You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Yep, that's why I put the rebuttal in before you even responded.
Or do you think she has a greater than 0% chance of being PM? Do you think that Unite For Remain is a totally legit and well intentioned movement? Do you even think she's the leader of the biggest remain party?
We shouldn't be worried about calling liars what they are, that's just a way for honest people to enable the liars and further devalue the truth.
The really troublesome thing about Swinson's lib dems, is that the key lies aren't even productive lies. Unite For Remain's a joke which could have achieved a lot but instead has as its single most likely outcome one more hard leaver MP. Insisting she can be PM undermines everything else she says since literally nobody believes it, but she's so committed to that lie that she can't even take advantage of the opportunities provided by "I will not be PM but we can still achieve a lot" which is where all of her strength really is. She's limited her own useful options with her own needless, transparent, ineffectual lies.
I'm never a fan of political lies but at least sometimes they're a means to an end and that's understandable if not laudable.
@scotroutes wrote:
Still, JC showing off his knowledge of Scotland by wearing a tartan scarf. Are his own staff trolling him now?
It a scarf from children's charity https://www.whocaresscotland.org/
I really don't get all the vitriol aimed at Jo Swinson. She just comes across like a particularly annoying primary school teacher
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/NFb0LH8x/EJQhs6y-XUAE0-X88-jpeg.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/NFb0LH8x/EJQhs6y-XUAE0-X88-jpeg.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://postimages.org/ ]imagehost[/url]
Not looking to defend Pastor Richard, but what about the above isn't true.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an Islamic absolute monarchy in which Sunni Islam is the official state religion based on firm Sharia law. No law requires all citizens to be Muslim, but non-Muslims must practice their religion in private and are vulnerable to discrimination and deportation.[1] Children born to Muslim fathers are by law deemed Muslim, and conversion from Islam to another religion is considered apostasy and punishable by death.[
Not too late to edit taxi
All of it is untrue ffs.
Is Saudi Arabia the only Muslim country?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
Not looking to defend Pastor Richard, but what about the above isn’t true.
Loads.
Talking about 'all Muslims' as if they are the same isn't very clever. I'm not sure you know the first thing about what it is to be Muslim in the modern world.
Even in majority Muslim countries, things vary a lot. I went to Turkey during Ramadan. The staff canteen was a bit less crowded than usual, according to the Turkish people I was eating lunch with (during Ramadan).
That kind of statement comes from ignorance, I'm afraid.
All of it is untrue ffs.
Is Saudi Arabia the only Muslim country?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
It's not untrue it's partially true.... it's misleading because it is giving an impression perhaps it means ALL ...
Saudi is by far not the only Islamic country that punishes conversion by death.
My ex certainly got disowned for being an atheist... (though she ended up becoming a Jehovas Witness ???)
Not too late to edit taxi
All of it is untrue ffs.
Ok if not completely true in every case, lets call it true in many cases.
Telling me to edit because you disagree with me, isn't that remarkable arrogance ?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
In many many cases yes.
As do many Christian families and Churches (such as the JW and the Plymouth Brethren for instance)
She just comes across like a particularly annoying primary school teacher
But she’s the real enemy Binners… catch up. Only a few more weeks left to defeat the LibDems, which must be the goal for all of us, even though it’s handing Johnson seats that he needs… it’s far more important to keep the LibDem seat count down so that we can not be challenged in our role as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. Only a few more weeks before Labour can return to the opposition front bench, pure and unsullied by cooperating with yellow Tories and dangerous Scottish separatists. And let’s not even mention those cynical Greens.
Anyone, I really like Corbyn’s scarf… where can I get one the same. The heckler was a grade A plonker.
As do many Christian families and Churches (such as the JW and the Plymouth Brethren for instance)
Indeed they might, people disown their children for all manner of reasons, but across the breadth of Christianity you're far less likely to be disowned for renouncing your faith than in Islam. I'm not going argue about that it's just a fact.
Only a few more weeks left to defeat the LibDems, which must be the goal for all of us
I love the level of projection going on here.
Swinson has made it clear that she does want to be in a position where she can demand that Labour jump to her wishes which include removing of those who dont suit her ideological aims.
For some odd reason Labour supporters arent overly keen on having someone with rather right wing tendencies dictating to them who they should have as their leader.
Hopefully at some stage the Libdems will tell the orange book brigade to piss off so they can return to being a semi reasonable choice.
