Boris Johnson has always has a weakness for a tasty one-liner. The newspaper columnist turned premier is now increasingly the victim of what was once his own art.

Scotland and England’s commentators on Tuesday once again turned their attention to the larger than life figure so many of them cannot resist referring to by his first name.

The Press and Journal

The voice of northern and north-eastern Scotland is not quite sure Johnson’s brand of Brexiteer Toryism will work for its readers.

Its political editor Dan O’Donoghue on Tuesday bemoaned the “Borisification” of the Scottish Conservatives.

He wrote: “Last conference saw the launch of ‘operation arse’, the apparent Scottish Tory plot to keep Johnson out of Number 10. It is fair to say that 12 months on, with David Mundell sacked, Davidson gone and Johnson prime minister, that it was one of the most unsuccessful political strategies in modern times.

“The re-positioning of the party last week could hold within it a downfall. The strength of the Scottish Tory party in recent years has been, much like the Union itself, that it has a bold, individual identity within a wider whole.

“There is a real danger now that if the plan is to parrot Westminster lines, the Scottish Tories will become an easy target for the SNP.”

Mr O’Donoghue added: “This Borisification of the Scottish Tories may have gone down well in front of the party faithful in Manchester, but how will it play on doorsteps in Aberdeen and Moray?”

He added: “Privately, many Scottish Tories agree with the analysis and believe a wipe-out is on the way, making the decision to row in behind Johnson surprising.”

The Financial Times

Over at the paper that speaks to - and sometimes for - the business community there is a different tack.

For columnist Robert Shrimsley, Britain faces a simple choice.

He wrote: “It’s Brexit or Corbyn. “Strip away all the what-ifs and new paradigms.

“As the UK and EU snowball towards one last grim Brexit gamble all sides need to recognise this fundamental choice.

“This is not a roulette wheel with multiple outcomes. It is a final coin toss. Heads you win; tails we lose. “

But Mr Shrimsley reckons the “has two major problems. The first is that he is energising the Remain vote against him. The second is Nigel Farage’s Brexit party.

“Fear of them will force Mr Johnson into a more hardline campaign since he dare not let the Leave vote splinter. “Mr Farage knows that if he splits the Leave vote he risks a Remain victory. Perhaps the Tories will squeeze his vote or perhaps he can take support from Labour in away that delivers seats to the Conservatives.

“But he knows Remainers are praying he will stand. As the person who did more than anyone to secure Brexit, is he ready to risk being the man whose vanity kills it?

The Daily Telegraph

Former Conservative leader William Hague, meanwhile was also thinking out loud about Brexit and the electoral prospects of Mr Johnson.

He reckons a No Deal platform good be bad news for his successor.

He said: “Much attention has been paid by Downing Street strategists to retaining the support of Brexiteers and winning over those who might vote for Nigel Farage. But it is easy to underestimate the difficulty of winning a general election without the other end of the Conservatives’ normally broad church.

“A hardline election message, shorn of any hope of compromise, will leave many traditional but moderate Tories with their pencils hovering over the Liberal Democrat box on polling day, and many Conservative MPs in the South West accordingly in danger of losing their seats.

“Seats held in London in the 2017 election would also be in danger, as would many that were gained in Scotland. All of these would have to be replaced by gains from Labour in the Midlands and North.

The voters there are certainly pro-Leave overall, but might easily decide that Brexit is not as important to them as other issues.

“However you cut it, a no-deal platform makes an election a toss-up, whereas an election after both doing a deal and delivering Brexit would give Boris a crushing advantage over all his opponents.”

The Times

Hugo Rifkind, meanwhile, lashed the PM,as a “man with no instinctive understanding, not only of the difference between the public interest and his own interest, but also between his own interest and his own momentary pleasure.”