Yet more Tory sleaze….

[mudsticks]

It’s a parody account. Look at his name.

Trubble iz sum fokes just arnt gunna get it..

They do actually thunk like this.

 

[mudsticks]

I know... need more coffee...

Me too...

 

[Milkfloat]

It’s a parody account. Look at his name.

The real genius is that Michael Fabricant retweeted it

There will be hell toupee when he finds out he has done himself over yet again.

 

[Beebo]

The real genius is that Michael Fabricant retweeted it
View attachment 984
There will be hell toupee when he finds out he has done himself over yet again.

If I didn’t know better I would presume that Fabricant is a parody of himself.

How do these guys end up in Parliament?

 

[Ian H]

Not directly about sleaze, but WTAF?

View attachment 978

Where's the snake?

 

[Ian H]

Another Michael Rosen 'Boris' text:-

View: https://twitter.com/MichaelRosenYes/status/1514147010898800642

 

[PaulB]

 

[cookiemonster]

If I didn’t know better I would presume that Fabricant is a parody of himself.

How do these guys end up in Parliament?

A thick electorate.

 

[BoldonLad]

Someone tell the Mail and their thicko readers that the UK had 5 different prime ministers during the Afghan war.
And the UK was actually fighting and our soldiers were actually dying.

Not a Mail reader, and, not a Boris voter, but, considering the outcome of the Afghan "war", I am not sure that the 5 different Prime Ministers is a recommendation?

 

[winjim]

A thick electorate.

I would say ignorant and ill-educated rather than thick.


Edit: and now the attachment thing has decided suddenly to work from last night and put in a picture of Liz Truss which the AI has manipulated into looking like my mate Jim. Might as well keep it in.

 

[mjr]

A thick electorate.

Combined with an electoral system so antiquated and unjust that foreign broadcasters from democracies now have to explain it to younger viewers because they've not used dysproportional elections in their lifetimes!

 

[mjr]

Not a Mail reader, and, not a Boris voter, but, considering the outcome of the Afghan "war", I am not sure that the 5 different Prime Ministers is a recommendation?

What about WW2? Sep 1939-Sep 1945 included Churchill replacing Chamberlain in May 1940 and Attlee replacing Churchill in June 1945.

And the Cold War had loads of changes, partly because suspending democracy was seen as letting dictators win. Why isn't it now?

But The Mail has previous for supporting so-called "strong" leaders beyond reason.

 

[Xipe Totec]

The truth at last! Phew, that was close!


View: https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1513980843101986818

 

[BoldonLad]

What about WW2? Sep 1939-Sep 1945 included Churchill replacing Chamberlain in May 1940 and Attlee replacing Churchill in June 1945.

And the Cold War had loads of changes, partly because suspending democracy was seen as letting dictators win. Why isn't it now?

But The Mail has previous for supporting so-called "strong" leaders beyond reason.

Indeed, what about WW2, but, I was replying to a post about Afghanistan "war", plus, WW2 ended in September 1945, so, technically, there were 3 PMs, I would agree, but, 3 is not 5, even in these inflationary times.

Finally, I wasn't passing an opinion on suspending democracy, simply pointing out that the Afghan Conflict was not something I would quote as an example of a successful outcome.

 

[cookiemonster]

The truth at last! Phew, that was close!


View: https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1513980843101986818

View: https://media.giphy.com/media/5t9wJjyHAOxvnxcPNk/giphy.gif

What was it I said about a thick electorate? These people walk among us.