Political Discussions And Ranting Thread

[En Passant 3,741]

29 minutes ago, Toast said:

They should all be rounded up and burned at the stake.

And the power thus generated used to fuel 'politician-powered-london-buses' in a sense beyond that they'd envisaged.

[Bibliogryphon 9,588]

5 hours ago, Toast said:

They should all be rounded up and burned at the stake.

 

Fair policies for a better Britain

[TQR 14,400]

 

What exactly in the name of Jesus Mary and Fuckfaced Joseph does she think this fucking pickled beetroot still has? The eternal shame of cunting clean off to his posh shed immediately after fisting the entire country to the gall bladder, perhaps? A pig on the end of his knob? Something else? Discuss.

[Redrumours 861]

32 minutes ago, TQR said:

 

What exactly in the name of Jesus Mary and Fuckfaced Joseph does she think this fucking pickled beetroot still has? The eternal shame of cunting clean off to his posh shed immediately after fisting the entire country to the gall bladder, perhaps? A pig on the end of his knob? Something else? Discuss.

Well he's got an audience of 7 maybe 8 in that pic.

[Grim Up North 3,726]

41 minutes ago, TQR said:

 

What exactly in the name of Jesus Mary and Fuckfaced Joseph does she think this fucking pickled beetroot still has? The eternal shame of cunting clean off to his posh shed immediately after fisting the entire country to the gall bladder, perhaps? A pig on the end of his knob? Something else? Discuss.

 

He's got quite a fit wife.

 

(other than that I concur with your excellent commentary)

 

[TQR 14,400]

Robert Jenrick just left this unattended on public transport for 4 minutes.

 

 

What would you do if you found it?

[prussianblue 1,038]

21 hours ago, TQR said:

Robert Jenrick just left this unattended on public transport for 4 minutes.

 

 

What would you do if you found it?

 

At least, unlike Rishi, he knows that you can simultaneously travel more sustainably and do work.

[Toast 16,145]

On 31/07/2023 at 16:05, TQR said:

Robert Jenrick just left this unattended on public transport for 4 minutes.

What would you do if you found it?

 

It depends how close we were to the next station.  It would be quite difficult to hide if I remained on the train with it.  Easier in the winter when I would have a coat to drape over it.

[TQR 14,400]

Nadine Dorries has now spent more time as an “immediately resigned” Member of Parliament than Liz Truss spent as Prime Minister.

[DCI Frank Burnside 3,887]

 

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Just so you know...

 

 

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Hope this rumour isn't true but the joke at the end amused me.

 

 

Right... enough Twitter for one day... 

[TQR 14,400]

How about we put 30p Lee and Cruella Braverman on a barge and let it drift out to the middle of the fucking ocean?

[Toast 16,145]

52 minutes ago, TQR said:

How about we put 30p Lee and Cruella Braverman on a barge and let it drift out to the middle of the fucking ocean?

 

With a slow leak.

[TQR 14,400]

[The Old Crem 3,608]

 

[Toast 16,145]

She's a monster.

[Bibliogryphon 9,588]

I am losing patience with Keir Starmer because all he looks like he is going to offer is another 5 years of Tory-Light

 

I want to vote Labour to oust this utterly vile Tory Government but I do not see Starmer's Labour offering radical change

 

He is in particular ignoring the Brexit elephant to try an appeal to Mail and Express voters who are not really natural Labour voters

 

I hate to say it but the pro-European Movement are going to have to go full UKIP to try and tip the balance. If they start planning to put pro-European candidates in winnable Labour seats as UKIP did to the Tories it will mean he will have to offer some EU concessions or miss the massive open goal he faces going into the next election

 

 

(There is the possibility he is a Trojan Horse and that he is offering a vision of Britain that will not frighten the blue rinse brigade and on election night after the results are in he miraculously becomes pro EU socialist man and everything will be wonderful - alternatively Angela Rayner accidently kills him by sitting on his face during election night celebrations and she becomes Prime Minister instead)

[msc 18,477]

8 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

I am losing patience with Keir Starmer because all he looks like he is going to offer is another 5 years of Tory-Light

 

I want to vote Labour to oust this utterly vile Tory Government but I do not see Starmer's Labour offering radical change

 

Which particular bit now, or is this just in principle?

