TaleWorlds News: New News Necessary for the OT Neophytes

正在查看此主题的用户

He acts like his family goes back to the Norman conquest, but apparently all his family's wealth was made by his jou*nalist father and his grandparents were truck drivers and Irish-Americans.

The Tories are for the most part cosmopolitan new money pretending to be Plantagenet barons. Boris and Mogg are just the most extreme examples, they really play it up. It's also one of the reasons why the tory frontbench is so diverse.

Actual nobility were mostly purged from government during the Blair years, he got rid of some 1000 Hereditary Peers in the House of Lords in the 2000s, replacing them with businessmen.

Is a likely scenario that Sunak is elected and brings in Boris through the back door (i.e. gives him a position)?

From my understanding nobody is actually loyal to him, he threw a lot of people under the bus back in 2016-2019 during the brexit deadlock. The only thing he had to offer during his PM-ship was electoral popularity, and now that that's gone I doubt Sunak is going to risk pissing off other MPs by bringing the jester back.
 
From my understanding nobody is actually loyal to him
Unfortunately, I don't believe that's true. Simpler voters and mps (such as Rees-Mogg) value BoJo's ability to distil any complex problem down to a crude course of action that communicates like a meme. Whether that action is sensible or idiotic, they seem happy to follow, lurching from one crisis to the next.
Is a likely scenario that Sunak is elected and brings in Boris through the back door (i.e. gives him a position)?
Reports suggested they were due to meet over the weekend. However, if Boris can raise a 100 mp nominees, he will be confident that the conservative members will vote him in, so, is unlikely to cut a deal. Our only hopes are:
1. Camp Boris is lying and can't get 100 nominees (only 56 publicly declared for him ATM per BBC tracker vs 137 for Rishi); or
2. Membership vote will be slanted towards its younger members as 20,000 old farts who would probably support Boris haven't registered or don't have an email address that allows them to participate in this rushed election.

If BoJo can't get 100 backers, why would Rishi wear a millstone round his neck by reinviting partygate into his cabinet? If BoJo can't get 100 backers, but can con Rishi into cutting a deal, who knows how the markets will react.
 
最后编辑:
Unfortunately, I don't believe that's true. Simpler voters and mps (such as Rees-Mogg) value BoJo's ability to distil any complex problem down to a crude course of action that communicates like a meme.

I meant just the MPs. I obviously can't see into inner party politics but the Boris faction seems pretty weak, being a subset of the already relatively small hardline brexit faction. Back when the opposition (and half of his MPs) were grilling him in PMQs, you would occasionally get some brexit backbencher almost smirking while proclaiming how Boris was the right man to lead the country due to his track record. It seemed very disingenuous.

But at this point who knows. The last 10 years of Westminster politics has been impossible to predict or make sense of, it's almost pseudorandom. Boris coming back would be insane, but not out of character for this lunatic government.
 
If you want to see the end of Tory misrule and Brexity bull****, you have to root for Labour to take over.
That means supporting the most extreme Tory fool who would hurt his own party and hand over voters to Labour. This agent was previously Truss and she was very successful, and now it falls to Boris to make things even worse. Please support Boris' coronation as PM if you value social democracy and human decency.
 
If you want to see the end of Tory misrule and Brexity bull****, you have to root for Labour to take over.
That means supporting the most extreme Tory fool who would hurt his own party and hand over voters to Labour. This agent was previously Truss and she was very successful, and now it falls to Boris to make things even worse. Please support Boris' coronation as PM if you value social democracy and human decency.
Unfortunately, we'd like something left intact economically for Labour to inherit.

"He, more than anyone else, more even than herself, is culpable for the catastrophe of the Truss premiership. Dominic Cummings was the first to advance the idea that Mr Johnson backed her, and told his acolytes to do the same, in the belief that she would self-destruct, opening the door for him to return. Many thought that theory too outlandish; I didn’t. That’s exactly how his utterly cynical, absolutely selfish mind works, though I doubt he anticipated she’d blow up quite as rapidly as she did."
 
最后编辑:
Lol, was just reading that article and came over here to ask what happens if Boris can't get 100 MPs (which is why it was set at 100)? Is it a straight coronation of Sunak?
Or does the party must have its say between the top two candidates whatever their MP support is? Will Boris make problems if he's 100-ed out, arguing for a democratic party vote?
 
Lol, was just reading that article and came over here to ask what happens if Boris can't get 100 MPs (which is why it was set at 100)? Is it a straight coronation of Sunak?
Or does the party must have its say between the top two candidates whatever their MP support is? Will Boris make problems if he's 100-ed out, arguing for a democratic party vote?
If anonymous backers (whips etc) are correct on this site, Boris is up to 76 with Rishi on 153. https://order-order.com/2022/10/22/whos-backing-who-weekend-updates-2/
If the 100 undeclared split the same way Boris would rise to 106 vs 212 for Rishi, enough to force a membership vote. Hopefully, all of the 100 fence sitters will abstain to avoid subsequent backstabbing. :smile: The lunatic membership overturning the choice of the majority of MPs would hardly create stable government.
PS if that site is correct, BoJo may have the anonymous backing of the men in grey suits, making it unlikely they'll ask him to withdraw for the good of the party (I doubt the good of the country figures in any calculations).

