Boris - The Prime Minister

First thoughts on PMBoris, will he make a difference?


  • Total voters
    603
Ah, but. You miss the real point of the various complainers.

It is all BJ's fault and if he had not been elected to lead the largest Party in parliament and thus become the Prime Minister then we would never have had any Covid-19 infection in this country.

Simples!!!
Boris Ggggrrr!! Cummings Ggggrrrr!!
 
Look at the people who even at the start of the lockdown looked for loopholes, or ways of getting around it.
The message from Boris was clear at the very start, in March. You must stay home for three weeks and not mix households. Only make essential journeys.
Some people couldn’t grasp this.
For example, even in the first three weeks people were going to relatives in their back garden, because they thought this was safe. This broke the spirit of the lockdown.
Secondly, families where the parents had split up and the kids mainly lived with the mothers. Straight away some people jumped on the bandwagon saying this meant fathers couldn’t visit their children who lived in different households. So the rules changed.
So apparently some fathers couldn’t keep away from their kids for just three weeks, bearing in mind that people in the armed forces even today, spend months away from their children, without mobile phones and FaceTime.
Some people just couldn’t obey simple rules, from the start.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
Not at all.
But look at his messages and lack of clarity;
Go to work , don’t go to work. Stay home but go to work if you can. But don’t use public transport, but use public transport if you have to. Stay home and don’t go out, go out if you have to.
Go to work but stay home. Work from home if you can but go to work if you can.
No need to wear a face mask but wear a face mask.
Go to work but don’t go to work.
Show me any world leader who hasn't changed their guidance/rules as the situation develops. Show me any world leader who has been open about all the bad news, whose statistics have included people dying with, rather than of Covid.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
Look at the people who even at the start of the lockdown looked for loopholes, or ways of getting around it.
The message from Boris was clear at the very start, in March. You must stay home for three weeks and not mix households. Only make essential journeys.
Some people couldn’t grasp this.
For example, even in the first three weeks people were going to relatives in their back garden, because they thought this was safe. This broke the spirit of the lockdown.
Secondly, families where the parents had split up and the kids mainly lived with the mothers. Straight away some people jumped on the bandwagon saying this meant fathers couldn’t visit their children who lived in different households. So the rules changed.
So apparently some fathers couldn’t keep away from their kids for just three weeks, bearing in mind that people in the armed forces even today, spend months away from their children, without mobile phones and FaceTime.
Some people just couldn’t obey simple rules, from the start.
Actively encouraged by PestoKuenssRigby who were stirring sh1t from the start.
 
Ah, but. You miss the real point of the various complainers.

It is all BJ's fault and if he had not been elected to lead the largest Party in parliament and thus become the Prime Minister then we would never have had any Covid-19 infection in this country.

Simples!!!
Yeah... but @Roger Out ’s mother would still be dressing him for work each day.

Perhaps he should have been our prime minister and the head of SAGE. We really need somebody with incisive vision and decision making ability.
↓↓↓

Here’s my personal opinion. We went into a lockdown in late March. When I say lockdown, it wasn’t really was it? It was rather half hearted to me..Joe Bloggs could still wonder about freely, just that shops were closed expect essential shops.
Schools were closed except for key workers kids or vulnerable children. The key workers lost was quite extensive, this wasn’t just NHS workers ,if parents worked in a convenient shop, they were classed as key workers. So surely these kids in school were a higher risk of getting Coronavirus from their parents? But vulnerable children could also go to school? How do you define vulnerable children? Are they not vulnerable when they are not at school? Surely sending vulnerable kids to school would be more of a health risk to them, if their disease was so life threatening?
Little old Doris who is 90, was still able to jump on a bus and ride around all day because she wanted something to do.
People openly flouted the rules and very few people actually fined.
Why not have made face covering from the start instead of four months down the line?
Why not have enforced the lockdown much stricter if it was so serious?
 
Oh come on, Boris is a marmite figure. He won because his message was simple, leave the EU. That’s why he won in the North East and other Labour heartlands.
That and the fact the opposition was a lunatic who would have bankrupt the UK.

Remember Thatcher V Foot in 1983 and Major V Kinnock in 1992.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Look at the people who even at the start of the lockdown looked for loopholes, or ways of getting around it.
The message from Boris was clear at the very start, in March. You must stay home for three weeks and not mix households. Only make essential journeys.
Some people couldn’t grasp this.
For example, even in the first three weeks people were going to relatives in their back garden, because they thought this was safe. This broke the spirit of the lockdown.
Secondly, families where the parents had split up and the kids mainly lived with the mothers. Straight away some people jumped on the bandwagon saying this meant fathers couldn’t visit their children who lived in different households. So the rules changed.
So apparently some fathers couldn’t keep away from their kids for just three weeks, bearing in mind that people in the armed forces even today, spend months away from their children, without mobile phones and FaceTime.
Some people just couldn’t obey simple rules, from the start.
The real question is - Is there anything that will make you happy?

