Poll: Boris voters - is he camping with a baby?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 68110
  • Start date Start date
NVP said:
Ok let's try that then, colour by numbers...

Why exactly do you think it is unlikely that he spent time on his holiday in a tent?
Click to expand...
Because he's more likely to spend time in a nearby superyacht.
 
dowie said:
Thats a point you could have grasped yesterday if you'd not been so evasive... you were prompted several times to give your take.. to elaborate. That would include having to explain what you think the tent was put up for if he wasn't sleeping in it....
Click to expand...
I wasnt evasive. I was busy yesterday. As I said before.
NVP said:
Your prejudice is obvious, your credulity is ridiculous, and your inability to absorb legitimate information is depressing.

And finally, when asked "why?" it would be courteous to not simply repeat the original assertion but expand and provide detail. The fact you don't is extremely telling.
Click to expand...
Wow. What a load of obtuse claptrap.

Ironic that while I've answered questions where asked, you've just posted a rake of unsubstantiated accusations.
 
NVP said:
Please, explain.
Click to expand...
How've I failed to "absorb legitimate information" or been prejudiced in any way?

I asked who was so credulous to think Boris was on a camping holiday with his baby.

You seem to think that is somehow a less valid question than, say:-
NVP said:
why would Boris be staying on someone else's luxury yacht when he has the ability to stay in his luxury manor house, chequers?
Click to expand...
... By any objective measure, that's a really dumb question.
 
dowie said:
I think the only person being obtuse here is you. You made several evasive replies previously when you could have just whacked in a brief couple of sentences to explain your position. That you didn’t believe his partner was with him, that he’s secretly on a Russian billionaire’s yacht and why you believe that to be true (you still haven’t cleared that up now despite being asked).

You’re still being evasive now, your assertion is completely devoid of any argument or explanation to support it and you’ve again failed to answer the obvious points raised.

Like are you *now* saying he did in fact camp in the tent but spent more time in this yacht? That’s what your more recent question implied but you don’t clarify that.

If not then what is your plausible explanation for him being photographed in a field by the cottage?

Yet again you’re evasive and unwilling to give even a brief explanation of what your claim is... which is perhaps because it’s becoming increasingly apparent you’ve imagined a rather implausible scenario.

The fact you started off the thread calling others credulous and now are shying away from even explaining your position is rather ironic.
Click to expand...
I think you're projecting this need of yours to focus on minutiae onto others.

I'll admit I've not mapped out a precise timeline of where Johnson has been at every hour of the day over last few weeks - I don't think anyone knows.

Just because I've not met your weird expectations, it doesn't automatically follow that I'm being evasive.

As I've said, I think you need to be fairly credulous that Johnson spent his holiday in a tent on a camping holiday as was reported.

It's since transpired that he most likely stayed in a cottage.

I've pointed that out a number of times and yet you keep repeating this lie about me not saying so. Very odd behaviour.
 
dowie said:
Ah I've got a reply when posting the above, some backtracking clearly needed by the OP:

cottage.

So to summarise the thread - OP seemed to believe that Boris was holidaying without his partner and child.... he wasn't camping but was more likely to be on a Russian billionaire's yacht, everyone who believes he was camping are the credulous ones here... but... photos and details emerge to contradict OP... now OP claims:

aChuAlLy i jUst tHinK hE wAs iN thE coTtaGe, sToP tElLinG LieS
Click to expand...
Oh dear.

The original post was just about camping, now you're insisting that unless I can map out a complete alternative itinerary for the guy, I must be wrong.

It's a weird leap for anyone not ASD.

But really? That odd font?

"I FiXaTe On IrELeVaNt MiNuTiAe, StRuGgLe To CoMmUNiCaTe NoRmAlLy aNd aM cHrOnIcAlLy LiTeRaL-mInDeD"

Is that really your level?
 
Acme said:
The subject of the thread isn't even that big of a deal!
Click to expand...
I didn't know that was a thread requirement. Are you sure it is?

That said, it certainly triggered a high volumes of posts from people very keen to weigh in on the subject and protect their investment in all things Boris.
 
LOAM said:
Yacht, possibly.
Cottage, likely.
Bell Tent, no chance. Look at the hill it's pitched on, there's no way you could sleep in that. It's been thrown up for photo opportunities only.
Click to expand...
That's what I should have led with.

:rolleyes: You live and learn.
 
NVP said:
Why should you? Are you simply taking someone's statement as truth because it fits your narrative? Have you verified that those types of glamping tents don't have their own levelling base?

You need to be more objective and less defensive. Don't be so closed minded.
Click to expand...
Because what LOAM said was what I thought when I read the story and what prompted the thread.

:confused:
 
NVP said:
He's attempting to mask his idiocy in silliness. He is ignorant to the fact that the majority here discussing with him appear a lot smarter and probably are wise to his attempted distraction.

It's a shame really, being so closed off stops you from getting better at life.
Click to expand...
So the question I asked originally, that's triggered so much vitriol from you was "who believes Boris Johnson is holidaying in a tent with his girlfriend and their infant child?"

It's so idiotic, I believe you've refused to give an answer.

:rolleyes:

But, yeah, I'm the closed minded one.
 
NVP said:
1 - there's a difference between legitimate criticism and vitriol.
2 - I said I'd answer once you answered my original question, which you continually evaded with repetitive vagueness
Click to expand...
I answered multiple times, and you just insisted it wasn't enough - like the kid that repeatedly asks "why?"

There's nothing stopping you answering my question other than your arbitrary unilaterally-imposed prerequisite.
 
If you were wondering why "the baby" was always facing away from the camera...

And why there's been no sign of Mark Francois for so long...

Another mystery solved...

7niJ8H1.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom