Straight Dope Message Board

[Elendil's Heir]

Previous thread about May's resignation and Johnson's election as PM: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=876044

Brexit, Brexit, Brexit and Brexit - oh, yeah, and the economy, budget, immigration, education, defense, environment, etc. How's he doing? Opinions welcomed both from Brits and non-Brits. 1

[QuickSilver]

What?... Nothing about rebuilding Hadrian's Wall with Irish labor and having Scotland pay for it? 2

[Kobal2]

First read that as "leave the UK", which would have been much better news. 3

[Gyrate]

My opinion is that he's a lying, corrupt hypocrite who will happily destroy the country (possibly literally) for his own profit and aggrandisement, and who - based on his career so far - will likely manage to escape being held accountable for his actions because he has funny hair and bumbles about a bit. 4

[cochrane]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

My opinion is that he's a lying, corrupt hypocrite who will happily destroy the country (possibly literally) for his own profit and aggrandisement, and who - based on his career so far - will likely manage to escape being held accountable for his actions because he has funny hair and bumbles about a bit.

You trump the thread! 5

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

My opinion is that he's a lying, corrupt hypocrite who will happily destroy the country (possibly literally) for his own profit and aggrandisement, and who - based on his career so far - will likely manage to escape being held accountable for his actions because he has funny hair and bumbles about a bit.

I do wonder about the first part though. I mean, with Trump or Farage or Reese-Mogg you can really easily connect the money dots. They're in red. And bolded. And the fuckers write books about their precious fucking dots, too.
Is there such an obvious self-profit angle with the be-mopped potato ?


(true honest question - I'm not concern trolling or socratic questioning or nuffin'. I have no earthly idea) 6

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Kobal2

I do wonder about the first part though. I mean, with Trump or Farage or Reese-Mogg you can really easily connect the money dots. They're in red. And bolded. And the fuckers write books about their precious fucking dots, too.
Is there such an obvious self-profit angle with the be-mopped potato ?


(true honest question - I'm not concern trolling or socratic questioning or nuffin'. I have no earthly idea)

You're right - I'm making assumptions here about his finances.

But Boris was staunchly pro-EU before he decided that a narrow loss while leading the Leave campaign would allow him to ride a wave of resentment into Number 10. Unfortunately he unexpectedly won and immediately ran away from any responsibility to deliver what he'd promised. And now he's back, clearly determined to drive the country toward a no-deal Brexit. If it's not the money, then I don't know what game he's playing - he's not a True Believer and he knows it's not going to turn out to be all the sunshine and lollipops he's been promising. 7

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

You're right - I'm making assumptions here about his finances.

But Boris was staunchly pro-EU before he decided that a narrow loss while leading the Leave campaign would allow him to ride a wave of resentment into Number 10. Unfortunately he unexpectedly won and immediately ran away from any responsibility to deliver what he'd promised. And now he's back, clearly determined to drive the country toward a no-deal Brexit. If it's not the money, then I don't know what game he's playing - he's not a True Believer and he knows it's not going to turn out to be all the sunshine and lollipops he's been promising.

That's really what's puzzling me. I don't know what he's about. He seems to have sort of bumbled himself into anti-EU politics because back when he was a journalist he found it effortless and the path of least giving a fuck to write alarmist nonsense and that was it - and that is still it. Beyond all the studied and deliberate bumbling, it really seems to me like he's on the side of the devils because, well, he's lazy and that requires the least effort and politics is better than having a real job.
Which is somehow more scary than all the McConnels in the world, to me. 8

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

My opinion is that he's a lying, corrupt hypocrite who will happily destroy the country (possibly literally) for his own profit and aggrandisement, and who - based on his career so far - will likely manage to escape being held accountable for his actions because he has funny hair and bumbles about a bit.

Thank you British SDMBers for electing him. Now you Brits can't complain about trump anymore.

See, loud mouthed racist bigots are everywhere. 9

[Go_Arachnid_Laser]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

Thank you British SDMBers for electing him. Now you Brits can't complain about trump anymore.

See, loud mouthed racist bigots are everywhere.

