Hooptedoodle #336 - Did I Jump Too Soon?

I've managed to steer clear of the Tory Leadership circus in the last few weeks, and I must say I feel a lot better for it. I reasoned that the party members are sufficiently self-obsessed to be able to carry on without my paying attention, which is a relief. Since my announcement that I would not be putting myself forward (see my Fake News Hooptedoodle from last month, if you can be bothered), I have had occasional requests to reconsider.

I confess that there have been moments when I was tempted - occasionally I would see one of the hopefuls in action, and find myself thinking, "you know, I could do that...", but commonsense has triumphed, I believe, and I am happy not to be involved. In any case, I'm trying to keep myself free in case I get offered the manager's job at Chelsea FC, which will probably have a more secure future than that of UK Prime Minister. The big problem for me is this Brexit thingy - I haven't the faintest idea what they are on about. We all have to accept our own limits, I think, and, though I have been waiting patiently for the Daily Mail to finally come to my aid, and explain clearly how this No-Deal business is all going to work (since they obviously understand it), I'm still none the wiser. Best to stay out of it, then - my Preston grannie would have had something pithy to say on the subject, you bet. 

I understand that the first of the televised debates for the real leadership candidates [real? - discuss] took place yesterday, and Mr B Johnson did not appear - his chair and lectern remained empty throughout. I didn't watch the thing, naturally, and I am reluctant to admit it, but I'm quite impressed by that. Not only did he set himself up to be the only candidate who did not disgrace himself last night by speaking drivel on live TV, but it seems he actually increased his share of the opinion poll by not turning up. Brilliant. Fleetingly, it occurs to me that I, too, could have failed to show up, but I'm sure I couldn't have done it so charismatically or impressively.

This is not a new concept - fairly recently, the United States elected a president who was not a politician, for example, so the idea of a null candidate has been around for a while. I recall that many years ago someone wrote a song in support of a US presidential nominee named Nobody - on the grounds that this was exactly the person who would govern with integrity, who would care for the poor and the sick, who would ensure that the legal system and taxation were fair for all, etc. I had a look, but couldn't find the old one (1970s? - yes - we've had buffoons around for as long as that). I did find this clip, however, which would be better if it hadn't been so childishly produced, but it makes the point. Clearly we have to have someone running things, but would a vacuum be better than an idiot? Worth thinking about. Does an empty chair have real advantages over Boris? Hmmm.

I'm bored with this now. I'm still not going to watch the next live debate, but am intrigued to see if this cunning ploy catches on, and no-one turns up to it at all - trying to out-absent each other. Keep your cards hidden. Say nowt. That would be something.

Better still, perhaps they could all just shut up and leave us in peace. I am sick to death of hypocrisy, flagrant dishonesty and self-promotion. Some clown tried to sue Mr Johnson recently for telling lies while serving in a public office. Imagine a politician telling lies - good heavens. That's not even funny.

How long can this confounded farce rattle on? No - it's OK - I don't really want to know.