Boris Johnson & the media

[LMcD]

Trouble is that the PM has never had to "learn from his mistakes" as such so sees no reason for any investigation. The fact that, contrary to his own opinion, being PM is not all about what he Boris Johnson wants, doesn't figure in any consideration. Refusing to accept responsibility in any form (except where success can be stolen from the rightful sources) is the modus operandi, not surprisingly as it has served him very well all his life.
Given what seems to be happening with any sort of official investigation these days(not being published, being undertaken to find a politically approved outcome, being judge and jury) my own view is that any "official" inquiry would be a pointless waste of time and money. Whatever mistakes have been made will not be used to inform the future, not least as they will in far too many cases involve people and interests too useful to the Party to be held accountable or otherwise inconvenienced - vide Grenfell.
As far as I can see it will be down to non-government bodies to record and investigate so far as they can so that at least the information is available outside the control of vested interests.

Unfortunately, the electorate have such a short ... what's the word?

[oddoneout]

Unfortunately, the electorate have such a short ... what's the word?

But it only needs a minority of them to elect an incompetent government sadly.

[Jazzrook]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/02/westminster-eton-schoolboys-boris-johnson-david-cameron

JR

[french frank]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-david-cameron

JR

Yes, that was a good piece (I thought).

[Jazzrook]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/30/tories-faustian-bargain-lord-of-misrule-boris-johnson

JR

[french frank]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-boris-johnson

JR

"The jaundiced view is that, for all the pyrotechnics of his performance, Mr Cummings won’t do much immediate damage to Mr Johnson because he was essentially telling us what we already knew or strongly suspected."

It's bizarre that the US and UK political systems have been going through the identical trauma at the same time. Party tribalism sustaining incompetent buffoons in the highest office; and the populace going along with it.

[Frances_iom]

... Party tribalism sustaining incompetent buffoons in the highest office; and the populace going along with it.

Often stated: the major argument against democratic government is the behaviour of the voters.

[Anastasius]

Why don't opposition politicians get the message? We'll soon be coming up to "13 years of Tory misrule" to be followed by "13 years of Labour misrule". Why do people only elect self-serving politicians? Same with the Republicans and Trump - the 'odd' "honest politician" soon gets mauled.

Because the vast majority of voters are simply too thick to vote. Sad but true.

[Anastasius]

Often stated: the major argument against democratic government is the behaviour of the voters.

Perhaps voters need an IQ test before they can vote.

[Serial_Apologist]

Because the vast majority of voters are simply too thick to vote. Sad but true.

It's more because people are offered fake inducements to keep them on board for as long as it takes. I've just now been watching the documentary tracing the clash between the Thatcher government and the miners on Channel 5, and was left wondering what, beyond Christmas bonuses given to those miners willing to strike break, now remains of the former mining communities of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire who, in the end, were as much affected by eventual closure of their mines as those in the militant areas.

[Joseph K]

Because the vast majority of voters are simply too thick to vote. Sad but true.

Perhaps voters need an IQ test before they can vote.

Well, most people don't vote Tory - that's true. But since we know that you voted Tory I have to wonder what result you'd like to see from what you propose - an even greater Tory majority??

[Dave2002]

Well, most people don't vote Tory - that's true. But since we know that you voted Tory I have to wonder what result you'd like to see from what you propose - an even greater Tory majority??

Do we know that A voted for the Cons? Has he ever mentioned that?

Even if he did - so what?

For my part, I can admit to having voted for Con people on one or two occasions - but never in a General Election - and that's over many years. At local elections I do look at what the candidates offer in terms of their ability etc., and make a judgement on that.
I can also say, having worked with some people at a local level, that often party politics doesn't have a lot to do with how well things get done. Assumptions about how others have voted, or which parties they might support, often turn out to be be completely wrong.
I have been really surprised at that over the last decade or so.

[vinteuil]

Because the vast majority of voters are simply too thick to vote. Sad but true.

... if the 'too thick' voters don't vote, this would imply that overall those who do vote are less thick than the average.

If what we see is the result of votes from those brighter than the average, I have to say it's an indictment of our current system of 'democracy'


.

[Bryn]

Perhaps voters need an IQ test before they can vote.

What has the ability to perform well in tests designed to assess one's ability to do them to do with the ability to judge which candidate to choose to represent one? I am reminded of the case of an old friend who, in her 20s, went for a job with IBM. As part of the assessment process, she had to do a range of psychometric tests, including some addressed at determining her intellectual qualities. She got the lowest scores recorded. This led to her being called in for a further interview since the low scores just did not match up with the impression given when first talked to. Being an artist, she had responded to the IQ tests on the basis of aesthetics, rather than logic, resulting in very low scores. She got the job and the tests were re-evaluated and became less relied upon. Do you, I wonder, think that those responsible for deciding to retain the name of the scientific fraudster, Cyril Burt (who invented twin statistics in support of his contentions regarding IQ testing), with a school for children with learning disabilities, should be permitted to vote in elections to appoint political representatives?

[oddoneout]

Because the vast majority of voters are simply too thick to vote. Sad but true.

Not true. What is a problem though is not having the full picture about the issues involved nor, in far too many cases the necessary background (education, family etc) to question what is presented in their media source of choice and find that fuller picture, especially if it runs counter to the group think - family/ friends/ community, where pressures to conform can be significant. Ignorance through lack of skills or knowledge is not automatically the same as being "thick". I was surprised at the level of misinformation (to put it politely) about the EU among people I knew or talked to who were not in the least "thick". It doesn't help that during the many years at school any inclination to question what is presented is generally squashed, so neither the skills nor the inclination develop and carry through into adult life.