Boris Johnson becomes UK's new prime minister

[Polybius]

Source: BBC

Boris Johnson said he wanted to "change the country for the better" after he became the UK's new prime minister.

Speaking outside Downing Street, he said the UK would leave the EU on 31 October "no ifs, no buts", adding: "The buck stops with me."

"The doubters, the doomsters, the gloomsters" who said it could not be done were "wrong", the new PM added.

Mr Johnson is making sweeping changes to his ministerial team, sacking a host of big cabinet names.

Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49102466

[hlthe2b]

1. As incredulous as I am to have "Trump" in WH, Johnson as PM is equally nauseating &

irrational. Brits, how the hell can you let the head of a party with 23% favorability become PM as selected by 0.2% of the population, selected from shortlist drawn up by 0.0005% of the population...?

Honestly, you'd done better if you'd just thrown it up to the Queen to select. (yes, I'm being facetious)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I don't understand how that even happened.

I have a general understanding of how a parliamentary system works but I don't get the process that allowed them to choose a PM without a public election.

[Polybius]

5. Conservatives were elected in the last public election

Conservative Party leaders choose from a short list who will be Prime Minister, until there are two candidates. Then Party members vote for one of those two.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. OK, thanks.

We hate the Electoral College. Sounds like they have a few glitches in their system, too.

[hlthe2b]

6. His party won the last election and new elections do not have to be called right away...

So that sets up this chain of events within his conservative party.

How are the candidates chosen?

Conservative MPs who want the job must secure the approval of two nominees in order to put their names forward.

The process is overseen by the "1922 committee" — the parliamentary body representing ordinary Conservative MPs who are not part of the government. It is currently chaired by Sir Graham Brady, although it was reported on Friday that he was himself considering joining the contest, which would require him to step aside from his committee role.

MPs vote in a series of secret ballots, usually on Tuesdays and Thursdays, with least-supported candidates dropping out of the race until there are only two remaining.

After that, the contest is opened up to a ballot of all Conservative party members that could involve hustings in different parts of the country.

The Institute for Government has the individual ballot results for every Conservative leadership contest since 1965.

I'd like to know how new elections can be called early and what that process might be...?

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Think of it like the Speaker of the House

That could change hands, decided by the representatives who got a majority at the last election, even if they then became unpopular, and if the new person wasn't mentioned at all as a possible Speaker during the election.

[LeftishBrit]

21. Voters at a General Election vote for their Member of Parliament, not directly for the PM

Last edited Thu Jul 25, 2019, 04:03 PM - Edit history (3)

(I had originally typed 'for the party' but that is of course inaccurate, though it is what Boris et al would like to think.)

So it's possible for a PM to resign or lose a leadership election, be replaced within his/her party, and continue till the next election.

E.g. Thatcher was replaced by Major as Tory leader and PM in 1990. Tories narrowly won general election under Major in 1992.


Blair was replaced by Brown as Labour leader in 2007. Labour rather narrowly lost general election in 2010.


Cameron was replaced by May in 2015. Tories remained as largest party, but lost overall majority, in 2017.


The choice of party leader is by a mixture of MPs and party members. The process differs between parties, and changes over time, but currently in the Tory party the MPs choose two candidates out of a larger number, and then the membership selects one of the two. The Tories started with 11 candidates, and eventually the MPs got it down to two: Jeremy Hunt who is dreadful, and Boris Johnson who is more dreadful. Most British people, even quite politically committed people, don't join parties, so those who do tend to be rather 'unusual', shall we say. The Tory members have always been older and more right-wing than average voters, even habitual Tory voters; but right now they seem to have suffered badly from what in the Labour party is called 'entryism': people who really support more extreme views than those supposedly associated with the party, joining to push the party in a more extreme direction. The majority of current Tory members voted for the Brexit party rather than the Conservative party in the EU elections; would rather see the UK break up than lose their precious Brexit; etc. etc. So they chose the most dreadful of the candidates.

[BigmanPigman]

4. The Brits have complete empathy for our political disaster

in the US. We're both in the same boat...the Titanic.

[dewsgirl]

3. I hope he is better with animals than Trump. I love Larry the 10 Downing street cat. Of

course, I hope he is also better for the people of the UK, but that isn't looking great.

