Off you pop….
I don't understand why you even bother. You know full well that I will mention any politician I want on whatever thread I want. Just like you do.
Edited for your edit:
endlessly shouting at each other in furious agreement
I find it particularly bizarre that you of all people should come out with that comment. Your lack of self-awareness is quite frankly remarkable.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, those Tories <tsk> what a bunch of….good night.
I find it quit interesting that Labour and conservatives are still the largest political parties in the UK, by a large margin… despite them both being utterly incompetent in thier own tragic and unique ways.
We get the government we deserve.
What do you propose "we" do about it? I vote Green and yet see a Tory MP win every time with 60%. What should "we" do about that? (and don't say revolution)
Unless it has changed recently mattyfez's strategy is to vote LibDem.
What do you propose “we” do about it? I vote Green and yet see a Tory MP win every time with 60%. What should “we” do about that? (and don’t say revolution)
Vote True and Fair party. It's kind of like voting LibDem except you're voting for actual policies rather than for the 60,000 or so LibDem members to decide what you voted for after you've voted for it.
https://www.trueandfairparty.uk/political-policies
rather than for the 60,000 or so LibDem members to decide what you voted for after you’ve voted for it.
They do? I think that will be news to them considering how often they have been ignored.
I don’t understand why you even bother. You know full well that I will mention any politician I want on whatever thread I want. Just like you do.
Yes, telling other people where the boundaries are in political debate should be met with contempt.
Too many people could simply choose to ignore a comment about something if they want to.
It's really not hard.
Starmer went trotting off to a Murdoch party last week. He puts himself in the Tory category time and time again.
It's also damn ridiculous to isolate political debate to one precise topic too.
Off you pop, to the thread that everyone else avoids, with those same handful of righteous comrades endlessly shouting at each other in furious agreement
Lol the very definition of the Sunak, Johnson, Truss or many Brexit threads.
simply choose to ignore a comment
Depends how often much the same comment is made, in every single political thread, like a flood of repetition seemingly designed to make it impossible to ignore. Definitely hard to avoid.
.
They do? I think that will be news to them considering how often they have been ignored.
I used to say, 'You have absolutely no idea what you are actually voting for if you vote LibDem' but then a LibDem member corrected me and said, 'No, you're voting LibDem so that we can decide what you voted for afterwards.'
Vote True and Fair party.
Looking at your link I was surprised by True and Fair Party's professed policy towards the EU, considering who the founder is:
Once the Tories are defeated, the UK can sit down with our friends and neighbours in the EU and negotiate a closer, more pragmatic, mutually beneficial relationship, without losing our independence or sovereignty.
So basically very similar to Kier Starmer's veiw on the matter?
*Yes binners I have just mentioned Keir Starmer's name.
Looking at your link I was surprised by True and Fair Party’s professed policy towards the EU, considering who the founder is:
Yeah, they seem pretty ambiguous:
We need to pull the rip cord and stop the national decline by re-joining the EU
https://www.trueandfairparty.uk/rejoin
Well True and Fair's current policy seems to suggest otherwise, as did their launch:
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/gina-miller-launches-true-and-fair-party-with-a-surprise/
The party is neither a Remain or Rejoin party as expected
Maybe we need a True and Fair and Straight Talking Party?
Depends how often much the same comment is made
Do you mean babbling about sixth formers, "comrades" and "down the allotment" or "racist brexiteers"?
The party is neither a Remain or Rejoin party as expected
I see it says that in the article. I don't see where Gina Miller says that.
Are you confused because they said, 'Once the Tories are defeated, the UK can sit down with our friends and neighbours in the EU and negotiate a closer, more pragmatic, mutually beneficial relationship, without losing our independence or sovereignty' at the bottom of the Economy section?
Maybe when they say 'independence and sovereignty' they mean it in the realistic sense that it is understood pretty much everywhere else and not the definition most Brexiteers have which is North Korea style control whilst magically having no trade barriers?