 

9 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

He is in particular ignoring the Brexit elephant to try an appeal to Mail and Express voters who are not really natural Labour voters

 

Yeah, he's trying to win an election. Brexit's a vote loser in the marginals. It would be suicidal for Labour to take a more pro-EU stance.

 

I voted to Remain. I still think Brexit, as it occurred, was a monumental piece of financial idiocy (and any passing Brexit voters, I'm talking about the government's role, not you) orchestrated by a government of charlatans interested in their own stock options over the welfare of the British public. But...it's done. Dead. We're out and unless you can change the minds of the people, and the political classes, and, most importantly, the fucking French (because they hold the veto now, its no longer a UK issue), we're not going back in, in any of our lifetimes. 

 

I know various polls point out that anti-Brexit support is now in the majority, but outside of polling, we live in a world where even the Lib Dems had to tone down their pro-EU stance in public to start winning seats again, and EU support has created wedges in other parties like the SNP. 

 

There's enough Labour voters who were pro-Brexit and still are, to make avoiding the elephant in the room pre-election sensible. There's certainly more than enough swing voters in key seats.

 

14 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

I hate to say it but the pro-European Movement are going to have to go full UKIP to try and tip the balance. If they start planning to put pro-European candidates in winnable Labour seats as UKIP did to the Tories it will mean he will have to offer some EU concessions or miss the massive open goal he faces going into the next election

Good way to keep the Tories in power tbh. They do well out of divided oppositions. 

 

This idea that Brexit can be overcome as easily as it happened is bollocks. It will take at the very least two decades of diplomacy and democracy. When Starmer says we need to live in the new arrangement and try to make it better, its one of the few times he's speaking honestly.

 

16 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

(There is the possibility he is a Trojan Horse and that he is offering a vision of Britain that will not frighten the blue rinse brigade and on election night after the results are in he miraculously becomes pro EU socialist man and everything will be wonderful 

 

Depends tbh. I doubt you're going to find a socialist in him. But your view will depend on if Tony Blair was just as bad as having Iain Duncan Smith or Michael Howard in charge.  And we had full socialism on the menu last time. It got gubbed. Probably delayed the achievement of several of my political hobby horses within that manifesto by a decade. 

 

There is a lot to criticise Kier Starmer about who has had a mare of a month on PR and policy. His over cautious safety first approach means he's not doing a Corbyn, but it also means, well, this. Backtracking, fudging and being rather "the alternate" rather than the inspiring guy everyone wants. His messaging can often be terrible. But Brexit is just an indomitable fact now, no matter how little you or I would want them to be. 

 

(And we'll find out how underwhelming he is as leader soon enough, as the government are so abominably crap they just need to get sent to the vet to go to sleep...)

[Bibliogryphon 9,588]

8 minutes ago, msc said:

 

Which particular bit now, or is this just in principle?

 

 

Yeah, he's trying to win an election. Brexit's a vote loser in the marginals. It would be suicidal for Labour to take a more pro-EU stance.

 

I voted to Remain. I still think Brexit, as it occurred, was a monumental piece of financial idiocy (and any passing Brexit voters, I'm talking about the government's role, not you) orchestrated by a government of charlatans interested in their own stock options over the welfare of the British public. But...it's done. Dead. We're out and unless you can change the minds of the people, and the political classes, and, most importantly, the fucking French (because they hold the veto now, its no longer a UK issue), we're not going back in, in any of our lifetimes. 

 

I know various polls point out that anti-Brexit support is now in the majority, but outside of polling, we live in a world where even the Lib Dems had to tone down their pro-EU stance in public to start winning seats again, and EU support has created wedges in other parties like the SNP. 

 

There's enough Labour voters who were pro-Brexit and still are, to make avoiding the elephant in the room pre-election sensible. There's certainly more than enough swing voters in key seats.

 

Good way to keep the Tories in power tbh. They do well out of divided oppositions. 

 

This idea that Brexit can be overcome as easily as it happened is bollocks. It will take at the very least two decades of diplomacy and democracy. When Starmer says we need to live in the new arrangement and try to make it better, its one of the few times he's speaking honestly.