[LeftishBrit]

20. Larry would be a much better PM!

[ChubbyStar]

23. Boaty Mcboatface would be a better PM

[LeftishBrit]

25. Very true.

[maxsolomon]

8. May he flame out spectacularly

and usher in Labor control for the remainder of my lifespan.

[democratisphere]

9. Only question left is which reality TV idiot will be elected to a high political office next.

What a f'ed up world.

[bucolic_frolic]

11. Quite the education, bio, and resume

I think the corporations for financial reasons get behind these anti-regulation nitwits no matter what they say.

Trump, Ayn Rand Paul, and Boris Johnson for the towhead hirsute libertarian agenda. That's the thread that ties them all together.

[IronLionZion]

12. Why does the world insist on elected the dumbest possible leaders?

Even for conservatives, they seem to have agreed on choosing their worst option.

[Polybius]

13. He's not dumb at all

He's actually quite intelligent and highly educated, which in my opinion makes him worse than Trump (who is an idiot).

[SunSeeker]

14. People want to be "entertained" I guess.

Competent, serious politicians are too boring for the racists and assorted assholes that make up way too much of the UK and US electorate. Looks like the Conservatives in the UK Parliament were more than happy to oblige them.

[LiberalLovinLug]

16. I think you hit the nail on the head

I also think that Democrats are foolish to ignore this trend. The rise of reality TV stars , instagram, twitter, stars. YouTube stars. Everywhere, but in America it is concentrated more, is this fascination love/hate with celebrity. You don't have to be some Hollywood blockbuster star who got their start because daddy was a golden age Hollywood movie star himself. The 'self made' star is even more attractive. The fascination is particularly strong with celebrities with charisma. Which Boris has in spades, and Trump does too in his own way.

Which is one of, I said one, of the reasons that Trump won over Hillary. Besides all the MSM free PR, the voter suppression, Vlad's thumb on social media, I'm sorry but Hillary came off as really really trying on stage to be "charismatic" to look relaxed and comfortable in front of large crowds, but that is just not in her wheelhouse. (sorry but that is one advantage Sanders had over her) Neither was it for Kerry or for Gore. Bill and Barack both had it. Although I think Obama could have used it even more. People criticize Trump for holding rallies, but there was nothing stopping Obama from having regular large rallies where he could champion the ACA and other legislation. He had such a powerful resonant voice and speaking manner. And the MSM would feel obligated to cover it. Anyways I digress.

I think Democrats have always held the public to a higher standard than they deserve in general. That we don't need no stinkin entertainer. That good policy will be appreciated and understood over bluster and snake oil. I think they are wrong. Imagine if Jon Stewart ran? Or George Clooney?, or dare I say Al Franken?

And why I also think that Johnson will end up being way more popular than some here think.

[Oneironaut]

26. I have been saying this to people. I'm glad someone else said it.

Part of Trump’s appeal is that he makes everything like a reality show. With the economy (perceived to be) doing so good, it’s hard to show people how dangerous this mindset is.

People want to be entertained. Trump delivers, and news programs like Anderson Cooper feed off of it. Trump does not want to be taken seriously, imo, because the circus-like atmosphere he creates is what gives him power.

[SunSeeker]

27. Of course. Only racists and sexists find him entertaining.

But there's lots of those folks.

[Mr.Bill]

15. Last night Chris Matthews compared him

to Winston Churchill. And I mean favorably. I kid you not.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Has Matthews lost his mind?

Johnson offered to give a criminal friend the address of a journalist so he could be beaten up. He spent years as an EU correspondent, making up scare stories about EU regulations to whip up anti-EU feeling. He's spent decades making casual racist comments.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2013/mar/24/boris-johnson-accused-nasty-video

He was sacked by The Times for making up a quote. He was sacked from a Tory party position for lying to the leader (about cheating on his wife). As Eddie Mair told him in the video, he's a nasty piece of work.

[DeminPennswoods]

17. Wonder how long his government will last

given Johnson's controversial personality?

[NurseJackie]

18. Putin celebrates.

[LeftishBrit]

19. Horrible man.

[ChubbyStar]

24. Horrible ShitStain

Fixed it for you!