582 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0
Johnson, by contrast, flailed and floundered. The stories that he's effectively unbriefable ring ever more true. Speaking as a journalist (who once worked with Bozza), I'd say he - and Gove - prove that folk in my trade ought to be barred from public office. It's easy to come up with magic solutions and killer jokes in a column. Governing is very different.
That's almost (but not quite) a way of saying that I suspect Johnson at least half wants to lose the election...
He never believed in it, after all - and never expected it to be voted for - merely calculated that affecting to support it would stand him in good stead with the membership when Cameron stood down from the leadership (around now...)
I think Martin Kettle in today's Guardian is right: the idea that BJ has cut-through across the country is being exposed as fantasy.
Re your last point, even if it could be proven that Corbyn would be more destructive long term to Britain than Brexit, that still wouldn't preclude a Labour/Lib/Scots pact. Once the referendum is done and dusted, these last two are going to insist on as the price of the deal, either – and likely both – party/s is/are going to pull the plug on the deal in short order. They won't want to prop Corbyn up any longer than is necessary for their main aim: stopping Brexit.
I understand absolutely the difference between debt and deficit. My basic point is that while the Tories trumpet the drop in the deficit, they never talk about the massive hike in the debt that has occurred on their watch.
Mind you, I'm even more baffled as to why the opposition parties don't talk about that hike either, but that's another point.
It isn't enough to form a government, that's the point. That's why I believe there'll be another election next year - likely after another Brexit referendum.
Contrariwise, Corbyn cobbles together a coalition / conf and supply arrangement, the price of which will be exactly the same: another referendum. After which, conf and supply ends and we have another election in early autumn.
Anyway, that's my guess/es...
Which options are you referring to?
I asked you if paying off one sum (of, eg: £120bn) by borrowing another sum (of in this case £1trillion) is wise? Perhaps you think it is. If so, can you explain why so? Because from where I'm sitting it looks like what I said earlier - robbing (or borrowing from) Peter to pay Paul...