Tory Watch

[tuffers#1]

Exactly how I see it. And I dare say many Tories, including those at risk of losing their seats in 2 years agree. Cut him loose, bring in a new leader. Clean slate stuff. If Boris goes an awful lot of crap goes with him and with it Starmers Ace card.

Personally he should resign and just piss off.

Starmer has an Ace card? Wow.

Boris got a big majority, not because he was hot stuff but because his opponent was a non-starter. The same would apply to Starmer, not doing well just because he as good but because Boris was bad.

Two men in a jungle when a wild animal approached the first stated to run, the second sat down to put on his trainers. The first guy said “ wasting your time there, wont make you outrun the beast”. The second guy said “ I don’t need to outrun the beast, I just need to outrun you “

Done need to be good, just better than the other person. Boris got a good majority because Corbyn was rubbish. Starmer could do the same with Boris.

Lies . Bodge got in because the red wall split over brex sh*t .

[Dohnut]

Starmer has an Ace card? Wow.

Boris got a big majority, not because he was hot stuff but because his opponent was a non-starter. The same would apply to Starmer, not doing well just because he as good but because Boris was bad.

Two men in a jungle when a wild animal approached the first stated to run, the second sat down to put on his trainers. The first guy said “ wasting your time there, wont make you outrun the beast”. The second guy said “ I don’t need to outrun the beast, I just need to outrun you “

Done need to be good, just better than the other person. Boris got a good majority because Corbyn was rubbish. Starmer could do the same with Boris.

Lies . Bodge got in because the red wall split over brex sh*t .

I take it you read the Labour review after the GE loss? Fair enough.

[Dohnut]

Starmer has an Ace card? Wow.

Boris got a big majority, not because he was hot stuff but because his opponent was a non-starter. The same would apply to Starmer, not doing well just because he as good but because Boris was bad.

Two men in a jungle when a wild animal approached the first stated to run, the second sat down to put on his trainers. The first guy said “ wasting your time there, wont make you outrun the beast”. The second guy said “ I don’t need to outrun the beast, I just need to outrun you “

Done need to be good, just better than the other person. Boris got a good majority because Corbyn was rubbish. Starmer could do the same with Boris.

So what you are saying is that the outcomes of British General Elections are decided on the basis of who has the least worst personality. Good to know.

It makes a difference. Well it did at the last election for sure. I would never have voted for Boris had Labour got a decent leader. And judging by much of the feedback at the time from Labour supporters, plenty more felt the same way. Boris may still have won, probably would have done, but not with such a huge majority which means he can take the piss and do what he likes.

If he gets shafted now it will be his own party that do it. Not Labour.

[E10EU]

I would never have voted for Boris had Labour got a decent leader. And judging by much of the feedback at the time from Labour supporters, plenty more felt the same way.

In 2017 Labour under the leadership of Corbyn wiped out the Tory majority when the Tories had expected to majorly increase theirs.
That is a fact!
Quite interesting to see who is trying to wipe this fact out of history and for what objective!

[E10EU]

Getting back to Tory watch:
Interesting to see Johnson's performance in parliament today. He presented as 'apologising' for events on 20th April but in reality his response was carefully calculated. He wanted to take the heat out of the immediate situation and then direct any suggestion of blame away from himself. As in 'he was there for 25 minutes but did not know it was a party'. He disregarded all the other dates and allegations of breaching lock down rules that have been reported in the media. Seems to me that he is taking a major gamble. All it needs is for people to provide more evidence on his complicity on those dates! Of course that would not be needed if Johnson accepted full responsibility.
But for now he is still in the job and still able to fool us with prime ministerial posturing.

[tuffers#1]

Boris got a big majority, not because he was hot stuff but because his opponent was a non-starter. The same would apply to Starmer, not doing well just because he as good but because Boris was bad.

Two men in a jungle when a wild animal approached the first stated to run, the second sat down to put on his trainers. The first guy said “ wasting your time there, wont make you outrun the beast”. The second guy said “ I don’t need to outrun the beast, I just need to outrun you “

Done need to be good, just better than the other person. Boris got a good majority because Corbyn was rubbish. Starmer could do the same with Boris.

Lies . Bodge got in because the red wall split over brex sh*t .

I take it you read the Labour review after the GE loss? Fair enough.

Of course i read it. couldnt help feeling like they need some heads bashing done . Between brexit & the smear fest across all media , its hardly suprising Brexit wasnt mentioned . Still at least we know the labour party would never have stooped so low as the d*ck inNo 10 right now.

[Dunners]

[Dunners]

Meow.

[EastDerehamO]

Getting back to Tory watch:
Interesting to see Johnson's performance in parliament today. He presented as 'apologising' for events on 20th April but in reality his response was carefully calculated. He wanted to take the heat out of the immediate situation and then direct any suggestion of blame away from himself. As in 'he was there for 25 minutes but did not know it was a party'. He disregarded all the other dates and allegations of breaching lock down rules that have been reported in the media. Seems to me that he is taking a major gamble. All it needs is for people to provide more evidence on his complicity on those dates! Of course that would not be needed if Johnson accepted full responsibility.
But for now he is still in the job and still able to fool us with prime ministerial posturing.

Yes, pretty much agree with that, but I was left with the impression that if Boris really didn't realise he was at a party for 25 minutes, he simply isn't qualified to be PM anyway! He's on borrowed time, it's when he goes now rather than if I think.

