Alexandole Boris de Pfeffel Johnson

Henkeman said:
It's not remotely the same, and you're conflating two separate issues. If you want to criticise him if he doesn't appear, that's perfectly valid to do so. What isn't, is what Sky did earlier to try and promote their own campaign for leadership debates by pretending it was identical. It is possible to be critical if he doesn't appear without buying into the Sky self-promotion agenda.
Click to expand...
It seems that it's only you that is seeing this in the context of the Sky agenda. The general point is that Johnson is carefully stage managing his appearances and keeping the level of scrutiny from the press and TV media to an absolute minimum, making it look very much like he's hiding away. Someone who aspires to be Prime Minister should be answering any questions that are put to him, not just carefully stage managed ones in an environment where he can ignore difficult ones. Why are you defending him?
 
Henkeman said:
Sigh, this is not complex. I have not said he shouldn't be criticised if he doesn't appear, go for your life. I have said that Sky are conflating two different subjects in order to promote their own particular agenda on this.



No, it was a comment by virtue of the language used. Which I said was childish and I'm not remotely interested in that. That is your answer, you don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it. But there you go, you don't get to make demands.
Click to expand...


Well aside from Sky's agenda,whatever that may be.

And putting aside Gdms penchant for using the language of the guttersnipe ;)

Do you believe,given Boris's career and behaviour thus far,that he is a suitable person to be prime minister of this country?
 
west didsblue said:
It seems that it's only you that is seeing this in the context of the Sky agenda. The general point is that Johnson is carefully stage managing his appearances and keeping the level of scrutiny from the press and TV media to an absolute minimum, making it look very much like he's hiding away. Someone who aspires to be Prime Minister should be answering any questions that are put to him, not just carefully stage managed ones in an environment where he can ignore difficult ones. Why are you defending him?
Click to expand...

Because at no stage have I done so. People have answered me based on the original Sky story as though it's some kind of gotcha when it's about something else entirely. I've also said on several occasions now that criticising him for not appearing is completely valid. What it does seem to show is that an awful lot of people lack basic comprehension skills. Try answering what I've said, not what you wish I've said.
 
Henkeman said:
Because it isn't a national election we vote in.
Click to expand...

So a tiny group of people get to choose the PM for a union of 4 nations of 65 million people and it’s acceptable that none of campaigning (so far) has been open to the media and scrutiny of the people of our union and furthermore it’s perfectly acceptable not to do a televised debate with the candidates so that we can see what this tiny group of people will be choosing on our behalf?

Well that’s democracy I guess.
 
lust overlord said:
Well aside from Sky's agenda,whatever that may be.

And putting aside Gdms penchant for using the language of the guttersnipe ;)

Do you believe,given Boris's career and behaviour thus far,that he is a suitable person to be prime minister of this country?
Click to expand...

A perfectly fair and valid question. And the honest answer is I doubt it.
 
BobKowalski said:
So a tiny group of people get to choose the PM for a union of 4 nations of 65 million people and it’s acceptable that none of campaigning (so far) has been open to the media and scrutiny of the people of our union and furthermore it’s perfectly acceptable not to do a televised debate with the candidates so that we can see what this tiny group of people will be choosing on our behalf?

Well that’s democracy I guess.
Click to expand...

I know you're a bit dense, and that you can't help that, but you too can next time try and post something that I've said, not what I haven't said.
 
Henkeman said:
I know you're a bit dense, and that you can't help that, but you too can next time try and post something that I've said, not what I haven't said.
Click to expand...

You said that it was disengenous to argue Johnson’s pro televised debate stance applied to the private election of the Tory party leader. I say it does apply as the outcome of the national election and this private election will decide the next PM and that is an outcome that effects us all. Defending Johnson’s stance is either partisan or stupidity. Pick one.
 
BobKowalski said:
You said that it was disengenous to argue Johnson’s pro televised debate stance applied to the private election of the Tory party leader. I say it does apply as the outcome of the national election and this private election will decide the next PM and that is an outcome that effects us all. Defending Johnson’s stance is either partisan or stupidity. Pick one.
Click to expand...
Can't it be both?
 
BobKowalski said:
You said that it was disengenous to argue Johnson’s pro televised debate stance applied to the private election of the Tory party leader. I say it does apply as the outcome of the national election and this private election will decide the next PM and that is an outcome that effects us all. Defending Johnson’s stance is either partisan or stupidity. Pick one.
Click to expand...

I said it was disingenuous of Sky.

It doesn't mean he can't or shouldn't be criticised for not appearing. Happy to help.
 
The Labour Leadership election debates were televised and all attended from memory. Are we seriously suggesting leading the party of opposition should be a more scrutinised process than the leader of the party of government?
 
Henkeman said:
I said it was disingenuous of Sky.

It doesn't mean he can't or shouldn't be criticised for not appearing. Happy to help.
Click to expand...

Which is what Sky did by highlighting Johnson’s previous comments on leader debates with his stance of refusing to appear now, a stance which you defended by stating the elections were not analogous. I pointed out they are and your defence was either partisan or stupidity. And like Johnson you have now backtracked.
 
BobKowalski said:
Which is what Sky did by highlighting Johnson’s previous comments on leader debates with his stance of refusing to appear now, a stance which you defended by stating the elections were not analogous. I pointed out they are and your defence was either partisan or stupidity. And like Johnson you have now backtracked.
Click to expand...

I know you are seriously hard of thinking, but conversations work so much better if you don't make up stuff and pretend you've made a valid point.

I've not backtracked on anything, you just don't have the wit to comprehend a point and prefer to argue with yourself on an entirely different one.
 
Henkeman said:
I know you are seriously hard of thinking, but conversations work so much better if you don't make up stuff and pretend you've made a valid point.

I've not backtracked on anything, you just don't have the wit to comprehend a point and prefer to argue with yourself on an entirely different one.
Click to expand...

You need to stop saying he is thicker than you, mate, to be honest. I've had run-ins with you both and have no axe to grind either way but he is blatantly more knowledgeable, articulate and amusing (ie intelligent) than you. Sorry to be blunt but you started it.
 
Interview on World at One. He's going full "alternative arrangements" but no idea what they might be.

"Disaggregate the WA..." official policy of cherrypicking.

Criticism by IDS over his foreign office performance is "blue on blue action" that he wants to stop....

Diverting from FO questions to London Transport. Apparently it'll be ok because he'll have a great team.
 
Didsbury Dave said:
You need to stop saying he is thicker than you, mate, to be honest. I've had run-ins with you both and have no axe to grind either way but he is blatantly more knowledgeable, articulate and amusing (ie intelligent) than you. Sorry to be blunt but you started it.
Click to expand...

I've read your comments too, and you are under the misplaced impression I remotely give a stuff what you think about anything at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top