK and that Libs, Labour and Greens etc would always roll over and have their tummy's tickled rather than fight.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Well well, I never knew that. I was always led to believe that only the Tories cared passionately about the UK and that Libs, Labour and Greens etc would always roll over and have their tummy's tickled rather than fight.

Captain Mainwaring was obviously a Tory. That in itself is sufficient to persuade me the patriotic fighting spirt runs through the Conservatives like the lettering in a stick of seaside rock!

 

[Theatre of Trees]

...as a footnote to that it can be pointed out that when Churchill called the four other members of his inner war cabinet together 80 years ago this month to consider whether to sue for peace or fight on to the death, two backed his position and two didn't. The division was, as it happens, along party lines - the two Labour politicians supported Churchill in insisting we fought on and the two Conservatives found themselves outnumbered. The rest, thankfully, is famous history.

I'll also add that a vote of no confidence in Parliament against Churchill's running of the war during 1942 was tabled largely by dissaffected Conservatives.

 

[Eeyore]

I'll also add that a vote of no confidence in Parliament against Churchill's running of the war during 1942 was tabled largely by dissaffected Conservatives.

Won easily, but there were in fact two of them IIRC.

Churchill freely admitted that he had, at times, miss-managed things. He also spoke of how things would take time to turn before the full force of the US was up to scratch.

It's clear how things weren't as united during the war as we are led to believe. History is just one lie after another.

Churchill was a great front man, but I remain to be convinced he was a great strategic leader. In fairness, I think he himself was plagued with such doubts.

Perhaps folk's insistence on comparing Johnson to him are not as wide of the mark as we think. But he was definitely brighter than Johnson.

 

[rogersix]

I have observed that you are quick good at being a condescending prick. But this isn't a game of 'I-Spy'

he's given you the whupping of your life!

you lost cos your philosophy is flawed

 

[rogersix]

Sticking to the theme that I am an old rascal.

I want to quote a famous saying from a older rascal, Starmer is "talking from a position of comfort".

Of course he can ask questions, but he is just looking to stab the knife in, he is not looking to engage in constructive talk going forward.

He has one mission is for revenge because his push to stop Brexit failed miserably.

#Bitter barrister.

I hear you had your barnet cut, how is the mower now?

so to paraphrase, you've just worked out bungle johnson is an idiot

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

A couple of PMQs and [MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2719]Mouldy Boots[/MENTION] are all ready shitting themselves

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Done it with the dog clippers.....no more trips to the barbers.

Mate your seriously wrong IMHO if you think Stamer is on a mission of revenge. Brexit is only one policy that he doesn't agree with, he would not have been unprofessional enough to let it influence his ability to question the government's decision making now or in the future. Consensus has always been that it is easier to be in opposition than in government but that should not stifle the opposition into inactivity. It's not good and not healthy for the country the opposition just to agree with the government and not ask questions that will highlight either their ability or maybe inability to run the country. I am sure Churchill was asked similar searching questions in peace & wartime and he probably welcomed alternative solutions to his and his government's own. It's what drives leaders to better things if they are right and fall on their swords if they are wrong.
It's only what we are seeing now, if Boris has belief in his own ability to be a good leader against fine opposition he has little to worry about Starmer, he should be embracing the challenge. Unfortunately for him I think he has met his match in Starmer, admittedly without his hordes of braying conservative compatriots but nevertheless his leadership is currently being exposed as what a lot of people predicted it to be, far from the truth, bluster and false scenario's that he himself has endorsed exposed for all to see. Now all this doesn't mean he would lose his popularity lead in the polls now or in the future and it doesn't make Starmer certain for next Labour Prime minister but what it does show is that if Boris Johnsons Premiership will be scrutinised at a level not seen in the commons for a long time. He is going to have to up his game to survive that is for sure. If he is good enough he will survive, if he doesn't rise to Starmer's level he is toast.