According to latest reports, BoJo is a changed man - apparently he's tucked his shirt in. https://www.ft.com/content/80a44533-ac22-4224-b4fb-83d9b434d184

EDIT BoJo has dropped out of the race for PM despite claiming 102 backers - difficult to know whether to believe him. If he had 100 the idiot members would have backed him. https://www.itv.com/news/2022-10-23/boris-johnson-announces-he-will-not-contest-tory-leadership-race
 
最后编辑:
Finally he learned to pull out. All hail Rishi I the Sunak, first of his name and color.
EDIT BoJo has dropped out of the race for PM despite claiming 102 backers - difficult to know whether to believe him. If he had 100 the idiot members would have backed him.
Typical self-serving bluffing and bluster.

@NPC99
452.jpg
 
最后编辑:
If he wants to be muh based old timey Catholic who communicates in hand-writing, maybe he should learn how to write first. I had to google what that cuneiform said. Muh based old timey Communist grade school teachers would probably have him transferred to a special needs class for that handwriting.

The article also said that:

His staff was barred from using words such as “lot”, “got” and the phrase “I am pleased to learn”. “Very”, “due to”, “ongoing”, “equal”, “yourself” and “unacceptable” were also off the cards.


I can see how "got", "lot" are a little plebeian and "I am pleased to learn" sounds like something a colonial servant would write, but can a well-born Brit explain to me what's wrong with the other words? They sound fine to me and my Americans.
 
His staff was barred from using words such as “lot”, “got” and the phrase “I am pleased to learn”. “Very”, “due to”, “ongoing”, “equal”, “yourself” and “unacceptable” were also off the cards.

I can see how "got", "lot" are a little plebeian and "I am pleased to learn" sounds like something a colonial servant would write, but can a well-born Brit explain to me what's wrong with the other words? They sound fine to me and my Americans.

It's just pure larp. Most of those phrases are ancient, and "i am pleased to learn" is perfectly formal. But since mogg is a class usurper he has to be extra gatekeepy and enforce his own special snowflake version of formal English with extra arbitrary rules.
 
Okay, sure, but within the LARP, what would be the proper equivalents of those words?

Ongoing = current?
 
If he wants to be muh based old timey Catholic who communicates in hand-writing, maybe he should learn how to write first. I had to google what that cuneiform said. Muh based old timey Communist grade school teachers would probably have him transferred to a special needs class for that handwriting.

The article also said that:

His staff was barred from using words such as “lot”, “got” and the phrase “I am pleased to learn”. “Very”, “due to”, “ongoing”, “equal”, “yourself” and “unacceptable” were also off the cards.

I can see how "got", "lot" are a little plebeian and "I am pleased to learn" sounds like something a colonial servant would write, but can a well-born Brit explain to me what's wrong with the other words? They sound fine to me and my Americans.
Many writers try to eliminate redundant adverbs such as very https://prowritingaid.com/grammar/1000047/Why-shouldn-t-you-use-the-word-very-in-your-writing
Traditionalists believe "due to” as an adjective can only modify pronouns and nouns and are unhappy with its modern misuse https://writingcooperative.com/writ...ow-if-it-s-grammatically-correct-264223ca27c0
The Guardian style guide considers ongoing a redundant adjective despite common usage https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/the-ongoing-fuss-over-ongoing/

IMO very is very lazy writing, due to is often clumsy and ongoing is fine in moderation. :smile:
 
最后编辑:
A lot of people got ongoing issues with poor language skills. It's very unacceptable and probably due to bad education.
But I am pleased to learn that I have found an equal who stands up to it.
 
A lot of people got ongoing issues with poor language skills. It's very unacceptable and probably due to bad education.
But I am pleased to learn that I have found an equal who stands up to it.
Like yourself, I am very pleased to learn that a lot of foreigners have got ongoing problems due to very unacceptable equal rights grammar.
 
If a child misuses a toy and becomes a nuisance it's easier to take away the toy than to teach the child to behave properly.
Same with language: if words or phrases are too often used poorly or in the wrong contexts, it's easier to forbid their use altogether.
Not because the words are inherently wrong. And in politics you can use it to steer the rhetorics in the right direction.
You could probably write a whole thesis on that topic:


______________________ Rhetorical Policing in Politics ____________________________

- How political parties use rhetorical rules and guidelines to control their political projects -

Adorno*, Theodor*, Ludwig*, Wiesengrund*
 
If a child misuses a toy and becomes a nuisance it's easier to take away the toy than to teach the child to behave properly.
Same with language: if words or phrases are too often used poorly or in the wrong contexts, it's easier to forbid their use altogether.
Not because the words are inherently wrong. And in politics you can use it to steer the rhetorics in the right direction.
You could probably write a whole thesis on that topic:


______________________ Rhetorical Policing in Politics ____________________________

- How political parties use rhetorical rules and guidelines to control their political projects -

Adorno*, Theodor*, Ludwig*, Wiesengrund*
Equal, I am pleased to learn, lot due to yourself, ongoing got very unacceptable.

 
最后编辑:
Formal language is always going to tend towards repetition and grammatic oddity, its just the nature of having to send a billion letters and emails. Any other organisation would just accept this linguistic drift, but mogg's entire persona is that he's a primordial english aristocrat. Without that he's just a void. There is an idea of a Rees-Mogg. Some kind of abstraction. But there is no real him. Only an entity. Something illusory.

"Impressive. Very Nice. Now let's see Paul Allen's staff prohibitions."
 
Formal language is always going to tend towards repetition and grammatic oddity, its just the nature of having to send a billion letters and emails. Any other organisation would just accept this linguistic drift, but mogg's entire persona is that he's a primordial english aristocrat. Without that he's just a void. There is an idea of a Rees-Mogg. Some kind of abstraction. But there is no real him. Only an entity. Something illusory.

"Impressive. Very Nice. Now let's see Paul Allen's staff prohibitions."
 
最后编辑:
后退
顶部 底部