 

 

Depends tbh. I doubt you're going to find a socialist in him. But your view will depend on if Tony Blair was just as bad as having Iain Duncan Smith or Michael Howard in charge.  And we had full socialism on the menu last time. It got gubbed. Probably delayed the achievement of several of my political hobby horses within that manifesto by a decade. 

 

There is a lot to criticise Kier Starmer about who has had a mare of a month on PR and policy. His over cautious safety first approach means he's not doing a Corbyn, but it also means, well, this. Backtracking, fudging and being rather "the alternate" rather than the inspiring guy everyone wants. His messaging can often be terrible. But Brexit is just an indomitable fact now, no matter how little you or I would want them to be. 

 

(And we'll find out how underwhelming he is as leader soon enough, as the government are so abominably crap they just need to get sent to the vet to go to sleep...)

 

I suspect you are right but his lukewarm support for union action, his toning down of green credentials, his refusal to call out an extreme far right agenda with regards to immigration and his purging the party of anyone who has ever had a socialist thought In addition his refusal to consider electoral reform so we do not end up in this situation again.

 

I want to be able to vote for Labour to get rid of this government but I feel that that is allowing the votes of people like me to be taken for granted.

 

The Conservatives have lost so much of the centreground that they are relying on the worst kind of racist dogwhistles to avoid electoral annihilation but it is an unedifying spectacle

[msc 18,477]

7 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

I suspect you are right but his lukewarm support for union action

Every Labour PM actually elected has tried to look tough on unions. Even Wilson and Attlee. That's just part of the "getting elected" game.

 

7 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

his toning down of green credentials, his refusal to call out an extreme far right agenda with regards to immigration and his purging the party of anyone who has ever had a socialist thought In addition his refusal to consider electoral reform so we do not end up in this situation again.

 

 

On the other hand, the "5 voters in Uxbridge mean more than everyone else" take on green policy is shit. Everyone's scared to tackle immigration, but there are four truths to it politicians try to avoid.

 

1. The best way to avoid boat crossings is to produce safe travel routes into the UK. 

2. The people on the stupid big barge and hotels are there because of governmental back log in assessing individual cases, which is deliberate to try and deter people. It doesn't work as a deterrence, it just fucks up the economy and people's patience. Speed up the assessment service, and get folk into the economy in paying jobs etc ASAP. 

3. We need immigrants to take over those jobs no one wants. Various UK industries are running desperately understaff, and the Daily Mail "make the feckless Brits do it" campaigns never work because it would be electoral suicide.

4. Britain has spent the better part of 500 years promoting ourselves as a beacon of tolerance, democracy, empathy and general amazingness. You can't make that an important part of your PR on the world, and then be shocked when vulnerable folk across the world see you as a beacon of security to try and get to. It's the same in America. "We call it the American Dream, best country in the world... hey, why do all these people want to live in the land of the free and best country in the world?"

 

But I expect Starmer to be as a cowardly on that as Blair, Major, the last 5 Tory PMs, even Gordon Brown (sadly). 

 

(The "ever had a socialist thought" is of course social media bollocks. Last I checked, Emily Thornberry and Red Ed were still in the Shadow Cabinet. Speaking as someone who did get chucked out of the Labour party once, I am sceptical about such sob stories online. Blame folk like that guy in the Guardian, bemoaning how he'd been banned for socialism when it turned out he'd been suspended for telling people to vote down the official Labour candidates in a seat.)

 

16 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

I want to be able to vote for Labour to get rid of this government but I feel that that is allowing the votes of people like me to be taken for granted.

Our vote will be taken for granted. Sorry, just the way it is. This is not a statement on how amazing it is, just... c'est la vie. 

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

7 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

 

I suspect you are right but his lukewarm support for union action, his toning down of green credentials, his refusal to call out an extreme far right agenda with regards to immigration and his purging the party of anyone who has ever had a socialist thought In addition his refusal to consider electoral reform so we do not end up in this situation again.

 

I want to be able to vote for Labour to get rid of this government but I feel that that is allowing the votes of people like me to be taken for granted.

