Why don't more people hate the awful Boris Johnson?

[mothman]

Here's a statistic that illustrates the problem with any political discussion on GB perfectly: at time of my submitting this post, there are more mentions of the words "Starmer" or "centrist" in this thread than there are "Conservative" or "Tory." "Johnson" (and equivalents) comes out top in terms of mentions but it'd be hard not to given the thread is ostensibly about him.

Something to think about, hmm? Not that any of you will. Pile-on in three, two, one...

[Johnny Yesno]

Something to think about, hmm?

Hmmm... no.

[Jockice]

Fuck knows. I used to be one of the admins on a PIP and ESA information page on Facebook. It had a still from I, Daniel Blake as its cover picture and many of the enquiries were from people who had been denied benefits they were entitled to. Yet on the admins' chat on messenger the main ones started going on one day about how much they liked Johnson. Eh? You do realise that he's a very big part of the problem don't you, not some sort of comedy TV personality? I didn't comment at the time but let's just say I didn't leave the page on good terms. Wankers.

[Kankurette]

This is a huge part of it, definitely.

Similarly, I also think people see him as an anti-politician; someone who cuts through the red tape and "PC nonsense" that hold other politicians back. Someone who says what he wants, knows what he wants (lol), and isn't interested in half measures (also lol). And his success in getting Brexit through when it had previously seemed impossible really cemented that, I think.

The irony is that he's nearly as directionless and unprincipled as a politician like Starmer. He's just much, much better at hiding it. The public like a politician who knows what he wants (so long as they agree), and they know what Johnson pretends to stand for.  I suspect Covid has helped as well, as it's given him one all-consuming issue to focus on, rather than having to layout his own vision.

I never got the 'says what he thinks/wants' line. I say what I think all the time and people don't like it.

[The Dog]

Kayfabe.

[Butchers Blind]

I never got the 'says what he thinks/wants' line. I say what I think all the time and people don't like it.

I heard someone at work comment on him, "He says what he wants. He's like one of us". I could've punched their face into next week.

[idunnosomename]

What a total wankpuffin he is!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kankurette]

I heard someone at work comment on him, "He says what he wants. He's like one of us". I could've punched their face into next week.

Oddly, when I said what I wanted at work, I got told off. Or reported.

Any average working person who thinks Johnson is just like them is a fool. He's a rich upper-class toff who looks down on most of the people who vote for him.

[katzenjammer]

I heard someone at work comment on him, "He says what he wants. He's like one of us". I could've punched their face into next week.

It's as if interviewers these days, particularly the BBC, are seen as The Man so anyone that DESTROYS them, doesn't matter if they are lying, is good because they are sticking it to them.

Same with Mogg, they are viewed as posh rebels

[Fambo Number Mive]

I never got the 'says what he thinks/wants' line. I say what I think all the time and people don't like it.

He doesn't say what he thinks either, he says what he thinks will win votes/readers, but his supporters mistake it as him.saying what he really thinks. One wonders if he has ever said what he actually believes. I imagine he probably is a massive bigot in real life though. I

Bleak that he might still be prime minister after 2024.

I think he is similar to Thatcher and Major in one way - he succeeded by being very different from his predecessor in Number 10.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

It's as if interviewers these days, particularly the BBC, are seen as The Man so anyone that DESTROYS them, doesn't matter if they are lying, is good because they are sticking it to them.

The conservative view that the liberal media are ideologically inflexible, drawn from a tiny section of society and almost entirely motivated by in-crowd preening and careerism is unfortunately accurate.

The lack of a specifically left wing criticism to this, or any left wing counterculture in the public eye, gives thick poshos who like to trigger the libs a free reign. It also makes cultural war material more potent than it should be by giving them a foundation to stand on - ie, liberal media don't believe the things they say, its just virtue signaling. Well, that's true. They're not sincere. They don't believe it, its just jargon to them. The Guardian isn't an anti-racist paper and the BBC isn't a feminist institution, its just pretend.

