Political Discussions And Ranting Thread

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,825]

11 hours ago, TQR said:

Few rumours floating about that Yousaf might be stepping down. This guy in the comments isn’t convinced though so don’t quote me on this.
 

 

Sounds like their may be truth to this.

Yousaf has cancelled a speech he was due to make at Lunchtime according to Sky.

[TQR 12,404]

14 minutes ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

Sounds like their may be truth to this.

Yousaf has cancelled a speech he was due to make at Lunchtime according to Sky.

 

Might just be to 'fight for his position' as Sky put it. Meanwhile, Ash Regan has submitted a list of demands for Yousaf to secure his* crucial backing. 

 

 

*Oh I'm so sorry to Ash, I misgendered them. Never fucking mind.

[TQR 12,404]

https://www.threads.net/@politicsintheuk/post/C6OPMfbrSgp

 

Sound up

[Redrumours 820]

2 hours ago, TQR said:

https://www.threads.net/@politicsintheuk/post/C6OPMfbrSgp

 

Sound up

What is it with these tories always waving their arms around  especially The Prime Miniture ironically I first noticed this with Piggy Cameron.

[YoungWillz 19,203]

1 hour ago, Redrumours said:

What is it with these tories always waving their arms around  especially The Prime Miniture ironically I first noticed this with Piggy Cameron.

The art of gesticulation (no guffawing at the back!) when making speeches has simply been lost.

 

I think it is because the politicians these days in general don't believe what they are saying, or they are simply very bad. Or both. If you look back in time, you can see how to do it, but that comes with conviction in what you are saying. So people who couldn't do it (Harold Wilson for example) used a prop to keep their hands busy. Masters of the art such as (yes, I'll say it) Thatcher and even Scargill believed in what they said and used their hands only when they needed to, to emphasise the point they were making.

 

When you have a bunch of folk who simply have no belief or conviction, the use of their hands is actually distraction from the lies they are telling you.

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,825]

Some rumblings in the Twitterverse that Rishi maybe going to the Palace in in the next few days. (Before the locals, so presumably pre-empting the letters going in on Fri) 

[TQR 12,404]

1 hour ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

Some rumblings in the Twitterverse that Rishi maybe going to the Palace in in the next few days. (Before the locals, so presumably pre-empting the letters going in on Fri) 

Shit show. They’re now trying to crush those rumours. Some inc the Guardian are hinting that the original rumours are true, though. It’s a safe bet, though, to say it’ll be sooner rather than later.

[YoungWillz 19,203]

Just now, TQR said:

Shit show. They’re now trying to crush those rumours. Some inc the Guardian are hinting that the original rumours are true, though. It’s a safe bet, though, to say it’ll be sooner rather than later.

I'd love to hear Jonathan Ross reporting on Rishi rushing and racing to Royalty for Prorogation!

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,825]

Davis can say all he wants that he (Rishi) wait till the last minute so things will start to show in the economy (aye right ) but end of the day "The Bastards"'will move against him on Friday morning if they get the expected kicking unless he pulls the trigger before then.

[Paul Bearer 5,716]

IYKYK.  

[Toast 14,897]

4 hours ago, YoungWillz said:

The art of gesticulation (no guffawing at the back!) when making speeches has simply been lost.

 

I think it is because the politicians these days in general don't believe what they are saying, or they are simply very bad. Or both. If you look back in time, you can see how to do it, but that comes with conviction in what you are saying. So people who couldn't do it (Harold Wilson for example) used a prop to keep their hands busy. Masters of the art such as (yes, I'll say it) Thatcher and even Scargill believed in what they said and used their hands only when they needed to, to emphasise the point they were making.

 

When you have a bunch of folk who simply have no belief or conviction, the use of their hands is actually distraction from the lies they are telling you.

 

At some point it became obvious that news reporters and presenters had been instructed to move their hands continually. 

It's very annoying and distracting, and the result is that they have nothing left to express emphasis when it's needed.

[RoverAndOut 3,568]

Just now, Toast said:

At some point it became obvious that news reporters and presenters had been instructed to move their hands continually. 

It's very annoying and distracting, and the result is that they have nothing left to express emphasis when it's needed.

 

They used to be occupied by holding a microphone, but now it's all lapel mikes, they've got to do something with their hands.

[Toast 14,897]

4 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

They used to be occupied by holding a microphone, but now it's all lapel mikes, they've got to do something with their hands.

 

No, they don't.  It's perfectly possible to stand still without fidgeting and waving your hands about.

[RoverAndOut 3,568]

Just now, Toast said:

No, they don't.  It's perfectly possible to stand still without fidgeting and waving your hands about.

 

It is. But do we want to see presenters standing still, with their arms by their sides? It looks unnatural. If they're cropped from the chest up, then fine, but otherwise I'm fairly certain it would very quickly become weird. Maybe we'd get over the weirdness and it would become normal with time. But movement maintains focus and concentration. I'm not saying they need to do drastic movements or move all of the time, I fully agree time and place and leaving room for emphasis. The point I was making is in the past, they got away with it by having them hold a microphone. Now their hands are idle. Sometimes they get around it by getting them to walk somewhere, like down a high street, or along a bridge. 

[TQR 12,404]

18 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

they've got to do something with their hands.

Yeah, the guy in the Threads clip said something about that.

[RoverAndOut 3,568]

Just now, TQR said:

Yeah, the guy in the Threads clip said something about that.

 

Haven't watched it yet. I will do.

[DCI Frank Burnside 2,825]

 

 

As opposed to the roaring sucesss of the  privatisation of British Rail is........

