@Sluffy wrote:@xmiles wrote:@Sluffy wrote:If you want me to be really pedantic then here you are - in order to become the PM he had to be an MP. In order to be an MP he had to be voted in by his constituents at an election. Even before that stage, in order to stand as a candidate for that election he had to be voted in by the Conservative members of that constituency.@xmiles wrote:@Sluffy wrote:@xmiles wrote:@Sluffy wrote:
Well if he's like that and still managed to become Prime Minister then I guess we get what we deserve.
(Just goes to show how unelectable most thought Labour was under Corbyn was then!
Same with Trump rather than Hillary too, I suppose).
Corbyn is a hypocritical buffoon but it was actually 92,153 Tories who made Boris Prime Minister in July 2019.
Whatever Hilary's faults I think we can all agree she would have been a better president than Trump.
Nah, not what I said.
The country went to the polls at the General Election in December, 2019 and the people spoke.
The people got what they wanted.
Doesn't matter that not everyone voted, or it wasn't proportional, or just a few votes in key seats made a difference, etc, etc, etc - they won under the system in place at the time for both/all parties - and Corbyn/Labour didn't.
Same in America - could have, would have, should have, counts for nothing - Hilary played to the same rules as Trump - and again the people spoke.
People therefore get what we deserve.
If we didn't deserve Boris and Trump then we should have done something about it so that they didn't win the elections.
Simple as that.
(and I don't mean bumping them off or such like).
Actually it is what you said. You said "he's like that and still managed to become Prime Minister". He became Prime Minister in July 2019. He later went on to win a general election and remain Prime Minister. The dictionary definition of to become is to start to be per the Cambridge English Dictionary.
If you insist on being pedantic you should at least be consistent.
So he's been democratically elected by a majority at all stages, just to be even there to become the PM in the first place.
So stick that in your pipe!
We all know what I was talking about - Boris was seen to be the lesser of two evils by the electorate at the GE and the same in America with Trump over Hilary.
Given a choice I would have had non of the four and would have wished a party wanting to save the planet and give equal opportunity to all to have won - but such utopia doesn't exist in reality.
(Probably why I'm non political and don't vote).
None of which alters the fact that you did say it! Just admit you didn't express yourself clearly and we can all move on.
Of course those are some of the words I wrote - they're there in black and white after all - but I set them in a context that your selective quoting has deliberately removed from it.
What I did say if you put it back into the context in which they were written was that Boris was only electable as PM to the people (rather than his party) because Corbyn was even less electable to them.
That's is why the first thing I replied to you when you decided to make something out of nothing was -@Sluffy wrote:
Nah, not what I said.
Have a nice day.
Is there any way we can conclude this without you insisting on having the last word?
HINT: don't reply to this post