Nowt worse than liberals wondering aloud how right wingers could POSSIBLY think that the liberal media are craven ideologues. Everyone thinks it, including their own bloody audience. This is all their fault. I blame them more than the right. The right wing are like sewage, an unpleasant but necessary by-product of developed society. I blame the people who've effectively spent the last 20 years arguing against sanitation and telling us representations of toilets are just as clean as the real thing.

[Kelvin]

I never got the 'says what he thinks/wants' line. I say what I think all the time and people don't like it.

Well, as I said:

The public like a politician who knows what he wants (so long as they agree)

People say they like genuine, outspoken politicians, but really they like outspoken politicians that agree with them. They hate politicians that don't. Which is why so many politicians play out their careers as spineless, grey nobodies.

[thenoise]

Looking down on people is what they like about him. No matter how lowly anyone is there is always a (possibly apocryphal) order of people for you to look down on. This is the basis of British conservatism.

[Kankurette]

It is definitely 'he validates my beliefs', yeah. If, say, Jeremy Corbyn was to speak passionately about the welfare of people in Palestine, the same people would tell him to shut up. Hence Farage is liked because he says what everyone is thinking, supposedly, and I tend to take comments like that literally. Of course it's bullshit. Plenty of people don't agree with him. But I guess his fans like to think that the majority of Brits share the same prejudices as them but don't have the balls to admit it. It's a bit discomforting, wandering around and wondering how many people secretly hate you, but in my case that's probably mental illness talking.

VGF, maybe that's why Starmer gets so many mentions in this thread - because he should be a credible opposition to Johnson, but isn't.

[MikeP]

Looking down on people is what they like about him. No matter how lowly anyone is there is always a (possibly apocryphal) order of people for you to look down on. This is the basis of British conservatism.

What I like about him is that he doesn't seem to give a toss. Which is also what I don't like about him.
His saving grace is that he is totally incompetent and only doing the job because the electorate allowed it to happen.
Democracy at work.

[Kankurette]

Looking down on people is what they like about him. No matter how lowly anyone is there is always a (possibly apocryphal) order of people for you to look down on. This is the basis of British conservatism.

And American as well. Like poor whites who vote for Trump because hey, at least they're not black. Sorry if I'm not wording this well enough.

I wish the liberal media would stop giving culture war bullshit so much attention. Like The Tiger Who Came to Tea. Who cares? It's not important.

[Johnny Yesno]

The conservative view that the liberal media are ideologically inflexible, drawn from a tiny section of society and almost entirely motivated by in-crowd preening and careerism is unfortunately accurate.

The lack of a specifically left wing criticism to this, or any left wing counterculture in the public eye, gives thick poshos who like to trigger the libs a free reign. It also makes cultural war material more potent than it should be by giving them a foundation to stand on - ie, liberal media don't believe the things they say, its just virtue signaling. Well, that's true. They're not sincere. They don't believe it, its just jargon to them. The Guardian isn't an anti-racist paper and the BBC isn't a feminist institution, its just pretend.

Nowt worse than liberals wondering aloud how right wingers could POSSIBLY think that the liberal media are craven ideologues. Everyone thinks it, including their own bloody audience. This is all their fault. I blame them more than the right. The right wing are like sewage, an unpleasant but necessary by-product of developed society. I blame the people who've effectively spent the last 20 years arguing against sanitation and telling us representations of toilets are just as clean as the real thing.

There's a lot of truth to this, although:

Kayfabe.

[chveik]

Something to think about, hmm? Not that any of you will. Pile-on in three, two, one...

looks like your post is not even worth the pile-on. must be sad

[jamiefairlie]

And American as well. Like poor whites who vote for Trump because hey, at least they're not black. Sorry if I'm not wording this well enough.

I wish the liberal media would stop giving culture war bullshit so much attention. Like The Tiger Who Came to Tea. Who cares? It's not important.