I very much doubt it.
 
I can’t, but have you seen the contradictions that been been made since March? Did you go to work, or did you stay home? Did you wear it mask or not bother?
I stayed at home as my company made it possible (even before COVID) for me to work from home. If I’d been unable to work from home then I’d have stayed at home and returned to work when my company said it was appropriate and safe. I drive to work so public transport is not an issue. If it had been I would have listened to the advice and taken all appropriate precautions including face masks and distancing.
On my one or two trips to a shop a week I wear a face mask and try to stay an appropriate distance away from other shoppers. I do scan as you shop and pay contactless if I can.
I‘ve made my parents in their 70s stay home the whole time and delivered shopping to them. When told it’s ok I now sit in their garden for a brief chat when I deliver their shopping.
Its really not that difficult to interpret the rules for yourself. The government cannot cover every possible situation as there are so many variables. They give general guidance for best practice mostly and count on the population to interpret for themselves. That, in my opinion, is where it all falls over because some people cannot think for themselves if their lives depended on it. Which in some cases they kind of do.
And then there is the media and opposition to the government who wilfully go looking for reasons to slate them and “the guidance is vague” is a good stick to hit them with. Closely followed by the weak of brain chiming in that they agree.
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
Show me any world leader who hasn't changed their guidance/rules as the situation develops. Show me any world leader who has been open about all the bad news, whose statistics have included people dying with, rather than of Covid.
China - so we are told.
 
Yeah... but @Roger Out ’s mother would still be dressing him for work each day.

Perhaps he should have been our prime minister and the head of SAGE. We really need somebody with incisive vision and decision making ability.
↓↓↓
I did say this was my personal opinion.
You’ll notice that quite a few have been critical of the Government over this.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Oh come on, Boris is a marmite figure. He won because his message was simple, leave the EU. That’s why he won in the North East and other Labour heartlands.
That and the fact the opposition was a lunatic who would have bankrupt the UK.

Remember Thatcher V Foot in 1983 and Major V Kinnock in 1992.
You're correct. Boris never mentioned anything about Covid-19 at the election so must stand down immediately!

You really are struggling to make a case aren't you?
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I did say this was my personal opinion.
You’ll notice that quite a few have been critical of the Government over this.
Indeed. You are not alone in the world of Mongs.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
They can't say "we'd prefer you to wear a mask in a shop because it may limit the spread, but we will not compel you to do so" because they are immediately assaulted by numerous lobby groups plastered all over the media calling for crucifiction of "Roooolbreakers.....". Trouble is by pandering to this sort of nonsense they're just encouraging more of it. Why not in pubs? Why not in restaurants? Why not {add tenuous example here) ......

They really have got to stop being reactive like this.
I agree with most of what you say, apart from the bold above. The trouble is, anything they do will be portrayed as "reactive" by the usual suspects. Wearing a mask in enclosed spaces is at the very least marginally effective at preventing infection; to now enforce their use in shops etc is sensible considering the (economically necessary) move to open back up. But on this morning's R4 Today programme the Health Sec was being nagged "why not sooner".

I don't see mandating masks in shops as being "reactive", I think the Govt is simply doing what it thinks needs doing when it can be done. However, it's being reported through a filter of such toxicity that no action's upside is given more than a cursory mention before the knife is driven home.. The Government is having to operate in an unparalleled atmosphere of corrosive cynicism where everything is being scrutinised through 20/20 hindsight (real or imagined), to a level I haven't seen previously and where any action is second guessed to death.
 
Some people couldn’t grasp this.
For example, even in the first three weeks people were going to relatives in their back garden, because they thought this was safe. This broke the spirit of the lockdown.
Some people just couldn’t obey simple rules, from the start.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

Now kindly point out how & why it is Johnsons fault that the the UK is full of thick f***ers, who are incapable of thought, except for me.......me.......me.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Yes to go back to normal. And not this new normal.
Now ytou have just proven your stupidity.

Remember the old adage: Better to stay silent and be thought a fool than opening one's mouth and proving it.
 
You're correct. Boris never mentioned anything about Covid-19 at the election so must stand down immediately!

You really are struggling to make a case aren't you?
My points were that lockdown had too many loopholes in it. And the message about face coverings is too late.
Other than that I just follow orders and wonder if I like millions will have a job in three months time. My major concern is the economy.
 
Indeed. You are not alone in the world of Mongs.
Well it made no sense to me to send people with covid 19 back to their care homes no.. wouldn’t it have been better to send them to a recovery centre, rather than pass it on to staff and other residents? Just a thought...
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top