[RoverAndOut 3,568]

17 minutes ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

As opposed to the roaring sucesss of the  privatisation of British Rail is........

 

Funny how other countries' nationalised rail networks are efficient, cheap and no less reliable than ours. We already own about a third of the network because they have to keep taking franchises off their fat cat mates who couldn't run a piss up in a brewery. Might as well go the whole hog and make it official.

[Sly Ronnie 636]

2 hours ago, Toast said:

 

At some point it became obvious that news reporters and presenters had been instructed to move their hands continually. 

It's very annoying and distracting, and the result is that they have nothing left to express emphasis when it's needed.

 

[Redrumours 820]

1 hour ago, Sly Ronnie said:

 

That'll be Sunak next Friday I expect.

[YoungWillz 19,203]

I've held my wheesht long enough.

 

Let me make it clear that I am no fan of Yousaf. While the SNP have done great things, they now seem to be directionless and unfocused on what matters to folk. Scrapping a target on climate change was quite simply wrong and tone deaf. Essentially following the Westminster line - Scots didn't vote for a party which mirrors Tory policy.

 

However, Douglas Ross has always been an opportunist. A man who will never be First Minister of Scotland and a Tory calls for Yousaf's head for doing what the Tories have done at Westminster. Puzzled? Not really - with local elections in other parts of the UK, there's nothing better for them than the media obsessing what is happening in Scotland. It won't help Sunak et al, but I'm frankly amazed at the airtime this sucks up by national media.

 

Meanwhile, Labour Sarwar jumps on the bandwagon, calling for the Scottish Government to fall entirely, sensing that Labour could seize Scotland and the Westminster Parliament in the same year. I feel that move is unlikely to succeed. But a sense of both major Westminster parties putting party above people. Neither of these parties are proposing what they would do better or describe a vision for the Scots - just a hatred for the party currently in power.

 

They should be careful. Minority government is the norm up here - wresting control of Scotland on a minority could lead to such confidence votes becoming the norm. And that could end up destroying the Scottish Parliament in its entirety.

 

Scoundrels all, admittedly, but a pathetic sideshow to what is coming May 2nd.

[The Old Crem 3,187]

MP Defection!!!!

 

[RoverAndOut 3,568]

1 hour ago, YoungWillz said:

I've held my wheesht long enough.

 

Let me make it clear that I am no fan of Yousaf. While the SNP have done great things, they now seem to be directionless and unfocused on what matters to folk. Scrapping a target on climate change was quite simply wrong and tone deaf. Essentially following the Westminster line - Scots didn't vote for a party which mirrors Tory policy.

 

However, Douglas Ross has always been an opportunist. A man who will never be First Minister of Scotland and a Tory calls for Yousaf's head for doing what the Tories have done at Westminster. Puzzled? Not really - with local elections in other parts of the UK, there's nothing better for them than the media obsessing what is happening in Scotland. It won't help Sunak et al, but I'm frankly amazed at the airtime this sucks up by national media.

 

Meanwhile, Labour Sarwar jumps on the bandwagon, calling for the Scottish Government to fall entirely, sensing that Labour could seize Scotland and the Westminster Parliament in the same year. I feel that move is unlikely to succeed. But a sense of both major Westminster parties putting party above people. Neither of these parties are proposing what they would do better or describe a vision for the Scots - just a hatred for the party currently in power.

 

They should be careful. Minority government is the norm up here - wresting control of Scotland on a minority could lead to such confidence votes becoming the norm. And that could end up destroying the Scottish Parliament in its entirety.

 

Scoundrels all, admittedly, but a pathetic sideshow to what is coming May 2nd.

 

I forget that minority rule was meant to be the norm in the Scottish Parliament. When the SNP managed a majority in 2011, it was seismic and what led to the independence referendum. Can't see how Yousef survives, he's pissed everybody off and nobody's going to save him. The SNP as a whole I think could survive, as I suspect the Greens won't back Labour's motion of no confidence in the government. So another First Minister and an attempt at minority rule, and some kind of confidence and supply deal with the Greens. As for 2026 (is that the next parliament elections?), it will depend on many things: the performance of the Labour (hopefully!) government in Westminster, the SNP scandals around Peter Murrell and co., the performance of Yousef's successor and the simple fatigue of having the same party in power for - at that point - 19 years and counting. We shall see what happens next week.

[TQR 12,404]

Dan Poulter has defected from the Tories to Labour. 

 

Sorry, but this does not sit right with me. I know Poulter is standing down at the GE anyway and not seeking reelection, but if it has taken him this fucking long to realise that the Tories are disgusting then frankly Labour should be telling him to fuck all the way off. Short term or not, the fact they've allowed him to sit in their name is not a good look. I know it has been done before but sweet fucking Christ, look at how sickening the Tories have been over the last four years in particular, and Poulter stayed? Nahhh he can get straight in the sea.

[The Old Crem 3,187]

8 minutes ago, TQR said:

Dan Poulter has defected from the Tories to Labour. 

 

Sorry, but this does not sit right with me. I know Poulter is standing down at the GE anyway and not seeking reelection, but if it has taken him this fucking long to realise that the Tories are disgusting then frankly Labour should be telling him to fuck all the way off. Short term or not, the fact they've allowed him to sit in their name is not a good look. I know it has been done before but sweet fucking Christ, look at how sickening the Tories have been over the last four years in particular, and Poulter stayed? Nahhh he can get straight in the sea.

Keir Starmer doesn’t care if 5-10% of the population think he is too right wing - he wants as many Tories votes as possible and is assuming in the end few will switch to the Greens.