[HARVEY T DENTON]

Having also suffered a loss in lockdown, this piece pretty much sums up my feelings.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ied-sister

[Dohnut]

Why it’s in Labours interests for Boris to stay. A new Tory leader, a clean slate. Those numbers can change very quickly.

[Max B Gold]

[Dunners]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

[tuffers#1]

Why it’s in Labours interests for Boris to stay. A new Tory leader, a clean slate. Those numbers can change very quickly.

People will be told it was the story party mps who put him there !

[StillSpike]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

I'm guessing it was BYOB so as to try to keep it "unofficial" - not dipping in to the wine cellars (which presumably would leave a paper trail) - If food was the only thing provided, then maybe they thought they'd be able to pass the consumption off as business-related. Rather defeats the object by sending out the invites on email, mind

Might be nonsense, of course.

[Currywurst and Chips]

Nah the wine is kept for business moguls and foreign dictators

They ain't sharing that sh*t with a Band D

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

Guarantee if they check back over the expense claims of the 40 attendees from May/June 2020, everyone of them had put in a claim for the bottle(s) they took along.

I’m sure this Sue Gray will discover it as part of her investigation.

[Dunners]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

Guarantee if they check back over the expense claims of the 40 attendees from May/June 2020, everyone of them had put in a claim for the bottle(s) they took along.

I’m sure this Sue Gray will discover it as part of her investigation.

You're probably right. It's what I'd do.

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

Having also suffered a loss in lockdown, this piece pretty much sums up my feelings.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ied-sister

That’s a horrific read. It’s bad enough to think back at what I/we went through and how angry this makes me, never mind having experienced something as tragic as this.

[Dohnut]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

I'm guessing it was BYOB so as to try to keep it "unofficial" - not dipping in to the wine cellars (which presumably would leave a paper trail) - If food was the only thing provided, then maybe they thought they'd be able to pass the consumption off as business-related. Rather defeats the object by sending out the invites on email, mind

Might be nonsense, of course.

Bring you own avoids cross contamination from bottles. Not unusual for wine at business working events. Pretty common in fact. Not unusual for organisations to have offsite meetings, in their case they have a secure garden. Our company used a local hotel.

Possible to have a working event that includes wine and nibbles, in a social setting. Not unusual. The issues is not that, it’s if it broke Covid regulations.

[Max B Gold]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

I'm guessing it was BYOB so as to try to keep it "unofficial" - not dipping in to the wine cellars (which presumably would leave a paper trail) - If food was the only thing provided, then maybe they thought they'd be able to pass the consumption off as business-related. Rather defeats the object by sending out the invites on email, mind

Might be nonsense, of course.

Bring you own avoids cross contamination from bottles. Not unusual for wine at business working events. Pretty common in fact. Not unusual for organisations to have offsite meetings, in their case they have a secure garden. Our company used a local hotel.

Possible to have a working event that includes wine and nibbles, in a social setting. Not unusual. The issues is not that, it’s if it broke Covid regulations.

It IS unusual to have alcohol in a work setting. In my day and probably yours too, as the Head of a Big Corporate it was work first and then the social. In those days we worked hard and played hard.

[Long slender neck]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

I'm guessing it was BYOB so as to try to keep it "unofficial" - not dipping in to the wine cellars (which presumably would leave a paper trail) - If food was the only thing provided, then maybe they thought they'd be able to pass the consumption off as business-related. Rather defeats the object by sending out the invites on email, mind

Might be nonsense, of course.

Bring you own avoids cross contamination from bottles. Not unusual for wine at business working events. Pretty common in fact. Not unusual for organisations to have offsite meetings, in their case they have a secure garden. Our company used a local hotel.

Possible to have a working event that includes wine and nibbles, in a social setting. Not unusual. The issues is not that, it’s if it broke Covid regulations.

Have you read the invitation?

How do you work in a garden with a glass of wine while enjoying the weather? It was an after work party. Guillable.

[tuffers#1]

Something about party-gate that is bothering me. If I was invited to a party at No.10, I'd certainly go along in the full expectation of being plied with free booze. It's what any self-respecting Champagne Socialist would do.

However, in this instance, they were all told to BYOB. And many of the stupid f*ckers clearly did. What's that all about? Is that a normal work-place thing and I'm just living in my privileged bubble, or is it yet more evidence of their incompetence?

I'm guessing it was BYOB so as to try to keep it "unofficial" - not dipping in to the wine cellars (which presumably would leave a paper trail) - If food was the only thing provided, then maybe they thought they'd be able to pass the consumption off as business-related. Rather defeats the object by sending out the invites on email, mind

Might be nonsense, of course.

Bring you own avoids cross contamination from bottles. Not unusual for wine at business working events. Pretty common in fact. Not unusual for organisations to have offsite meetings, in their case they have a secure garden. Our company used a local hotel.

Possible to have a working event that includes wine and nibbles, in a social setting. Not unusual. The issues is not that, it’s if it broke Covid regulations.

Its also to see if Bodge lied again !

[tuffers#1]

More parties, including the Night before Lily bet put old PHIL in the ground ! Bodge not there ,but its his House .

[Dunners]

His Director of Communications was there.

If Johnson knew, he was complicit. If he didn't, he's incompetent