If there's going to be a geography-based plot to replace Johnson, suspect that one originating in Melton Mowbray is far more likely to result in a new Tory leader who's actually a conservative than one originating in either Cameroon Notting Hill or Goldsmith Richmond.
As @GoodwinMJ suggests in this thread, if the Tories were to elect a new Party Leader/PM ideologically grounded in Notting Hill/Richmond, rather than the shires & the Red Wall, their chances of retaining power are much lower. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1481612…
To survive in office in the medium-to-long term, they need to engage with, and 'lean into' the political realignment that the UK is going through, not shy away from it retreat into a Home Counties/SE England metro-'liberal' comfort zone.
Bang on target again by @Sherelle_E_J.
If he, and his party, are to survive, then Johnson has to prove, by his both policies and his personal conduct, that there is still a point to his existence as PM, and his party's continuation in office. telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/…
The readiness of Barwell - who fronted May's No 10 backstairs plot to secretly agree a BRINO-Lite with Merkel & then impose it on her Cabinet - to be quoted, says much about the source of at least some of the Tory internal anti-Johnson/Brexit plotting. thetimes.co.uk/article/e463c5…
It's the metro-'liberal', Brexit-unreconciled, Notting Hill-Richmond nexus of 'Conservatives' who potentially stand to gain most from a Johnson defenestration.
In any leadership contest, the Red Wall & the grassroots must elect Truss, to thwart them. thetimes.co.uk/article/a-pm-w…
Spot-on by @jowilliams293: it's not up to Cummings to pick and choose who is the UK's PM. spiked-online.com/2022/01/18/its…>
But equally, it's not up to the Media, either, and they're working very hard colluding with Cummings in trying to make the choice a joint effort between them.
AS @jowilliams293 rightly points out, the same Media that demonised Cummings & virtually condemned him for spreading Covid round the country single-handed are now lapping up his opinions & accusations with a credulity & eagerness verging on adoration. #ScumMedia
Via @Tom_Slater_ at @spikedonline, this is why Johnson should go... spiked-online.com/2022/01/17/the…>
But strictly provided, IMHO, that it's not so that he can be replaced by Hunt or some other shonky retread of the divisive, deceitful & disastrous Theresa May.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With this decision, the medico-totalitarian Australian government, both in legislative & judicial forms, has placed itself beyond the boundaries of civilised society.
Utter disgrace. telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2022/01…
Abundantly clear that Djokovic has been targeted & punished, not b/c he is healthy & infection-free but just unvaccinated, but b/c he's thereby a dissenter who threatens to undermine the legitimacy of the entire medico-totalitarian regime.
What a s**thole Australia's become.
And there's the proof.
"Mr Djokovic’s ongoing presence in Australia may lead to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment generated in the Australian community"
In other words: "Dissenting opinion will not be tolerated."
100%, @CitySamuel. As if the Online Safety Bill wasn't enough of an additional threat to already under siege #FreeSpeech in Britain, the judicial-activism which awarded Meghan Markle a win without even a trial exerts a further chilling effect on it. telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/…
VG analysis by @CamillaTominey. Contrary to the extravagant claims made in Markle's triumphalist but victimhood-larded statement, what her legal action proved was that she does have the voice which she disingenuously insists she lacks. telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2…> #PrincessPinoccchio
Glover may be parti-pris as columnist for one of the parties; but he surely has a valid point about how Markle has now had two legal wins, but in both of which the judge decided that the matter need not even go to trial, so she never need be cross-examined mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/c…
Says it all about the Woke-Left #BiasedBBC, doesn't it, that Edwards was reprimanded for 𝙤𝙗𝙟𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 to the 'decolonisation'-inspired removal of a statue, on the grounds that its removal was 'censoring history'? telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/0…
And to add insult to injury, the #BBC, which never misses an opportunity to ram its own anti-heritage, anti-white woke revisionism down our throats, actually had the gall to say Edwards was risking breaching its internal impartiality guidelines.
You couldn't make it up....
And this only 2 days after D-G Davie in effect 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘥 the #BBC from responsibility to observe any impartiality or balance whatsoever on 'climate-change', b/c the BBC now regards it as so settled as to be politically uncontroversial. #DefundTheBBC
So the same #BBC that unapologetically beams the foulest language & most extreme perversions at its audience to promote the Woke-Left agenda feels the need to apologise at 3.24. a.m for a double Olympic gold-medallist dropping an F-bomb in exulting at his victory. #DefundTheBBC
THREAD 1/4 Part of my cynical brain wondering whether the Johnson Junta is actually following a devious plan to deliberately go OTT on both #oneruleforthem entitlement & repressive Covid-authoritarianism, in the hope of generating a public backlash so big...
2/4 …that it would force them to abandon all Covid restrictions as politically impossible to sustain; thus partly getting themselves off the hook for when the full reckoning for the economic & societal damage #lockdowns have already caused comes in…
3/4 …and also transferring blame from themselves on to the British people for any increase in infections, hospitalisations, etc., if either the virus continues to spread or vaccines are seen to have undesirable side effects…
1/7
OK, tweeps, here’s my take, FWIW, on Boris Johnson’s possible ‘logic’-tree on sacking Matt Hancock.
Interested in hearing your (NB non-abusive!) thoughts.
THREAD
2/7 BJ would prefer MH gone. MH has now destroyed any former usefulness he had as a human shield for BJ over Covid, and as a lightning rod for growing public discontent.
But - on what grounds to sack him without damage to, or at least with minimum damage to, BJ himself ?
3/7
Can’t sack MH over the infidelity.
(a) on its own, purely a private matter.
(b) too many skeletons in BJ’s own closet on that score
(c) unlikely to be only minister or MP in same situation