I mean, technically speaking he hasn't been elected by the Brits. He's been elected by members of the Conservative party. 10

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Go_Arachnid_Laser

I mean, technically speaking he hasn't been elected by the Brits. He's been elected by members of the Conservative party.

Who are...not British? And who voted them in? The French?

Technically then trump wasnt voted in by Americans, it was the Electoral College, those scalawags. 11

[Go_Arachnid_Laser]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

Who are...not British? And who voted them in? The French?

Technically then trump wasnt voted in by Americans, it was the Electoral College, those scalawags.

Well, no. "Some" Brits elected him. As in he wasn't elected in a general election where all the electorate, the "Brits", got to vote. 12

[Stanislaus]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

Thank you British SDMBers for electing him. Now you Brits can't complain about trump anymore.

See, loud mouthed racist bigots are everywhere.

Speaking for myself, I feel quite capable of complaining about both Trump and Johnson. And Modi. And Erdogan. And Orban. And Kaczynski. And any and all national leaders who I think are populist race-baiting shitheads.

It'd be really fucking weird if, just because my country's leader falls into the set of "populist race-baiting shitheads", I had to start keeping schtumm about the fact that populist race-baiting shitheads are bad. That seems to me to be a very limiting approach. Equally, I wouldn't expect Americans not to point out Johnson's many flaws just because of who their president is. Why should they? 13

[Siam Sam]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

My opinion is that he's a lying, corrupt hypocrite who will happily destroy the country (possibly literally) for his own profit and aggrandisement, and who - based on his career so far - will likely manage to escape being held accountable for his actions because he has funny hair and bumbles about a bit.

But enough about our president. This thread is supposed to be about Boris Johnson. 14

[GreenWyvern]

Johnson's plan to blame the EU and/or parliament for no-deal seems to be going well, unfortunately.

He will call an election - he must do so because he can't govern with a majority of one. He was hoping to have polling day immediately after Brexit, when he could get credit from the useful idiots for keeping his promise, and before the chaos and shortages hit.

It looks like that plan has been scuppered by the new bill to stop no-deal, and he will be forced to call an election in mid-October. The only hope now is that he loses that election. Corbyn may be far from ideal, but he better than Johnson by miles, and he has pledged to hold a second referendum. 15

[casdave]

Its early days, and the parties on both sides of politics are couching almost everything in terms of entrenched pro and anti Brexit terms.

Every person with anything to say seems to have a personal take on their corner without any regard whatsoever to the bigger picture - seems to me its all short termist me me me politics right now.

Difficult to say how he is doing, so many folk are determined to have him fail it is really hard to find any commentary from objective sources - even the BBC seems to be carrying out studio interviews with loaded panels, mind you it has been doing that for some time.

Scots nats will spin everything into a referendum for another independence vote, Lefties are spinning everything into a confidence vote in the hope of a general election, Welsh seem to be spinning everything for a second Brexit referendum - despite Wales as a whole voting to leave.

Labour seem to be pressing for a second vote when their core areas of support were solidly behind leave, - a general election for them would likely be political suicide but their party leaders seem to be listening to their activists instead of their electorate.

Other groups that benefit from fixed prices such as farmers who love EU intervention, but hate support for industry because they see it as subsidy, can see their exposure to market forces as a bad thing for them - so they are up in arms - which matters because they are traditionally supporters of the Conservatives, and as for the Irish, both sides of the border - what a mess, its been a mess for the last 150 years and its unlikely to get better after years of relative peace - they are all pointing at the sky in different and incompatible directions and being impossible.

Many conservative MPs are solidly pro EU and seem to be threatening to bring down the government in a confidence motion - which is very much like snowmen booking their summer holidays.

Anyone who thinks a second vote or a general election will resolve anything will get an extremely nasty surprise - the failure to undertake the wishes of the majority has already allowed Boris Johnson to become PM, giving the electorate further votes will divide the country deeper and likely create a huge opportunity for more robust leave parties.

Boris Johnson has to manage all that - he needs all the luck in the world and it is unlikely he will get it. 16

[Lord Feldon]

Originally Posted by casdave

Labour seem to be pressing for a second vote when their core areas of support were solidly behind leave, - a general election for them would likely be political suicide but their party leaders seem to be listening to their activists instead of their electorate.

