After being forced into resignation by a raft of backstabbing ministers and cabinet ministers, it was only a matter of time before the Back Boris brigade imploded with fury.
A series of so-called sleaze scandals finally got the better of the man responsible for the Conservative’s largest working majority since the 1980s.
However, many on the right of politics, including GB News presenter Dan Wooton, have branded this both as an evil plot orchestrated by the liberal mainstream media and a democratic betrayal of the mandate given to the Conservatives in 2019.
Mr Johnson was bombarded with negative coverage from all sections of the press and some may even liken it to the Trump witch hunt that sought to impeach the president over an unfound allegation of Russian collusion in 2016.
However, are these conservatives misguided for trying to defend the warmongering, metropolitan liberal, and lockdown tyrant, who presided over the biggest state since Clement Attlee’s post-WW2 government? The only realistic replacement is someone amongst a sea of careerist and establishment politicians all eyeing the top job. Though perhaps that is not a bad thing.
Johnson famously followed the crowd when he made a late switch to leave in 2016 to advance his career prospects. Whilst there are some experienced and competent backbenchers in the party, such as David Davis and John Redwood, the next leader was always destined to be a stooge of the Johnson legacy.
A globalist, soft-Brexiteer, and supporter of lockdowns.
The inevitable question is whether the Tories have made a big mistake. If the replacement is no better than the current, why would you oust the greatest political commentator of our age and the only PM able to dismantle the rigid red wall?
Most people are inclined to support the PM’s departure as they have been influenced by the orthodox media narrative of him losing his integrity – the Chris Pincher scandal being the final nail in the coffin.
In hindsight, a fresh start was probably the right thing. But many will look at the final two contenders and beg to differ. Now known widely by hardcore Boris backers as a duplicitous snake, the ex-Chancellor cannot separate himself from Johnson’s mass spending legacy.
Dishy Rishi was at the forefront of the financially irresponsible policies during the lockdown, from the furlough scheme that created a false economic paradise; to the £37 billion of taxpayers’ money squandered on a futile track and trace scheme.
This barbaric borrowing is the root cause of the 9.1%+ inflation the UK now endures – which is the highest rate in 40 years. Despite this, the man has the gall to brand himself as the cure to this inflationary disease. Surely this makes the argument that he is ‘fiscally conservative’ completely redundant – a term which he admittedly prescribed himself.
With the right of the party now uniting behind Liz Truss, she has also made it into the final two. Sunak’s unpopularity amongst members will likely influence the outcome in her favour. Yet, during her time as foreign secretary and now as a leadership contender, she has demonstrated severe intellectual incompetence.
The ex-Liberal Democrat famously made a fool of herself when she was mocked by Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, for not realising the difference between the Baltic and Black Seas, which are 700+ miles apart.
Her dangerous rhetoric in the context of the war in Ukraine was described by the Kremlin as being the reason for putting Russia’s nuclear weapons on ‘high alert’. Rather than focusing on the bread-and-butter issues people care about at home, like the cost-of-living crisis and inflation, she has spent far too much time waging war with Russia.
In addition, her obsession with trying to mimic Margaret Thatcher in any way possible is both ingenuine and unauthentic.
She fails miserably in replicating Thatcher’s strong persona – the sort of which was so excellently illustrated in the Cold War era and Falklands War. Instead, she was mocked by the media for wearing a Russian hat in the height of summer at Red Square.
Thatcher-like or not, her past tells a different story. She once was a staunch supporter of republicanism and EU membership. Can she really be trusted to remove the red-tape post-Brexit and complete Brexit properly?
Alas, the only Conservative truly devoted to completing Brexit by taking Northern Ireland out of the EU, reclaiming British fishing rights, and leaving the ECHR, was Suella Braverman.
Conservative Home published a poll suggesting that Kemi Badenoch was the members’ favourite to win by a country mile. Unfortunately, she too has been kicked out the contest.
Another poll revealed the interesting truth of how many Tory members would support Mr Johnson being an option on the ballot sheet. One can infer this to be because they prefer him to the two standing or think he should still honour his 2019 mandate.
It raises deep concerns if the latter is true. Have the Conservatives made a big error of judgment?
Most members will agree that Johnson has not been successful as prime minister in terms of his legislation and progress made in power.
A justifiable reason for him to resign would be as a result of the crushing of our civil liberties over lockdown, failure to complete Brexit, inability to control the channel migrant crisis, lack of financial responsibility, and impotence at implementing socially conservative policies which would please red-wall voters.
Instead, his reign has disintegrated over sleaze scandals – not all entirely of his doing and mostly exacerbated by the anti-Brexit press.
This is the reason why die-hard conservatives, even those who opposed Johnsonism, might find themselves banging the drum for Johnson’s premiership to continue. And not because they enjoyed his big state agenda, but because he was forced out for the wrong reasons.
Be it his charisma, likeability or his doing away with May’s dreadful deal, Johnson’s flawed political character will be preferred by many to the arguably worse substitutes. Let the lesson be learned that you should always be careful what you wish for.