Anyway, I think the focus of the party is right. Brexit, both the vote and the current ongoing shit show, are symptoms of a broken political system where two parties pander to the wants of a tiny minority of swing voters and are rewarded with an absolute majority and the ability to do whatever they feel like with no compromises.
Fix that and fixing everything else becomes possible.
Anyway, trying to argue they aren't a Rejoin party is quite a feat, even for you:
On the seventh anniversary of the Brexit referendum, we are faced with overwhelming evidence of the damage Brexit has done to the UK. Today, the government still has no more of a proper plan or strategy today than there was seven years ago.
Everybody makes mistakes, but the biggest mistakes are from those who refuse to admit them and learn from them. People were told that Brexit would mean more money for our NHS, lower immigration, and a stronger economy. None of these promises have been delivered. When the UK voted to leave the EU in 2016, it was a decision that was based on fear and misinformation – and led by a liar.
There must be a point - unpopular as it is - when we face the truth. To honestly and openly ask ourselves how do we best protect the UK, grow our economy, and make Great Britain once again a nation respected and proud, rather than pitied. That it is our urgent responsibly to restore to future generations the prosperity, security, opportunities, and choices that they will need to face an increasingly volatile world.
If our country is to move on from a high tax, low growth economy with failing public services something must change. The evidence of the damage to almost every sector and every part of our country is clear.
In terms of joining the single market and customs union option, we are not supporters as this would mean the UK doffing our cap and accepting existing and future rules and regulation without any vote or voice.
The only viable option is to re-establish our membership of the EU and return to the top table once again. After seven years of failure, now we need to pull the rip cord, and start the process of re-establishing our membership of the EU, as the benefits far outweigh the costs.
The question is - what are we waiting for?
We just need rid of these ****ers
I give it about 6 months before you're whining about PM Starmer. Binners you're the ultimate sing-when-you're-winning glory hunting politico. Then you'll go back to being Burnham's arselicker-in-chief or start banging on about northern independence or something.
Well this is fun, isn't it? I do like it when the whole politburo turns up
Anyways... back on topic
The walking pot plant that is Helen Whately was sent out to do the rounds this morning. Bless her. She's so dense she doesn't even realise that she's the last port of call to act as Rishi's representative on earth when even James Cleverly won't answer his phone
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1673218360174051329?s=20
Its obvious that the 'pitch is being rolled' (to use a Borisism) for the government to reject the recommendations of the public sector pay review bodies
When will these people learn that the government sets up these things in order to deliver a pre-ordained set of 'answers' that have been agreed in advance? We'll not have any of this independence nonsense
this would mean the UK doffing our cap and accepting existing and future rules and regulation without any vote or voice.
This is weirdly aggressive language to use about our "friends and neighbours"...
Are you confused because they said, ‘Once the Tories are defeated, the UK can sit down with our friends and neighbours in the EU and negotiate a closer, more pragmatic, mutually beneficial relationship, without losing our independence or sovereignty’ at the bottom of the Economy section?
It doesn't sound confusing at all to me. The stated policy in your link makes it very clear that the True and Fair Party wants a closer relationship with the EU, there is no mention at all of rejoining.
How is that different to Starmer's position?
You have to assume that the most reliable source of what the True and Fair Party's position is their stated policies on their official website. Well at least I assume that.
https://www.trueandfairparty.uk/political-policies
there is no mention at all of rejoining.
I'm going to have to get my crayon out, aren't I.
And if you click on the big button in bold:
This is weirdly aggressive language to use about our “friends and neighbours”…
Well, OK. But it is the case, isn't it?
Norway pays much the same as the UK did per capita but are very much rule takers. And that's without even being members of the CU, that's just SM membership.
Its obvious that the ‘pitch is being rolled’ (to use a Borisism) for the government to reject the recommendations of the public sector pay review bodies
Isn't the Tories's excuse for considering not accepting the pay review bodies recommendations exactly the same as Labour's excuse, ie "not affordable"?