I’m not going argue about that it’s just a fact.
Quality line of argument there.
However you seem to be admitting that Richards is talking shit?
To flip it on its head. Do you think it would be fair to say all C of S preachers are complete arseholes? If not why not?
it’s far more important to keep the LibDem seat count down so that we can not be challenged in our role as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition
Kelvin I think you're mistaking us Swinson haters on here for the labour leadership. If you watch the labour campaign, they make almost no mention of the liberal democrats, and are focusing all their attention on the tories, so you have nothing to fear.
Back to the campaign, I was watching the live focus group on the Victoria Derbyshire show this morning, and I was pretty amazed at just how much people have fallen for the anti-Corbyn propaganda. They were mostly positive about labour policies, but when they were asked to describe Johnson and Corbyn as animals, Johnson was described as an Eagle, Lion or Bear, whilst Corbyn a rat, snake and chicken! Now I may be biased but to even the cursory observer out of the two, the untrustworthy and dishonest one is clearly Johnson. Or maybe it's not the propaganda and just deeply ingrained class deference?
If you watch the labour campaign, they make almost no mention of the liberal democrats
Oh, you are funny.
I follow most of the front bench on twitter, and they bang on about them all the time.
Anyway, I was talking about standing aside in key Tory vs LibDem battle grounds. That’s not going to happen. And it needs to for Johnson to be denied those seats.
pretty amazed
How can you be amazed. We had a thread or two on here where we’ve been telling you for years that people who would otherwise vote Labour will not do so while Corbyn is leader as he has no appeal beyond his core support. People do not like Corbyn. You can bang on about why that shouldn’t be the case, but it’s been obvious for at least 18 months. He is a turn off for voters. It’s as plain as day.
“I like our local Labour councillors, they talk a lot of sense and do good work, and lots of Labour policies will benefit me and my family directly, but I just can not vote for that man to become PM.”
I hear that again and again locally, and I try damn hard to convince people of the benefits of replacing our Tory MP with a Labour MP, and people agree, but then say they still can’t vote Labour because of Corbyn. The man is an albatross around the Labour Party’s neck, and the only real asset Johnson’s has in this campaign.
I’m not going argue about that it’s just a fact.
Is that one of those facts you can prove, or just one of those other sort of "facts" where you can't actually prove it, but just "know" it's true?
People do not like Corbyn.
I've never claimed they don't. What I'm talking about is why. It's as clear as day if you take even the most brief interest in it that Corbyn is a decent honest bloke, whilst Johnson is a dishonest, untrustworthy narcissist. Yet people say they prefer Johnson to Corbyn. It's weird, and like I said perhaps ingrained class deference has something to do with it, or they just don't want to be ruled by someone who is like them?
Who cares why. What do you do about it? Far too late to do the obvious and replace him. You can’t sideline him in the campaign. You can’t turn it into some joint leader/deputy campign, because Watson is doing a runner. What do you do? Keep smiling and press on ‘till the election is out of the way.
ruled by someone who is like them?
When did you last speak to someone who thinks Corbyn is “like them”!? People see him as someone who has made a living out of politics, has never done a days hard work, sleeps around with other politicians, a middle class layabout who dresses like a comedy poor man, someone jumps to the defence of Russia & Iran when no one else does… they see him as alien.
What do you do about it?
What they did last time, and what they're doing now. Cut through the lies by getting him in front of as many people as possible either in person or in the media so they can start to see with their own eyes that what they've been told and what they think of him is untrue. It doesn't really matter who the leader is, they'd get the same treatment from the media. Look at Miliband, and Brown before him. They only ever supported Blair because he was a tory 😉
You can’t turn it into some joint leader/deputy campign
But they have done that. There's a reason Rayner is playing a very prominent role in this campaign, along side McDonnell.
In many many cases yes.
There are many cases of people, including Christians and atheists being complete dicks. But I don't go around saying 'atheists are dicks' or 'Christians are dicks'. The reason your comments are racist is that you are taking an example of dickish behaviour and reasoning that, because the people happen to be Muslim, that they are behaving badly specifically because they are Muslims - therefore insinuating that Muslims are bad people. This is a terrible road to go down, it really is.
When did you last speak to someone who thinks Corbyn is “like them”!?
I reckon I'm quite like him. Rational, thoughtful, reasonable, not that good at politics and people miss his points a lot.
Dazh… the Rayner stuff is playing well… it has to be said. Repeating 2017 will be an uphill struggle though… people won’t suddenly ignore two years of Corbyn turning them away/off… we’re not in the same situation as 2017… Johnson is the new radical leader now, not Corbyn, as maddeningly messed up as that is.
My colleague went to a wedding with both christian & islamic ceremonies a few weeks ago !!!
im not sure that anyone got dis-owned by their families, she said it was a great weekend
the minister just sounds like a bigoted dick to me, surprised anyone would agree with him
The only inter-faith marriage I know of that caused family disownment involved a Sikh woman. Not sure what this has to do with this thread. I know lots of Muslims married to non-Muslims… never heard of any issues.
[Everyone in these pointless anecdotes is voting Labour - I even had a heated drunken debate with my Sikh friend’s husband at another wedding, where he was trying to get me to vote Labour when Miliband was leader, despite the mugs and Edstone nonsense trying to use immigration as a campaign tool … he was right, I should have.]
So… where can I buy that scarf?
So… where can I buy that scarf?
Email the charity and see if they sell them?
Oh good, Len the Lexit hero has stuck his oar in to say we should keep foreign doctors and nurses out. Thanks Len.
Well, I think I’m up to double figures in people who have said to me in a real, yes you can actually still get those, conversation that they would vote Labour if it wasn’t for Grandpa.
These are conversations that strayed onto politics as a topic.
These are fairly apolitical ‘normal’ people.
The sort of people who are really pissed off about Brexit, can see why it is a terrible idea, but still can’t hold their noses strongly enough to vote Labour whilst Grandpa is in charge.
Let the attacks commence on this post, but it doesn’t stop it being true.
but still can’t hold their noses strongly enough to vote Labour whilst Grandpa is in charge.
Like I keep saying. People get the government they deserve. This one point is the only thing that keeps me sane to be honest. Until the people at large start politicising themselves and looking beyond what the media (and it is mostly the media) tells them then nothing will change, no matter who leads the labour party.
Fast forward a few years, and if Rayner is leader (as I'm sure she will be), and it will be a whole load of stuff about how she wants to hand power to the chavs from the estates, the fact she's got ginger hair and a bit of a lisp, and whatever other bollocks they think they can throw at her. The only people who can change this are the people who believe it.
The sort of people who are really pissed off about Brexit, can see why it is a terrible idea, but still can’t hold their noses strongly enough to vote Labour whilst Grandpa is in charge.
That ordinary people think that Boris is in any way a viable alternative is quite horrifying. You're voting to put hundreds of thousands if not millions of people through hell. Don't do it.
but still can’t hold their noses strongly enough to vote Labour whilst Grandpa is in charge.
Do they have a coherent supporting argument for this or do they just come out with the hilarious magic grandpa comments?
My guess is most of them would only vote Labour if it veered far enough right that they managed to please the press barons.
None of which is particularly good for having a functional political system.
Fast forward a few years, and if Rayner is leader (as I’m sure she will be), and it will be a whole load of stuff about how she wants to hand power to the chavs from the estates, the fact she’s got ginger hair and a bit of a lisp
Kier Starmer. Won't be accused of wanting to hand power to the chavs from the estates, Non-ginger, decent orator.
that scarf?
Wins my wholehearted approval.
Blame “the people” all you want… I blame Corbyn for treating the 2017 failure as a win, and not moving on then. It’s literally everyone else’s fault apart from his with some people, isn’t it.
Anyway… vote to get Johnson out.
If that means Labour in your seat, do it. Please.
I really don’t get all the vitriol aimed at Jo Swinson. She just comes across like a particularly annoying primary school teacher
That's because your not analysing her position as critically as you do magic grandad's.
In all seriousness we all take sides and it's clearly going to get uncomfortable for the people that have faith with the libdemos to realise (quite slowly) they're not as wholesome as they thought they were.
Blame “the people” all you want
What is this need to decide what someone thought and then announce they are wrong? You seem to have a real habit of doing so.
It’s literally everyone else’s fault apart from his with some people, isn’t it.
No its not. Try harder. I am sure you can manage it with some help.
Len McClusky is the most devastatingly effective voter-repellent ever deployed.
Can someone not kidnap him and lock him in a shed for the next 6 weeks?
He’s a ****ing liability!
On radio (Let's Blame Corbyn) today it was saying that in some Brexity flood areas (like mine) that people were making the connection between lack of resources and the Tories.
Maybe God is having the last laugh.
Jokes aside, it will have an impact.
taxi25
Member
Not too late to edit taxi
All of it is untrue ffs.
Ok if not completely true in every case, lets call it true in many cases.
Telling me to edit because you disagree with me, isn’t that remarkable arrogance ?
I thought a quick edit would be a good idea because your post is both racist and wrong.
Corbyn is a decent honest bloke, whilst Johnson is a dishonest, untrustworthy narcissist. Yet people say they prefer Johnson to Corbyn. It’s weird,
If those voters are in tory marginals that Labour need to win an election, then the leader of the labour party becomes the problem. The policies can be good, the party can be good, but you have to have the right sort of leader who will appeal to a wider range of voters than what is happening presently, because FPTP, also the media.
As for Johnson, people probably know he is lying tow rag who is only on the lookout for himself, but believe that the tory party will look after their interests, even though that particular belief is greatly diminished.
In fact, people who say they are comfortable voting for Johnson even though they know he is lying and the tory party will protect their interests, are simply lying to themselves, doubling down on their own lies...Trump 2016.
People do not like Corbyn.
*Some* people don't like a version of him they are peddled.
or just one of those other sort of “facts” where you can’t actually prove it, but just “know” it’s true?
Yes, one of those other facts, and if you read my post in full you'll know its true. If you don't the world has somehow past you by. Go to a mosque talk to Muslims renouncing Islam creates a terrible crisis within families, far more than in any but the most devout Christian family. I'm not judging it's just how it is.
There are many cases of people, including Christians and atheists being complete dicks. But I don’t go around saying ‘atheists are dicks’ or ‘Christians are dicks’. The reason your comments are racist is that you are taking an example of dickish behaviour and reasoning that, because the people happen to be Muslim, that they are behaving badly specifically because they are Muslims –
Obviously, all manner of people can be dicks. But disowning a family member for renouncing Islam isn't Muslims being dicks, at least not in their eyes. Amongst even remotely devout Muslims, of which there's many renouncing Islam is a fundimental betrayal of their religion, family and community. Muslims love their children as much as any parent and will grieve a child they disown as if they'd died.
Using the term Muslim in the way I've done doesn't imply all Muslims would behave as such, only that it's prevalent in their communities.
And MG stating obvious truths isn't racist. I get the impression the only Muslim you meet are educated professionals, not so much the normal working class families that I meet so often.
P.s
I've said my piece on this, so I'll say no more on it. Agree disagree thats fine.
Kier Starmer.
Kier Starmer has about as much chance of becoming labour leader as Peter Mandelson. He's the John Major of the labour party. Effective, trustworthy, inoffensive, but completely lacking any passion or drive to do anything that will inspire anyone outside of Westminster.
decent orator.
You're joking aren't you? Unless of course he's delivering a lecture to the Bar Association.
You’re joking aren’t you?
Have you heard Corbyn this time around? Talk about phoning it in, It's clear he knows there's no chance and his days of Labour leadership are numbered. At least he'll get a quiet Xmas
Taxi - and yo get the same in every religion at it extreme fringes which is what you are talking about. Try renouncing orthodox Judaism or united free kirk of scotland. I know a jewish woman who remained a follower who was thrown out of her family for marrying a gentile. Never saw them again. there was an elder of the united free kirk who was excommunicated for daring to go to a funeral in a protestant church
Your critique is of religion not Islam
The lib dems antics over the seat that the chap stood down in are abhorrent. They are going to impose a candidate centrally that will be shunned by the local party as no one in the local party thinks they should be standing
Its just becoming more and more obvious that Swinson is a tory not a liberal. She is destroying her party given the disquiet over this issue and her strident aggressive tactics and outright lies
But all she wants is another meaningless seat in a tory government - thats clear.
Yeah, how dare the LibDems stand a candidate that’ll just split the vote and help the Tory candidate win… who the hell do they think they are… Labour?!?
I wish the LibDems would back out of this seat. But they are just doing what Labour are doing, and insisting on a candidate for their party standing (in seats where it would be wise for that not to happen if stopping Johnson really is the main goal). Slam both parties for this self defeating tribalism, rather than claiming one actively want a Tory as PM, when clearly neither do… but neither are prepared to step aside for the other in even a single seat. A curse on both their houses, no?
This is the kind of thing I mean about the local response to getting people to vote Labour to get rid of our waste of space Tory MP…
‘My ultimate problem is that I'm friends with Josh and have spoken with him and he has helped me in the past but I can't back Jeremy corbyn’
That’s a direct quote from a local on Facebook (and for those that don’t know, Josh is our Labour candidate) posting on a post by one of our local councillors who the guy also knows and likes.
To a great extent Kelvin yes. However given the relative standing in the polls and how the votes stack up labour standing aside in seats would do much less than the lib dems standing aside. Also Swinson if her aim is to stop brexit should not allow herself to become the greatest obstacle to doing so - which is what she is doing
But than - I am convinced Swinson is actually a tory in the wrong party. She clearly feels more affinity to the tories than to labour and what she actually wants is a ministerial car. Sure she might make her price a second referendum but I still say that given the right numbers she will be straight back into bed with the tories
She clearly would rather have a tory bexiteer win a set than a labour remainer
However given the relative standing in the polls and how the votes stack up labour standing aside in seats would do much less than the lib dems standing aside. Also Swinson if her aim is to stop brexit should not allow herself to become the greatest obstacle to doing so – which is what she is doing
If the SNP stood aside they would hand Labour ~45 seats on a plate. And the SNP *have* power shared with the Torys in Scotland.
However given the relative standing in the polls and how the votes stack up labour standing aside in seats would do much less than the lib dems standing aside.
Yes, would need to stand down in fewer seats than the LibDems, for sure TJ. And we’re not talking many seats in total anyway, not just because there are few that are clear cut, but because in some areas of the UK it simply wouldn’t work, as voters wouldn’t swap their vote from one to the other. But Labour just need to stand down in 4 or 5 seats, and LibDems in 15 or so, and that could be 10 or more Johnson backing MPs kept out of parliament. My seat is one of those where the LibDems should really stand aside.
If the SNP stood aside they would hand Labour ~45 seats on a plate.
Pointless whataboutary. Stepping aside is about reducing Johnson’s number of seats after this election… and the SNP don’t need to help Labour north of the border in order to do that.
decent orator.
You’re joking aren’t you? Unless of course he’s delivering a lecture to the Bar Association.
Whoever I was replying to was talking about a lisp being an electoral disadvantage to another candidate. I'm suggesting Keir Starmer is a decent orator in the sense that he doesn't have a speech impediment, not that he's Winston Churchill.
...and perhaps my point was too subtle for some, but it was that if Labour think a candidate has flaws that will put voters off, they need to pick another candidate. Not consistently field losers and then complain about it!
Almost forgot… three cheers for the people of SOYO for giving Johnson the reception he so richly deserved today.
And the SNP *have* power shared with the Torys in Scotland.
Labour still do.
And MG stating obvious truths isn’t racist. I get the impression the only Muslim you meet are educated professionals, not so much the normal working class families that I meet so often.
You miss the point, I'm not saying all Muslims are great, they're as diverse as anyone else. I'm saying that you can't say as a blanket statement that Muslims do this bad thing, because a) it's not true - bad people do bad things regardless of religion and b) it perpetuates negative stereotypes from which all Muslims suffer even if they are good people.
Stereotyping is bad, ok?
I've moved on MG.
Do they have a coherent supporting argument for this or do they just come out with the hilarious magic grandpa comments?
My guess is most of them would only vote Labour if it veered far enough right that they managed to please the press barons.
None of which is particularly good for having a functional political system.
Does it matter? Their vote carries the same weight as someone you might consider more ‘politically aware’ like your good self. If Corbyn’s Labour is what you regard as ‘legitimate’ then you have a straight choice.
Do you want a Labour Party that is ideologically acceptable to you or do you want a Labour Party that is electable? With Corbyn in charge it is one or the other. Sorry to burst the bubble.
Bear in mind that I myself can and probably will hold my nose tight enough to vote Labour. It ain’t me you’re trying to convince.
And the SNP *have* power shared with the Torys in Scotland.
Exactly what are you reffering to because I do not remember any SNP / tory alliances. are you referring to the SNP minority government working with anyone and everyone to get a programme thru? the tories, the Greens, SSP even occasionally the lib dems all worked with the SNP in a consensual and collegiate style as was always intended for Holyrood. never a formal pact tho. Labour of course sulked, instituted the bain principle and refused to work with the SNP at all which sewed the seeds of their collapse in Scotland
Whereas we have some stinky labour / Tory pacts going on in councils and of course the abhorrent " non aggression" pact at the last general election between labour and the tories which resulted in a dozen tory MPs . without that disgraceful action by Labour we would not have a tory government
Does it matter?
Yes it is rather important. Are they actually valid or, like the attacks on Ed Milliband, are they completely rubbish spun up by the hard right press and tacitly accepted by the "centrists" since they dont really like the idea of a left wing party existing and wanting to get back to the glory days of no options?
Do you want a Labour Party that is ideologically acceptable to you or do you want a Labour Party that is electable?
I want a Labour Party which is actually a Labour party and not a centrist fantasy. In the same way I want a Conservative Party (preferably not so rabidly right wing as it is currently but still reasonably right wing), a Green Party and the Lib dems.
I want to see some actual choices in politics and not the centrist dream (inherited from Thatcher with the "no alternatives") of several very mildly different parties offering pretty much the same things with a few different bits of glitter.
This "electable" really is short hand for want it to be rightwing enough to appeal to the hard right press barons. The country has been there and tried that and ended up with a system so far of centre that its almost USA style. We have ended up with large portions of the population feeling disillusioned with politics since they, rightly, believe a lot of the politicans couldnt care less about them once they have been parachuted into that safe seat.
Also what is it with these bollocks scare quotes and attributions of opinions to me without any evidence.
Stop wibbling on about centrists.
Think about the person who isn’t political engaged day to day, they’re just getting on with their life, but still has their (increasingly regular) vote.
They don’t want Corbyn, they don’t like Corbyn. Wakey, wakey.
Show them the policies, and a lot of people like them… yet still can’t bring themselves to vote Labour because of who the leader is.
He is voter repellent.
Stop wibbling on about centrists.
He is voter repellent.
Centrists get all the flack they deserve when they continue the idea that voters don't like Jeremy Corbyn as they are part of the problem - because they keep repeating embittered DM guff. (Some voters will never like him ofcourse but it's not as far reaching as you think.)
Our number one centrist on here has repeatedly attacked Corbyn for about two years - demonstrably mixing up propaganda and facts. As well as whole of host ridiculous predictions just to stoke the flames. It got the point where I checked Jonathan Freedland just so I knew what bile was coming next on here.
Centrists are part of the problem that the UK is in the state its in. They put all the eggs in the Brexit basket without a nod to the catastrophe that has been austerity and the things that cause people to vote for Brexit. They fail to recognise the disaster that is Jo Swinson and spend time defending the Libdem's pointless (in that it's not going to happen) Brexit position again at the expense of understanding Neolibralism's affect on the UK.
It's not the Labour party that needs to change its the Centrists understanding on what is needed to change the direction of this country for good.
Let's say in the Centrists fantasy world - the Libs made it in and revoked article 50 - our wonderful society and life before 2016 ... Guess what? We're back to the status quo with all the same downward trajectory that we've had for ten years (or thirty years if you really like Thatcherism.)
How can that possibly be a good thing?
Down from my high-horse... UKIP are standing some candidates in areas BXP previously stood down.
Go for it lads!
Its difficult who to decide to vote for.
Labour long ago deserted the working class person ... whilst I agree with their talk of equality, greater opportunity and funding of the NHS; its hard to forget that under New Labour the NHS sell off accelerated last time and they are just a typical London-centric party oblivious to what happens outside London.
The Torys are the usual group at the top maintaining at any cost those at the top .. pure scum.
LibDems are once again London-centric and trust worthy as Boris Johnson himself.
Then you have the Loony Greens and even loonier Plaid Cymru
And of course Brexit Party .. but they are a one trick pony with nothing beside getting Brexit done on the agenda.
Politics is deader than the dying democracy in this country. who knows the answer to how it can be fixed?
Mooman - the answer is actually fairly simple. Copy the holyrood system for Westminster.
Its almost properly proportionate while retaining the constituency links. Small parties get fair representation ( albeit with a high threshold) ALL expenses are published in full and expenses are much more tightly controlled with buying houses on expenses banned
NO archaic bits of flummmary - ie black rod and all that pish
Make it unicameral ( ie no more house of lords)
Thats what a modern democracy looks like
I will also add:
A debating chamber where only party leaders have fixed seats and everyone faces the speaker - everyone else sits where they like, and if leaders are not there, they all sit at at the front together. Physically supporting collaborative working.