It's not just the activists, which is a big part of their dilemma. Even as most Labour constituencies voted to leave, most Labour voters voted to remain. 17

[Gyrate]

The real challenge to Boris isn't overt party revolt (won't happen) or Labour forcing a vote of no confidence (Labour couldn't force a toothpick through a wet tissue). The challenge is that even with DUP support, he'll still only have a majority of 2 (which could be reduced to 1 if Brecon & Radnorshire goes as expected on Thursday). That means that not only will he be held hostage by the DUP, he could also be held hostage by every member of his party. One defector and his government crumbles. 18

[GreenWyvern]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

The real challenge to Boris isn't overt party revolt (won't happen) or Labour forcing a vote of no confidence (Labour couldn't force a toothpick through a wet tissue). The challenge is that even with DUP support, he'll still only have a majority of 2 (which could be reduced to 1 if Brecon & Radnorshire goes as expected on Thursday). That means that not only will he be held hostage by the DUP, he could also be held hostage by every member of his party. One defector and his government crumbles.

That's why he will make impossible promises to everybody about everything, try to appear strong and decisive, take a hard line with the EU... and call an election.

He will come to an agreement with Farage, and hope that he gets a decent majority. Then he will try to force through no-deal, by fair means or foul. 19

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by GreenWyvern

That's why he will make impossible promises to everybody about everything, try to appear strong and decisive, take a hard line with the EU... and call an election.

He will come to an agreement with Farage, and hope that he gets a decent majority. Then he will try to force through no-deal, by fair means or foul.

He will only call an election as a last resort, having learned the lesson of the last election where Theresa May went in confident of an increased majority and took a major hit to it instead. If he can bluff and bluster through to the end of October without an election, he will. 20

[PastTense]

Originally Posted by GreenWyvern

Then he will try to force through no-deal, by fair means or foul.

He doesn't have to force through no-deal--Brexit is scheduled to happen automatically on October 31. 21

[Skara_Brae]

John Oliver did a piece on him this Sunday. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dXyO_MC9g3k 22

[glee]

Boris is an lying adulterous narcissist who makes foolish snap decisions.
He's failed as Foreign Secretary and also lost taxpayers millions over an imaginary bridge (as Mayor of London.)

Three years after a narrow vote to leave the EU (on a poorly-phrased referendum), there is no agreement on:

- whether to leave
- what sort of terms should apply if we do leave
- how to resolve the Irish border question.

Boris doesn't do detail, so he's just claiming that in the next few months:

- he can renegotiate a new deal with the EU (no chance)
- he can solve the Irish border question (perhaps he'll build a bridge somewhere )
- the UK will have a stronger union (particularly crass - far more likely that Scotland leave)

If Boris is the answer, then the question is about 'style over substance'. 23

[Buck Godot]

Originally Posted by glee

Boris doesn't do detail, so he's just claiming that in the next few months:

- he can renegotiate a new deal with the EU (no chance)
- he can solve the Irish border question (perhaps he'll build a bridge somewhere )
- the UK will have a stronger union (particularly crass - far more likely that Scotland leave)

If Boris is the answer, then the question is about 'style over substance'.

-I think the end result will be a non deal Brexit, with Boris either ignoring the utter chaos that follows by claiming that everything is peachy, or if that becomes untennable claiming that its just temporary growing pains and prosperity is just around the corner.

-I think the Irish border will just be sort of ignored. Officially there may be laws regarding tariffs being required, and the occasional shipment seized, but by and large anyone with the will to break an unenforced law will be able to pass goods/people back and forth across the border without any real hindrance. It might actually create a boom in the Irish economy as a transport hub.

-I think that Boris will do everything he can short of reenacting the battle of Pinkie to prevent another Scottish referendum. 24

[Stanislaus]

He's not even a week in to the job yet, so it's hard to say how he's doing. But there are signs of his overall approach to Brexit.

Broadly, there are three possible futures, to coin a phrase, for Britain re Brexit:

Agree a withdrawal deal and exit the EU;
Exit with no deal;
Rescind Article 50 and stay in the EU*.