 

The Conservatives have lost so much of the centreground that they are relying on the worst kind of racist dogwhistles to avoid electoral annihilation but it is an unedifying spectacle

 

Fully agree with everything @msc has said. We are about as far away from a socialist utopia at the moment as we ever have been and there's no way Starmer can go full reverse even if he wanted to. Labour thought Milliband had a good chance of winning in 2015, and were almost certain Kinnock would win in 92. They're terrified of throwing this away, and unlike 97, there's no chance the Mail, Express and co. are going to support Labour, or even tone down their criticism. And these days, it's not just the papers, there's GB News and Talk TV and the endless poisonous talking heads on Twitter. Starmer is not keen to give them any fuel for criticism and is unbelievably cautious. He's also conscious that Labour has been painted as financially irresponsible since the banking crisis, a view that wasn't exactly eased by Corbyn's manifesto. So him and Rachel Reeves keep preaching balancing the books, living within our means, how the circumstances have changed, none of which is music to a socialist ear. But the reality is we're a centre left country at best (probably actually more centre right in reality) and left wing ideas tend to be introduced cautiously, even when there's widespread support (publicly owned railways anyone?). The mess the country's been put in recently is not an easy fix, meaning the first Labour government is going to be mainly about getting the country on a better footing, improving relations with the EU, etc. so we're probably looking to 2028/29 for a more ambitious Labour manifesto (if all goes well). And, yes, unfortunately, our votes are taken for granted. Are you going to risk letting the Tories sneak back in? No? Then Starmer can ignore you and try and tempt a few more from the centre. I can't say I feel overjoyed at Labour's current direction but I'd take them every day of the week if it gets Braverman, Cleverly and the rest of the brain dead bunch out of government.

[Sly Ronnie 886]

Ed Miliband and Emily Thornberry? Hardly Tony Benn and Barbara Castle.

[Sly Ronnie 886]

12 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

Fully agree with everything @msc has said. We are about as far away from a socialist utopia at the moment as we ever have been and there's no way Starmer can go full reverse even if he wanted to. Labour thought Milliband had a good chance of winning in 2015, and were almost certain Kinnock would win in 92. They're terrified of throwing this away, and unlike 97, there's no chance the Mail, Express and co. are going to support Labour, or even tone down their criticism. And these days, it's not just the papers, there's GB News and Talk TV and the endless poisonous talking heads on Twitter. Starmer is not keen to give them any fuel for criticism and is unbelievably cautious. He's also conscious that Labour has been painted as financially irresponsible since the banking crisis, a view that wasn't exactly eased by Corbyn's manifesto. So him and Rachel Reeves keep preaching balancing the books, living within our means, how the circumstances have changed, none of which is music to a socialist ear. But the reality is we're a centre left country at best (probably actually more centre right in reality) and left wing ideas tend to be introduced cautiously, even when there's widespread support (publicly owned railways anyone?). The mess the country's been put in recently is not an easy fix, meaning the first Labour government is going to be mainly about getting the country on a better footing, improving relations with the EU, etc. so we're probably looking to 2028/29 for a more ambitious Labour manifesto (if all goes well). And, yes, unfortunately, our votes are taken for granted. Are you going to risk letting the Tories sneak back in? No? Then Starmer can ignore you and try and tempt a few more from the centre. I can't say I feel overjoyed at Labour's current direction but I'd take them every day of the week if it gets Braverman, Cleverly and the rest of the brain dead bunch out of government.

 

Thing is we've been here before. Remember how we all thought Labour would get a bit more radical by the 2001 election? The only radical thing they did was ilegally invade countries.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

2 hours ago, Sly Ronnie said:

Ed Miliband and Emily Thornberry? Hardly Tony Benn and Barbara Castle.

 

And hardly surprising. They don't get elected anymore, often even when they're selected. 10 years of Thatcher completely altered the make-up of the country: the post-war welfare consensus was ripped up, the country became obsessed with money and private wealth, we became a nation of homeowners and the manufacturing industry was decimated in favour of a service industry. 18 years of losing meant Labour had to move to the centre in order to get back in power. Middle England has been brainwashed into believing money = prosperity and the only way to get that money is growth, which can only be generated by the rich getting richer. It does feel like we should be coming to a turning point on all these issues. The old system is clearly broken and the people are thrashing around for an alternative, but the old order maintains the control by turning everything into a culture war and ensuring Joe Public can't see how one issue (e.g. ULEZ) links directly to another (e.g. small boats) - the changing climate impacting on the number of migrants trying to get into this country, for example (not the only reason, of course). Short termism is everywhere.