Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 36138103)

There's a big difference between being Chancellor and Prime Minister. Mr Sunak dished out too much on furlough and you can't buy popularity as PM. Boris already has that popularity; anything else is an unknown and we know how the last unknown ended up when in the top job. Boris is a tried and tested leader; the timing is wrong to cross our fingers and hope a new broom can deliver. Get on with the job Boris; your Country needs you.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36138148)

One is less awful than the other, and it’s a choice of one or the other. On that basis alone, Sunak is the one.

There simply isn’t going to be a general election unless the parliamentary conservatives become unmanageable. The polls guarantee a wipeout. The only sensible course of action if you’re a Tory is to choose the most stabilising leader on offer and hope that something comes up by 2024 that makes that wipeout less likely. That more than 70 Tory MPs don’t seem able to see that is sobering but there are encouraging signs this evening that Sunak and BoJo are going to sew it up so no contest is required.

If Sunak has any sense he’ll offer Boris the foreign office and encourage him to spend as much time as possible in Kyiv.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36138108)

I suggest we don’t need a leader who makes laws, flouts them, and repeatedly lies and ignores rules and conventions to get his mates out of trouble.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36138150)

Boris was chucked out in disgrace with an approval rating of -53%, popularity like that has been known to get you killed, do what's best for the country bozo and stay on holiday, your constituents have managed without you for months now anyway

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36138151)

My position is that, Tory MPs may view Sunak as the least worst. I’m not so sure that those who elected Boris in the first instance will.

I would prefer neither. I think a vote for either is a backward move. My initial ire was the proposition that Sunak was morally superior than Johnson, and that’s simply not the case.

I don’t know where they go, preferably without either Johnson or Sunak. But if I was offered only Sunak and Johnson…………it would be Johnson.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36138153)

If the online sources are to be believed there's a massive difference between

a) MPs who hold posts within the party (massively Johnson)
b) the rest of the MPs (not Johnson, probably Sunak)
c) the membership (heavily Johnson)
d) Conservative voters (lean Johnson?)
e) the population at large (not Johnson)

Originally Posted by Paddy1 (Post 36138154)

Sounds like a scene from Blazing Saddles

Originally Posted by Ms NTL (Post 36138157)

Have a look here

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/words-containing-cock

How is this related to the race to be PM?

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36138160)

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36138151)

My position is that, Tory MPs may view Sunak as the least worst. I’m not so sure that those who elected Boris in the first instance will.

I would prefer neither. I think a vote for either is a backward move. My initial ire was the proposition that Sunak was morally superior than Johnson, and that’s simply not the case.

I don’t know where they go, preferably without either Johnson or Sunak. But if I was offered only Sunak and Johnson…………it would be Johnson.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36138153)

If the online sources are to be believed there's a massive difference between

a) MPs who hold posts within the party (massively Johnson)
b) the rest of the MPs (not Johnson, probably Sunak)
c) the membership (heavily Johnson)
d) Conservative voters (lean Johnson?)
e) the population at large (not Johnson)

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36138160)

Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36138161)

You forgot Cockwomble.

Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36138171)