The current deadline for one of these things to happen is Oct 31. By default, option 2 - No Deal Brexit - is what will happen unless one of the other two does, or the UK and EU agree a further extension of time.

When May was PM, the government's approach was to try to get a deal. She came to an agreement with the EU - the Withdrawal Agreement. Getting it ratified meant winning a vote in Parliament, which she failed to do three times. Johnson, although he voted for the Withdrawal Agreement as a Cabinet Minister, is not pursuing that strategy.

He appears to have a twin approach -push the EU to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement, while preparing for No Deal. The EU has been pretty emphatic that it is not going to renegotiate, so there is a strong element of brinksmanship to all this. It is not yet entirely clear whether Johnson considers No Deal a viable policy for Britain, or if this is merely a negotiating ploy. The messaging has been...mixed:
1) in his campaign to be elected Leader of the Conservative Party, Johnson said that the chances of No Deal were a "million to one".
2) As PM, his first actions were to fire most of his cabinet and replace them with people who back No Deal, and to task a senior minister to accelerate No Deal programming. That minister told the press that the governemnt were working towards No Deal.
3) Questioned about this, Johnson insisted that No Deal was not on the cards and that his plan was to get a deal with the EU.

It's hard to discern if this is the work of a Machiavellian mastermind or a floundering fuckwit. Certainly Johnson has a reputation for being the former; he also has a track record of weak grasp of detail, vacillation and changing his mind to suit the needs of the moment. He's quite capable fo saying one thing on Monday and another on Tuesday, and meaning both sincerely. Neither should be taken as evidence of what he might say on Wednesday.

All this analysis is complicated by the fact that Johnson has brought in to government Dominic Cummings, who lead the Vote Leave campaign. Cummings does think strategically and revels in disorienting his opponents by doing the unexpected. The lurch towards hard Leavery feels very much like his kind of move - it not only leaves the EU wondering what's going on, it also scores a political win by shooting the fox of the Brexit Party, who were poised to threaten the Tories from the right in any forthcoming election, but who will have little to say against a policy they back.

The election is of course the other big element in this. Johnson's majority in the Commons is down to 3, I think, and there are as casdave says a lot of Tory MPs (not least some recently fired Ministers) who have no love for Johnson and still less for No Deal. So winning an election and getting a malleable majority soon would be a good thing for Johnson. Of course, just because you want something doesn't mean you can get it, and the polls don't look amazing. So a good 50% of everything he does now will be done with an eye on winning popularity. His current tour of the UK, involving a new spending commitment at every stop, seems to be very much in this line. However, the No Deal stuff is risky, electorally speaking. It will be disruptive in the short term, and various groups (e.g. farmers, per casdave above) are being pretty vocal about that. The aim will be to blame it on the EU and/or Labour/Lib Dems/Wet Tories.

But, again, he's just started. It's hard to tell what he's going to try for. It is easy to see from his past career that he's an intellectually lazy ditherer and bully with a terrifying inability to grasp complex detail, so I'm not optimistic.

Included for completeness, not out of any actual belief in its plausibility. A lot of stuff would have to happen for this to be a serious option. 25

[glee]

Originally Posted by Stanislaus

(bolding mine)
...
It's hard to discern if this is the work of a Machiavellian mastermind or a floundering fuckwit. Certainly Johnson has a reputation for being the former; he also has a track record of weak grasp of detail, vacillation and changing his mind to suit the needs of the moment. He's quite capable of saying one thing on Monday and another on Tuesday, and meaning both sincerely. Neither should be taken as evidence of what he might say on Wednesday.

Surely you mean that Johnson is the latter?! 26

[AK84]

He looked like the dog who’d caught the car on referendum night you mean. 27

[WillFarnaby]

I'd love to see the no deal Brexit go through. Johnson isn't the best advocate for it. It would be a huge win for free market capitalism. Small is good. I doubt it can be pulled off. 28

[Steophan]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

I'd love to see the no deal Brexit go through. Johnson isn't the best advocate for it. It would be a huge win for free market capitalism. Small is good. I doubt it can be pulled off.