Pressed on whether Labour would accept the pay review bodies’ advice, which could reportedly stretch to 6.5% for teachers, Ms Reeves said: “No, we haven’t even seen the recommendations of the pay review bodies, so I’m not going to preempt that.
“And I’ve also always been very clear that Labour’s fiscal rules are absolutely non-negotiable.
And if you click on the big button in bold:
Why isn't it mentioned under their list of policies then? If you click on the big button "Economy" there is a section about "Europe", nowhere does it mention rejoining the EU.
If you are claiming that you have to hunt around for that rather vital bit of information then it strongly suggests that the True and Fair Party is not open and honest about their policies.
To be honest their daft name should tell you all that you need to know about the True and Fair Party.
Gina Miller spoke at the Cambridge Union this year, and while I've not watched on tneir YouTube channel, I'm reliably informed she was batshit crazy.
Gina Miller spoke at the Cambridge Union this year, and while I’ve not watched on tneir YouTube channel, I’m reliably informed she was batshit crazy.
Yeah, you can tell that from all the crazy stuff in the Policies page.
Anyway, if you look at the Google News results the only people who are paying any attention to her party are the Daily Express and Guido Fawkes.
This is weirdly aggressive language to use about our “friends and neighbours”…
A bit of 'pitch-rolling' before they are attacked by The Fail and need police protection aftet being doxed by the likes of Gullis. It won't make any difference, though.
Such is UK politics in 2023.
Is this the thing where she was batshit crazy, @MoreCashThanDash?
Can you ask your reliable informant to give us some timestamps of where she is going batshit crazy? I'm about 10 minutes in and so far it's very disappointing.
She's just saying basically sensible things.
Admittedly, she is saying it in a woman's voice which I know some people think just sounds batshit crazy by default but isn't that a bit of a misogynistic viewpoint?
Sunak now strongly hinting that he will ignore the recommendations of independent bodies set up to determine pay increases for public sector workers...
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1673288110849785857
Sunak now strongly hinting that he will ignore the recommendations of independent bodies set up to determine pay increases for public sector workers…
The same "independent" bodies that he said he couldnt overrule in favour of paying more? Fancy that.
I use the quotes since several of them are about as independent as a board members pay review board just in the other direction.
Sunak now strongly hinting that he will ignore the recommendations of independent bodies set up to determine pay increases for public sector workers…
Knowing that the leader of the Opposition is openly and publicly taking a very similar position to himself will certainly take a lot of pressure off Rishi Sunak:
https://news.sky.com/story/starmer-fails-to-commit-to-recommended-public-sector-pay-rises-12910325
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he too will not be following recommendations on public sector pay rises, saying his party are set to "inherit a real mess" if they win the next general election.
So Rishi Sunak can go ahead and ignore the pay review bodies's recommendations, if he so wishes, knowing that Starmer will lack the moral authority to argue against the policy.
And we see here that Labour are laying the groundwork for using the same tactic as the Tories and LibDems used in 2010.
In 2010 the coalition government successfully shifted the blame for austerity away from themselves and onto Labour by claiming that they had 'inherited a mess' after 13 years of Labour governments.
Starmer is already saying that public spending restraints he and his chancellor will impose will be the fault of the current government.
@MoreCashThanDash Having listened to the whole thing, I'm just going to come right out and say your reliable informant is a misogynist and/or racist.
Care to watch the video yourself and defend your reliable informant?
MCTD - is your 'reliable informant' a family member who is a student there?
I have no idea if Gina Miller is batshit crazy, I know very little about her, but she does seem to say some things which sound a tad peculiar:
The businesswoman and Remain campaigner insisted neither she nor the party had discussed the idea of her replacing Sir Vince Cable.
As far as I am aware she wasn't even a member of the Liberal Democrats when that comment was made.
