imo, BJ's frightening performance last night wasn't wholly calculated
Disagree with this, because he deliberately and repeatedly used certain phrases. This is a propaganda technique.
^It was an expression of fury by a narcissistic sociopath that the Suppreme Court & the MPs dare to thwart him
SImilar sociopaths on the Tory benches applauded him, to add their rage^
This is something that isn't mutually exclusive from a deliberate plan to try and place certain stock phrases in the minds of the public by ensuring that they are the clips that the news shows.
On that note I refer to the following tweets (which are being reported by a few different sources in similar ways, even if slightly differently worded)
Alex Wickham@alexwickham
Government in a completely uncompromising mood this morning
1st govt source: “It is no coincidence that the one phrase they want to ban is one of our main attack lines for the election they are too cowardly to call.”
2nd govt source: “It’s like with 350m. If it hadn’t cut through before, Surrender Act definitely has now”
3rd govt source: “I’ve renamed my imaginary dog ‘Labour support the surrender act’. Unfortunately he’s gone missing so I’ve spent the morning running around east London having to shout ‘Labour support the surrender act’. I do hope they don’t find this offensive”
^But a former member of the govt says:
“It’s a murdered mother they’re showing such contempt for. Stomach churning stuff. Even if they are happy to mobilise the angriest corners of society to better their chances of a majority, can they do it twice? Not a sustainable vote base.”^
And
Sam Coates Sky@samcoatessky
Some parts of gvt not in a mood to compromise this AM. One gvt source
“Remain MPs are trying to overturn a democratic vote and they literally passed the Surrender Act. Actions have consequences. Fact they’re whining about abuse while also seeking a second referendum which ...
.... would be one massive campaign of total abuse shows they’re even more clueless about true public opinion than in 2016,” says a gvt source
I also refer to this twitter thread featuring a couple of journalists and Mr Banks.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges
We need to draw a distinction this morning. You cannot argue the words "surrender" or "betrayal" should become proscribed. But the specific response by Boris Johnson to the death of Jo Cox, and broader fears about MPs safety, were a disgrace, and he needs to apologise for them.
Arron Banks @ arron_banks
Ridiculous, they deliberately invoked the dead for political gain. The only ones that should be apologising are the ghastly female labour MPs who scream and shout abuse & then invoke victimhood and Jo Cox ...
Mark Di Stefano @markdistef
The day after Jo Cox’s murder (17 June 2016) groups agreed to suspend campaigning. Leaked emails revealed by Channel 4 show Arron Banks telling campaigners to “keep pumping out” material and to “press harder”:
www.channel4.com/news/the-banks-files-brexit-funder-urged-campaign-to-press-it-harder-after-jo-cox-murder
The Banks Files: Brexit funder urged campaign to “press it harder” after Jo Cox murder
Andy Wigmore @andywigmore
I would withdraw that tweet @MarkDiStef that’s untrue and defamatory @Arron_banks @kingsleynapley
Mark Di Stefano @markdistef
More than happy to point out, Banks’ media handler disputes the record of events as reported by Channel 4
On a slightly nicer note.
Sam Coates Sky@samcoatessky
Labour MP Paula Sheriff tells @adamboultonSKY that a Tory cabinet minister has come up to her, given her a hug and said they are “mortified” by the comments of the PM last night and promised to sort it
There is this cross party respect of colleagues that behind the scenes many on both sides of the house share - especially on things like shared issues they face in their workplace.
Will that cut through though?
Hard to say. Certainly there does seem to be a split in the Tory Party over this, and it would be wrong to say that Johnson has support even of his own.
However I do think this is definitely a deliberate election tactic. It's one used at the ref and one which Trump repeatedly uses.
It's offend and then refuse to apologise and instead double down. Trump does this because it further polarised and further polarisation protects the authoritarian figure at the centre because it radicalised his core base and increases the culture of fear surrounding him. It means fewer people are willing to challenge and hold to account because they know there may be a personal cost to them to do so.
The authoritarian needs to mob to enforce his authority through intimidation of the institutions which hold power to account.
How far does this go? Who knows but we know what happens if it is not stood up to with full force in the face of that fear.
Time to be brave. And there may well be casualties as part of that process, if we understand the nature of what is happening properly and take the danger as seriously as we should.