How is reducing the size of the free trdae area and adding a load of new regulations for trading a win for free market capitalism? 29

[WillFarnaby]

Originally Posted by Steophan

How is reducing the size of the free trdae area and adding a load of new regulations for trading a win for free market capitalism?

The UK can shed EU regulations and unilaterally drop barriers to trade that are required for EU membership. The net effect could be more freedom in trade if it is handled correctly.

Small nations do no have the ability to pursue protectionist policies because they would be immediately felt by the consumer. You will find that small nations are more likely to adopt free trade policies. 30

[glee]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

I'd love to see the no deal Brexit go through. Johnson isn't the best advocate for it. It would be a huge win for free market capitalism. Small is good. I doubt it can be pulled off.

How is losing the free trade we have already with the rest of the EU going to be profitable?

The Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Council, the Bank of England and the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer all said 'no deal' would be an economic disaster.

It takes years to set up trade deals - and when you have a clown like Johnson in charge, our prospects are dismal. 31

[WillFarnaby]

Originally Posted by glee

How is losing the free trade we have already with the rest of the EU going to be profitable?

The Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Council, the Bank of England and the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer all said 'no deal' would be an economic disaster.

It takes years to set up trade deals - and when you have a clown like Johnson in charge, our prospects are dismal.

Yes I would expect no less from entrenched interests that have already lobbied for their privileges.

Really you don't need deals. Unilaterally dropping barriers to trade will do quite a bit by itself. 32

[Steophan]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

Yes I would expect no less from entrenched interests that have already lobbied for their privileges.

Really you don't need deals. Unilaterally dropping barriers to trade will do quite a bit by itself.

You can't unilaterally create a trade deal, and the terms for trading without a deal are pretty onerous. What you are proposing is an end to free trade areas and trading solely under WTO rules, which would be devastating to the economy. 33

[WillFarnaby]

Originally Posted by Steophan

You can't unilaterally create a trade deal, and the terms for trading without a deal are pretty onerous. What you are proposing is an end to free trade areas and trading solely under WTO rules, which would be devastating to the economy.

You don't need a trade deal to unilaterally drop all barriers to trade. Those countries with the highest levels of trade freedom are not in mammoth free trade blocs. There are better ways to pursue free trade. See Hong Kong, Singapore, Chile, New Zealand, etc. Of course I will not deny there would be a slight hiccup along the way. 34

[casdave]

You can argue the merits or otherwise of Brexit all you want - but this has been done to death in other threads already - the OP isn't asking about the ins and outs of Brexit as such, more they are interested in Boris and his approach to the issue and an evaluation of how it is perceived to be going. 35

[slash2k]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

Really you don't need deals. Unilaterally dropping barriers to trade will do quite a bit by itself.

Unilaterally dropping barriers to trade means that importers suddenly have it better, but industries that rely on exports, or even the domestic competitors to those imports, have it much worse until the situation sorts itself out, by which time some or many of those companies will have gone out of business, with all of the attendant economic disruptions that causes. If the net benefit to importers doesn't outweigh the net losses elsewhere, the "quite a bit by itself" you tout equals economic hardships if not outright recession. What leads you to conclude the net outcome will be positive? 36

[Staggerlee]

It seems possible that Boris's push for hard/No Deal Brexit is in the knowledge that this will be rejected by parliament, forcing a General Election. As that would amount to a second referendum (but this time along distinct party lines) Boris and Cummings might hope to win a majority and finally push Brexit through (they roused a sufficient rabble last time around). 37

[Nava]

Originally Posted by glee

How is losing the free trade we have already with the rest of the EU going to be profitable?

The Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Council, the Bank of England and the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer all said 'no deal' would be an economic disaster.

It takes years to set up trade deals - and when you have a clown like Johnson in charge, our prospects are dismal.

Apparently, getting rid of EU regulations will make trade easier. I guess those toys painted with lead need a market after all. 38

[glee]

Originally Posted by Nava

Apparently, getting rid of EU regulations will make trade easier. I guess those toys painted with lead need a market after all.

Yes, it's amusing that people who want to leave the (highly profitable) EU trade deals don't realise that the UK will be bound by World Trading Organisation rules instead! 39

[kirkrapine]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

Small is good.

