Alexandole Boris de Pfeffel Johnson

[west didsblue]

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.

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?

 

[lust overlord]

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.

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?

 

[Henkeman]

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?

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.

 

[BobKowalski]

Because it isn't a national election we vote in.

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.

 

[Henkeman]

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?

A perfectly fair and valid question. And the honest answer is I doubt it.

 

[Henkeman]

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.

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.

 

[BobKowalski]

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.

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.

 

[west didsblue]

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.

Can't it be both?

 

[Henkeman]

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.

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.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

Johnson wrote that Brown taking over from Blair was an affront to democracy without a general election to sanction it.

Hypocritical ****