So it is a little strange as it is generally accepted that you need to be a member of a political party before you can be considered to become its leader.
And despite her "warning against a new political party" she then went to form her own new party. She didn't even listen to her own advice. Which is also a little strange.
Why would you need to be "a misogynist and/or racist" to question if she's the full ticket btw? Is the sanity of white male politicians never questioned?
So it is a little strange as it is generally accepted that you need to be a member of a political party before you can be considered to become its leader.
She was answering a question put to her, five years ago, about a nonsense story. She denied there was any truth to the nonsense story she was ask about. What else could she do?
Erm, how about, "I'm not even a member of the LibDem Party"?
It sounds more reasonable than denying that she had been involved in discussions to replace Vince Cable.
She was answering the question!
No fan of hers, won’t be supporting her new party, but won’t be inventing grievances against her.
but won’t be inventing grievances against her.
Who is "inventing grievances against her"?
I said that it was a tad peculiar of her to deny that she had been in discussions to replace Vince Cable when she wasn't even a member of the LibDems.
I really don't mind at all how she dealt with the issue, why would I? I'm just pointing out that it is a bit strange.
If someone asked me to respond to allegations that I was involved in discussions to replace Rishi Sunak the first thing I would point out would be that I am not a member of the Tory Party. "Denial" of my Tory leadership ambitions would not be necessary.
FFS the woman wasn't even a LibDem MP, why would she need to even deny that she was after Vince Cable's job?
Because that was the question put to her.
Why would you need to be “a misogynist and/or racist” to question if she’s the full ticket btw? Is the sanity of white male politicians never questioned?
Because apparently she was doing/saying batshit crazy things at an event. I watched the event and found nothing that could be reasonably described as batshit crazy.
Unfortunately, as white males, we are the real oppressed minority in this country. If someone says we're batshit crazy then it's more or less just accepted that it's true.
If someone says that a women of colour is batshit crazy, people think, 'Maybe she is batshit crazy or maybe the person who said it doesn't like women of colour. I'm going to investigate for myself.'
It's tough being a white male.
Fortunately white males stick together and other white males will be along to say, 'Well, maybe she's not entirely batshit crazy but four years ago she said this...'
He's further away Dougal.
Small = Faraway
1′ 2″ difference, fact fans.
[ 0.345m for SI unit fans ]
Kawczynski is taller. But if this is some kind of willy-waving contest, Sunak is the Prime Minister, smarter, and richer. Daniel is just as evil, but clumsier, poorer (moaning about being unable to pay school fees), more self-debasing, and a backbench MP.
Kawczynski is a venal, bullying, whingeing, duplicitous hypocrite - and a tory.
If marvel did Tory super heros....
politecameraaction
Free Memberif this is some kind of willy-waving contest
Mostly it's not- most people don't care that Sunak is slightly smaller than average, it's just that he's made himself the joke by trying to hide it and it's usually weird, because things he does just have a tendency to come out weird... Concealed platforms to stand on, getting spotted standing on tiptoes for the cameras, official photographs carefully managed to work the angles to make it look like he can stand eye to eye with the king, etc etc. He's the same height as Macron. About an inch taller than Zelezny, but nobody gives a crap about Zelezny being short because he doesn't give a crap and doen't go around staging photos like this completely normal one
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50999439072_2928b1feb4.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50999439072_2928b1feb4.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/2kGDsrE ]The Chancellor and his ministerial team[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/hmtreasury/ ]HM Treasury[/url], on Flickr
IIRC he’s about an inch taller than Zelezny, same height as Macron, but nobody gives a crap because they don’t give a crap and don’t go around staging photos like this completely normal one
Maybe but Nicolas Sarkozy certainly gave a crap, and he was regularly accused of staging photos, wearing high heels, etc
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/07/france-sarkozy-stands-accused-height
Yup, and the french ripped the arse out of him for that too. Same thing, it's not that he was short, it's that he was trying really hard to hide it, and drawing more attention to it, the french seem to enjoy that even more than we do.