Big Is Beautiful. 40

[PatrickLondon]

Johnson is still in the phase of shaking everything he can out of the "magic money tree" his party so frequently told us didn't exist, and projecting a hard Brexit, all with a view to staging a general election that will see off Farage's latest political vehicle. This is a continuation of Cameron's plot with the referendum that got us into this mess - because, whatever else, the important thing is that the Tory party hangs on to office.

It all depends on when he times his run in relation to the crash-out date, October 31. Go before, against the big bad EU not giving him everything on a plate (but with Farage's lot saying he's not genuinely trying) or go after (with the risk of adverse consequences of crashing out starting to hit in the run-up to polling day)? 41

[Sam Stone]

I had only a vague idea of who Boris Johnson really was. I mean, I know who he is, but not what kind of person. I keep hearing that he's another Trump - a low intelligence populist rabble rouser. So I did a little research on him, and I'm not seeing it.

Apparently he went to Eton, where he was considered a bit of a prodigy. Then Oxford, where he graduated with second class honors. He speaks Greek and Latin fluently. His politics are said to be more David Cameron style center-right orthodoxy, other than Brexit.

So what am I missing? Sure, he has goofy hair and a penchant for theatrics, but I'm not seeing the dumb drooling Trump clone. 42

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by Sam Stone

I had only a vague idea of who Boris Johnson really was. I mean, I know who he is, but not what kind of person. I keep hearing that he's another Trump - a low intelligence populist rabble rouser. So I did a little research on him, and I'm not seeing it.

Apparently he went to Eton, where he was considered a bit of a prodigy. Then Oxford, where he graduated with second class honors. He speaks Greek and Latin fluently. His politics are said to be more David Cameron style center-right orthodoxy, other than Brexit.

So what am I missing? Sure, he has goofy hair and a penchant for theatrics, but I'm not seeing the dumb drooling Trump clone.

That's kind of what I'm saying : he's no Trump. Trump is an idiot, Johnson is only pretending to be one. A relatable one, sort of lazy, sort of improvising, ha ha, you know hows it is, herp derp. It's all for show of course, but it *is* effective. The only thing is, I don't know what it's effective *towards*. Trump is transparent, he's just a canker on democracy, a pustulent boil oozing "more money for me and the people who give me money ; fuck you".
BJ (heh.) seems diffenrent, in that he doesn't seem to be gorging himself on any particular trough. It really seems like he's being a cunt for the sake of 'being a cunt is easier than not being that'. 43

[Stanislaus]

Originally Posted by Sam Stone

I had only a vague idea of who Boris Johnson really was. I mean, I know who he is, but not what kind of person. I keep hearing that he's another Trump - a low intelligence populist rabble rouser. So I did a little research on him, and I'm not seeing it.

Apparently he went to Eton, where he was considered a bit of a prodigy. Then Oxford, where he graduated with second class honors. He speaks Greek and Latin fluently. His politics are said to be more David Cameron style center-right orthodoxy, other than Brexit.

So what am I missing? Sure, he has goofy hair and a penchant for theatrics, but I'm not seeing the dumb drooling Trump clone.

Boris isn't dumb, and can string sentences together. He's also arrogant, raised from birth to think he's special, and a serial adulterer. He is, even by the standards of politicians, in love with the sound of his own voice. He's very definitely populist, and if he's not specifically saying "Make Britain Great Again" a big part of his pitch to the country is vague exhortations to believe in ourselves coupled with sweeping declarations that everyone pointing out problems that can't be solved just by positive feelings is a naysayer talking down Britain.