Boris consistently has asked for his input, but why is Starmer so negative, he should be waiting to gain the whole picture?
It's because he is being political, now is not the right time and place.

As an opposition leader in this extraordinary position, we need him being constructive, not destructive.

Being a barrister doesn't make him a superior leader as Starmer has no motivational skills or personality.

He is very one-dimensional, detail, at least when you had Blair he had something about him even if he was a slimeball.

I think he only appeals to the Labour for life crew, as they are unable to see past his incredibly dull personality, the neutrals will be feed up ith his dullness in 4 years.

Looks like you have another John Major on your hands.

The media will be more of a worry for the tories in the future as there are still too many people who believe in all the spin they create.

In the meantime perhaps we can all get together and beat this virus.

Stay alert this weekend mate, no tripping to wales!

 

[Deleted member 2719]

A couple of PMQs and [MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2719]Mouldy Boots[/MENTION] are all ready shitting themselves

Why is that then

 

[vegster]

A couple of PMQs and [MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2719]Mouldy Boots[/MENTION] are all ready shitting themselves

[MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] won't be worried, he can always find an opinion poll somewhere in which the Tories are +6 on the week. How the Tories never achieve a 100% approval rating is beyond me though as they never seem to drop points in an opinion poll ?

 

[Titanic]

[MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] won't be worried, he can always find an opinion poll somewhere in which the Tories are +6 on the week. How the Tories never achieve a 100% approval rating is beyond me though as they never seem to drop points in an opinion poll ?

The changes are from the General Election... you might be happier if you look at it this way...

ON: 51% (-3)
LAB: 32% (+4)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
GRN: 2% (-2)
BREX: 2% (+1)

via @KantarPublic, 07 - 11 May
Chgs. w/ 20 Apr

Still surprising to me, given the general clamour against Bungling Boris.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The changes are from the General Election... you might be happier if you look at it this way...

ON: 51% (-3)
LAB: 32% (+4)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
GRN: 2% (-2)
BREX: 2% (+1)

via @KantarPublic, 07 - 11 May
Chgs. w/ 20 Apr

Still surprising to me, given the general clamour against Bungling Boris.

 

[vegster]

The changes are from the General Election... you might be happier if you look at it this way...

ON: 51% (-3)
LAB: 32% (+4)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
GRN: 2% (-2)
BREX: 2% (+1)

via @KantarPublic, 07 - 11 May
Chgs. w/ 20 Apr

Still surprising to me, given the general clamour against Bungling Boris.

Kerching ! right on cue !

 

[Lincoln Imp]

The changes are from the General Election... you might be happier if you look at it this way...

ON: 51% (-3)
LAB: 32% (+4)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
GRN: 2% (-2)
BREX: 2% (+1)

via @KantarPublic, 07 - 11 May
Chgs. w/ 20 Apr

Still surprising to me, given the general clamour against Bungling Boris.

Astounding. At a time of existential national crisis half the people support the governing party. I bet that's never happened before.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The changes are from the General Election... you might be happier if you look at it this way...

ON: 51% (-3)
LAB: 32% (+4)
LDEM: 7% (-2)
GRN: 2% (-2)
BREX: 2% (+1)

via @KantarPublic, 07 - 11 May
Chgs. w/ 20 Apr

Still surprising to me, given the general clamour against Bungling Boris.

Doesn't surprise me at all.

Although there has been plenty of criticism of Boris' handling of Covid on here and elsewhere, the criticism is quite nuanced in the great scheme of things. Even I am not yet convinced he's made a total hash of it. Only when the dust has settled and the bodies counted fully will it be possible to give a considered assessment of the bungling. But even then his actions will be defended, and the verdict it is still likely to be nuanced.

In the meantime Starmer simply hasn't been around long enough as leader to make a mark.

It would be the epitome of an immature and fickle electorate to vote a party into power and then lurch the other way in a few short months. We are not effing Italy, or Greece. Or Canada. FFS.