Another rat leaves the sinking ship...
https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1674689296131936256?s=20
Clearly the proximity to boris (boris' kids real father) has finally influenced his choices. It maybe carrie finally put her foot down
Like the way Rishi is playing the hardman after he resigned:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66063894
Didn't see him calling for an apology yesterday?
So if Nad, Smug & the others don't apologise publicly, does that mean Rishi asked them to & they've given him a 2 fingered salute?
Oooh think thats the first time weve sunak get so bitchy
So Goldsmith resigns over the governments failure on environmental stuff, Rishi makes it about the Privileges committee?
Smokescreen again to distract from failed policies?
Resigning on a point of principle? Oh aye?
Surprise, surprise... this then turns out to actually be resigning because of a petty personal squabble, because everyone was horrid to his 'lying to parliament' mate who gave him a peerage (so he could carry on being a government minister even after he'd just been resoundingly kicked out of parliament by his constituents)?
How very Tory. Hurray for democracy!
Smokescreen again to distract from failed policies?
Given Goldsmith was a Johnson loyalist god knows which of them is lying.
Quite possible Goldsmith got the choice of apologise or get sacked and chose to resign with maximum damage.
Then again Sunak trying to make good of the resignation is also plausible.
Timing does give a bit more credence to Sunak but not something I would put money on.
As for Rishi's big announcement today, am I right in thinking that he's essentially saying
"if we win the next election then at some indeterminate point in the future, we'll definitely put some money into actually training some healthcare workers, honest!"
I suppose they'll be to staff Johnsons 40 new hospitals?
Mythical staff for imaginary hospitals? I'm sure that'll be a vote winner
So his pitch is this time you really can trust us with the NHS, honest... Yeah, sure.
Goldsmith now saying he didn't refuse to apologise!
Given the disputes over pay in the NHS, will they be increasing salaries to attract these new workers? How many of these new recruits will be replacing existing vacancies/people that leave in the meantime? It'll be like the mythical 40 hospitals where they included revamps to existing ones
Backing himself into a corner… clearly scared of any scrutiny now…
https://twitter.com/benkentish/status/1674747356221194241?s=21
Sue Gray now cleared by ACOBA to start job with Labour in September – ho ho, rish!
But Dowden is depserately trying to organise a vote to declare she broke the rules, cant get much more petty than that
pretty obvious Sunak has lost control of his party, hes floundering badly
https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1674793513870045189
we've still got another 18mth??!!? of this government to run
A 15 year plan for the NHS is a great idea. We should probably always have a 15 year plan for the NHS. It's just, introducing it when your party's been in power for 13 years slightly misses the point.
It's just something to talk about on the doorsteps and in interviews when confronted with the fact that the NHS is being run down into oblivion. Something you don't have to deliver for 15 years, with no measurable outcomes, is perfect for electioneering when you just need something to make it look like you're fixing stuff.
Fortunately he's given us the five-point plan which does have measurable outcomes and deadlines, none of which are going to be delivered in time to help him.
Classic jam tomorrow.
"No, honestly, vote for us in the next election and this time I definitely will sort out <insert issue we haven't fixed in over a decade>, I promise"
How can they possibly think that anyone believes them anymore???
The proposals are being ripped apart already, mainly about the fast-tracking and apprentice ideas. We may have 'more' doctors and nurses but they'll be undertrained and essentially crap.
Just think, if they had launched this plan on going into government, we could all be enjoying the results already, and only 18 months from its completion...(obviously, they would have had a chance to ditch the unworkable and unsafe stuff too).
Fortunately, they chose to do SFA instead (apart from introducing austerity, failing to keep staff pay in line with inflation, cutting us off from one of main sources of staff, and failing to prepare for a global pandemic.)