His education would suggest that he's capable of grasping detail, but a regular feature of his career as journalist, London Mayor and Foreign Secretary is that, like Trump, he blurts out what he wants to be true rather than what is. See for example, his recent speech in which he claimed that fish smokers on the Isle of Man were being put to unneccessary costs by EU rules requiring them to put a chemical cool pack in their postal kipper deliveries. It went down very well with the audience. It just turns out that: the Isle of Man isn't in the EU; even if it were the EU doesn't have such a rule; but the UK does. (Also, it's probably quite a good idea to keep fish cool in transit, when you think about it.) Disregarding the truth for a crowd-pleasing speech that falls apart on further investigation is reasonably Trump adjacent behaviour and it's this tendency to say whatever will get him applause and power that's the main point of comparison between him and Trump. 44

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Stanislaus

Boris isn't dumb, and can string sentences together. He's also arrogant, raised from birth to think he's special, and a serial adulterer. He is, even by the standards of politicians, in love with the sound of his own voice. He's very definitely populist, and if he's not specifically saying "Make Britain Great Again" a big part of his pitch to the country is vague exhortations to believe in ourselves coupled with sweeping declarations that everyone pointing out problems that can't be solved just by positive feelings is a naysayer talking down Britain.

His education would suggest that he's capable of grasping detail, but a regular feature of his career as journalist, London Mayor and Foreign Secretary is that, like Trump, he blurts out what he wants to be true rather than what is. See for example, his recent speech in which he claimed that fish smokers on the Isle of Man were being put to unneccessary costs by EU rules requiring them to put a chemical cool pack in their postal kipper deliveries. It went down very well with the audience. It just turns out that: the Isle of Man isn't in the EU; even if it were the EU doesn't have such a rule; but the UK does. (Also, it's probably quite a good idea to keep fish cool in transit, when you think about it.) Disregarding the truth for a crowd-pleasing speech that falls apart on further investigation is reasonably Trump adjacent behaviour and it's this tendency to say whatever will get him applause and power that's the main point of comparison between him and Trump.

Boris even got fired from the Times for making up stories - and then moved to the Telegraph where they're perfectly happy for their staff to make up stories. It's what he does.

In addition he has a string of disasters in his wake. As Mayor he pushed through his "garden bridge" project against all opposition despite it being a vastly overpriced boondoggle nobody wanted, resulting in £50m of taxpayer money being spent on nothing. As Foreign Secretary his efforts to get Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe freed from prison in Iran ended up earning her another three years' imprisonment for spectacularly stupid reasons. And of course his string of lies brought us Brexit. And yet his fans love him. 45

[Rick Kitchen]

Originally Posted by Sam Stone

I had only a vague idea of who Boris Johnson really was. I mean, I know who he is, but not what kind of person. I keep hearing that he's another Trump - a low intelligence populist rabble rouser. So I did a little research on him, and I'm not seeing it.

Apparently he went to Eton, where he was considered a bit of a prodigy. Then Oxford, where he graduated with second class honors. He speaks Greek and Latin fluently. His politics are said to be more David Cameron style center-right orthodoxy, other than Brexit.

So what am I missing? Sure, he has goofy hair and a penchant for theatrics, but I'm not seeing the dumb drooling Trump clone.

Other than the calling black children piccaninnies and talking about black people eating watermelon? Saying that Africa's only problem is that white people aren't in charge? Talking about Africans being AIDS-ridden? Saying "part Kenyan" Obama had an ancestral dislike of the UK? 46

[WillFarnaby]

Free trade blocs are great, but the EU doesn't allow member countries to pursue other agreements. 47

[UDS]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

Free trade blocs are great, but the EU doesn't allow member countries to pursue other agreements.

EU member states can't pursue free trade agreements unilaterally, but they do so collectively - and with considerable success. As an EU member state, the UK is party to the largest network of free trade agreements that the world has ever seen, negotiated collectively through the EU. By brexiting, they leave that network, and have to start building their own network, from scratch, and from a much weaker bargaining position than they enjoyed as members of the EU. A much, much weaker bargaining position, if they leave the EU with no deal. 48

[PatrickLondon]

Plus one of our permanent underlying economic problems is a negative trade balance. Simply making imports cheaper by cutting tariffs will do nothing to increase exports: that requires agreements, country by country, to replace the ones we have as a member of the EU that we automatically lose when we cease to be a member. And what would those countries expect in return? 49

[AK84]

Come on, all Boris has to do to get a great trade balance is....

SPOILER:

Recreate the old Sterling Zone

For that, he needs to

SPOILER:

Restore the British Empire

Easy peasy. 50