To intensely dislike Rishi Sunak?

[IClaudine]

He has no backbone, no coherent policies (u-turns a dozen times a day)and no understanding of ordinary people's lives. Plus he wears all his clothes a size too small, which really irritates me.

Here is an explanation of the phrase.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudian_slip

It might be helpful.

Sunak broke the law, Starmer didn't. No matter how much you try to obfuscate it, those are the facts.

In the interests of cut and place.

Here is an explanation of gormless.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gormless

Sunak became Chancellor because, unlike Javid, he was prepared to allow Cummings to appoint all his advisers. He's PM because he was prepared to court the endorsement of ERG MPs. The price for that was having Braverman in a position of high office.

Those are not the actions of a decent man with integrity, but no one has been along to defend that behaviour.

DuncinToffee
So what was my Freudian slip?

'your Home Secretary'

Who is your King?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudian_slip

I don't get what you are trying to imply here, clavinova? Care to elaborate?

You're being silly now. I'm Dutch too, and live in the UK. My Home Secretary, in the sense of policy that affects my daily life, is Suella Braverman. Sadly. My King is Willem Alexander of the Netherlands, who is every bit as irrelevant and lacking in impact on my daily life as Charles III. The comparison is ridiculous, and only valid if you're some kind of mad nationalist.

And even then, that doesn't make it a Freudian slip.

Spot on!@ilovesooty !

https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1704522548648509467

ilovesooty
Sunak became Chancellor because, unlike Javid, he was prepared to allow Cummings to appoint all his advisers

He seemed an obvious choice in this Guardian article - not least;

When Johnson became prime minister last year, he appointed Sunak to the high-profile post of chief secretary to the Treasury. He stood in for Johnson in the seven-way televised election debate and at Christmas the Financial Times reported he was being tipped to run a new “economic super ministry” after the February reshuffle.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/13/rishi-sunak-banker-uk-chancellor

I still don't understand, I have explained the use of the word your, I have confirmed that I am Dutch, I live in England

What are you implying? Spit it out.

pointythings
You're being silly now. I'm Dutch too

Neither of you are eligible to vote in UK general elections though?

I don't get what clav is on about. If I said "it is shameful when your home secretary is a witless bigot" that would make perfect sense. Not a slip to be seen, let alone Freudian.

Can I play this game too?
"It is shameful when your Prime Minister is so gormless he can break the law by not knowing he is at a party".

Oh dear.

Sunak broke the law, Starmer didn't

That still doesn't explain why Starmer told a string of lies about his evening.

And he would still not have been appointed if he had followed Javid's example in refusing to accept advisers appointed by Cummings rather than his own choices.

I wonder how he feels about the fact that Javid has twice shown the glaring holes in Sunak's standards of integrity?

😂Blind dogma knows no bounds.

How does that alter the point I made? He has risen to power by being prepared to compromise any sort of principle or conviction.

Passepartoute
And he would still not have been appointed if he had followed Javid's example in refusing to accept advisers appointed by Cummings rather than his own choices.

I have no idea whether Sunak chose his own advisers or not - perhaps Cummings only objected to Javid's advisers.

@Clavinova He is 3 years younger.

I have to say I assumed it was an attempt to prove your point.

@Clavinova, is there any chance of an explanation of why you defend Sunak despite his repeated and very public support of Johnson whilst he lied to Parliament and the British public over and over again?