What do the tories do next?
The 15-20 odd poll deficit seems to be baked in now
None of their policies are achievable within 18months - there's not even much sense to anything they come up with
Do they try a leadership change-
At this point what do they have to lose?
This thread sums it up better
https://twitter.com/Sime0nStylites/status/1674727386070351872?t=arZeI6keJau5kvrc36HfWA&s=19
What do the tories do next?
The 15-20 odd poll deficit seems to be baked in now
Not much they can do, after 12 years of complete crap from them people have eventually sussed it out (11 years too late but never mind). However, Labour won't win by the amount suggested in the polls and the media will be out in force to attack everything they can con Starmer/Labour starting 6 months before the election which will narrow their lead.
What do the tories do next?
Free gladitorial combat and public executions
What do the tories do next?
Breathe a huge sigh of relief that Keir Starmer will be the next prime minister until their inevitable return?
They really have very little to fear. Unless you can think of something?
We haven't got a clue what Starmer will do have we as he changes his mind every 5 minutes, unfortunately every time in the wrong direction but maybe he will run out of going the wrong way and start to come back the right way?
Everyone who keeps banging on about Starmer is missing the point, we're a centre right country, the Tories have moved too far to the right and ended up in loony land. Starmer has seen the opportunity and has moved in to seize the ground the Tories have vacated. It's a shrewd move if you want to get elected. It might not be the screaming left wing, power to the people Labour the usual suspects in here want but it probably is what the majority of voters wants. Shame he doesn't have a bit more charisma.
Who knows what he'll do in power, I guess the first term will just be trying to stabilise the shift storm he's inherited. After that it will be slow and boring repair which we have 25 years of to get the cost of living back inline with real world wages. No politician is going to try the radical solutions the left want. The public proved that don't want that approach when Corbyn tried.
Anyway back on topic, there's nothing the Tories can do, the best they can hope for is 18 months of not shooting themselves in the foot and that won't happen with the remains of Johnson's legacy still throwing hand grenades from the side lines.
....maybe he will run out of going the wrong way and start to come back the right way?
Redistribution of wealth? Nationalisation of the utilities and commanding heights of the economy? Reversal of 40 years of neoliberalism?Withdrawal from NATO? Further devolved regional power and abolition of FPTP?
I think the Tories are as confident as I am that nothing like that will happen.
Edit: I am sure the Tories are confident that even this stuff on Starmer's website won't be implemented:
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
The public proved that don’t want that approach when Corbyn tried.
Corbyn, it always comes back to Corbyn, doesn't it? Whether it is a Tory or a right-wing "Labour" supporter there is always the need to mention Corbyn to justify changing nothing and maintaining the status quo.
Yes it is strange how voters weren't particularly enthralled by the thought of having a Labour PM who was constantly being attacked on a daily basis by Labour MPs and accused of being a racist.
Despite the fact that Corbyn's first left-wing radical election manifesto in 2017 achieved the greatest increase in Labour support since 1945 and robbed the Tories of their majority.
Everyone who keeps banging on about Starmer is missing the point, we’re a centre right country, the Tories have moved too far to the right and ended up in loony land.
For the last few years we have been a centre right country in many ways.
But fiscally the state gets called on time and time again to prop and support the private sector, which can't exist without the state.
When times are good - low interest rates, liquidity, jobs etc everyone's trying to protect their capital - when times are duff we look to the state for a solution.
We are moving away from one economic model since the pandemic (and probably before) so people had probably do well to understand that things are changing and being centre right will likely come back to bite them certainly economically as victims are naturally gobbled up.
Also Starmer perhaps would do well offering solutions to the Tory disease if he wants to change things. There are plenty of things to shout about, and to fix - that might just be a catalyst.
Be the change you want to be and all that otherwise what's the point of screaming at Tory policy?
Running similar economic decisions from both parties have led us to where we are - hardly an endorsement for centre right solutions.