But it is important to them. It's how they keep the Brexit coalition together, they need a bogeyman and now the EU is no longer as useful, 'the woke' are being used, even if there is no such thing they will still use it.

[Kankurette]

Sure, but to the majority of people, it isn't. Some woman writing a critique of a kids' book is not going to affect most people. The Tiger Who Came to Tea has not been banned. The right are just trying to make a big fuss about nothing and it doesn't deserve the attention. The left shouldn't indulge them. It's why I don't watch GB News.

[Johnny Yesno]

looks like your post is not even worth the pile-on. must be sad

Oh, no. Will this do?

[jamiefairlie]

Sure, but to the majority of people, it isn't. Some woman writing a critique of a kids' book is not going to affect most people. The Tiger Who Came to Tea has not been banned. The right are just trying to make a big fuss about nothing and it doesn't deserve the attention. The left shouldn't indulge them. It's why I don't watch GB News.

Agreed but they own the media so can create large mountains out of little molehills. They need the enemy and will create it if necessary.

[Johnny Yesno]

They need the enemy and will create it if necessary.

I know I keep posting this every so often but it's worth remembering:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hnsgrassegger/george-soros-conspiracy-finkelstein-birnbaum-orban-netanyahu

It was back then that Finkelstein started developing a political method that now reads like a how-to guide for modern right-wing populism. Finkelstein's premise was simple: Every election is decided before it even begins. Most people know who they will vote for, what they support, and what they oppose. It's very difficult to convince them otherwise, Finkelstein believed. It's a lot easier to demoralize people than to motivate them. And the best way to win is to demoralize your opponent's supporters. That's what Trump did to great effect against Hillary Clinton, and what he meant when, after the election, he thanked black Americans for not voting.

This is why some people on the left talk about the Orbanisation of British politics.

[Kankurette]

Just like Emmanuel Goldstein in 1984.

[pigamus]

I know I keep posting this every so often but it's worth remembering:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hnsgrassegger/george-soros-conspiracy-finkelstein-birnbaum-orban-netanyahu

This is why some people on the left talk about the Orbanisation of British politics.

I wish I had the job of trying to demoralise people about Hillary Clinton

"Hillary Clinton exists"
"I know she does"
"Thank you for your time"

[Johnny Yesno]

I wish I had the job of trying to demoralise people about Hillary Clinton

"Hillary Clinton exists"
"I know she does"
"Thank you for your time"

Haha! Yes, I take your point but nevertheless the Trump campaign did engage in voter suppression in that election and the subsequent one.

[jamiefairlie]

I think Adam Curtis touches on it in Hypernormalisation.

"In Russia, Vladimir Putin and his cabinet of political technologists create mass confusion. Vladislav Surkov uses ideas from art to turn Russian politics into a bewildering piece of theatre"

So you create such chaos that people end up having no clue and just give up trying. Every new event that previously, in a more stable environment, would have caused a resignation and damaged the government, now just results in a resigned shrugging of shoulders.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Haha! Yes, I take your point but nevertheless the Trump campaign did engage in voter suppression in that election and the subsequent one.

Still hard to believe "basket of deplorables" actually happened and wasn't some blue tick cunt paraphrasing.

On October 20, 2016, during the 71st Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, Clinton joked about the phrase, telling the guests: "I just want to put you all in a basket of adorables".

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Imagine the world we might be in right now if she'd not said it, had a shred of humility about thinking the arc of history would offer up "her turn" on a platter. And, then three weeks later when Access Hollywood tapes drop she could look the camera dead on and say "Trump supporters: I know at least some of you have qualms about voting for someone who brags about sexual assault. Please think about your vote carefully"

idk if it would be enough to counterbalance the Comey letter but generally in an election the thing to do is not give your opponents the best unifying identity they could dream of

[Johnny Yesno]

She put humility in a casket marked 'Ignorables'.