The offices in Holyrood are also muddled up between parties, again supporting interaction between MSP's.
Finally, you only have to listen to the language difference between Holyrood and Westminster these days to understand the difference in attitude.
The Scottish system is far from perfect, but they have created a collaborative European style system, building and culture.
They don’t want Corbyn, they don’t like Corbyn. Wakey, wakey.
Show them the policies, and a lot of people like them… yet still can’t bring themselves to vote Labour because of who the leader is.
He is voter repellent.
Exactly this. I like Corbyn and would rather have a conversation with him than most other MPs. However, there is no way he should still be the leader and if he was self aware he would have stepped down a long time ago as he is the main reason the Labour party is not more successful.
They don’t want Corbyn, they don’t like Corbyn. Wakey, wakey.
Show them the policies, and a lot of people like them… yet still can’t bring themselves to vote Labour because of who the leader is.
He is voter repellent.
Don't disagree, but the second a new person steps into his position the Tory smear canon will just change it's aim and start splurting out the lies again.
If you, or someone you know lives in them, especially the ultra marginals, please have a word and get them to vote tactically.
Show them the policies, and a lot of people like them… yet still can’t bring themselves to vote Labour because of who the leader is.
He is voter repellent.
Am awful lot of my friends are going to 'hold their noses' and vote Labour this time. He's the only option to realistically prevent Brexit so a few years of some damage is much more preferable to the eternal damage Boris' Brexit will cause. For context of this as a group we were royally screwed by two direct actions by Labour locally back around 2000-03 (complex but essentially to do with local training schemes in high tech industries that they pulled the funding for at the last minute, continuously for a number of years), none of us have voted Labour since. In our small group it will be a roughly 80% swing from Lib Dem/Plaid/Greens to Labour, if that is repeated in even small percentages nationally they'll be on to a winner.
I want a Labour Party which is actually a Labour party and not a centrist fantasy
JC is as polarising as BoJo is though, the problem being it seems there's more people out there with views similar to BoJo's (or for some reason trust a bumbling idiot more than someone that appears to buy his suits from Primark). A strongly left-leaning Labour Party isn't what we need right now, they have no chance of winning a GE majority. We absolutely need a more centrist Labour for this election (therefore without JC at the helm), let them have 4 years of trying to sort the current mess of a country out and removing any chance of Brexit and then we can look at a more socialist Labour.
‘My ultimate problem is that I’m friends with Josh and have spoken with him and he has helped me in the past but I can’t back Jeremy corbyn’
So your friend has been helped by his candidate and is friends with him yet won’t vote for him?! Like I said, people get the government they deserve. Your friend clearly doesn’t understand politics. There’s bugger all Corbyn or any other politician can do about this level of stupidity.
Show them the policies, and a lot of people like them… yet still can’t bring themselves to vote Labour because of who the leader is.
Wakey wakey.
The hard right press will relentlessly smear the next prospective candidates and the "moderates" will happily join in unless said candidate dances to their right wing demands. Just look at what happened to Ed Milliband.
There’s bugger all Corbyn or any other politician can do about this level of stupidity.
Half the country are under average intelligence. But, less glibly, people vote with their heart/gut more than their brain… they vote for people they want to run things rather than having to deal with all the politics themselves… and Corbyn turns off voters… and there is something he could have done about it, he should have stepped aside in 2017. The Tories understand politics… if a leader can’t click with the public enough to win a election, they’re unceremoniously ejected to the back benches. Corbyn is the most unpopular opposition leader of my lifetime… which considering some off the utter doughnuts the Tories have had leading them in opposition is an unbelievable claim to fame.
I’m voting Labour, and I thought, given the alternative, lots of people I know would also be, despite any reservations they might have about Corbyn. I misjudged quite how strong people feel about him. Can you turn such feelings around in a short campaign in the run up to Xmas? Maybe enough to repeat the “success” of 2017. I really hope so. Hoping for any more than that for Labour would probably be foolish though… which is why I’m also still hoping for the other opposition parties to take seats off of Johnson.
There are many cases of people, including Christians and atheists being complete dicks. But I don’t go around saying ‘atheists are dicks’ or ‘Christians are dicks’.
You can add cyclists, drivers, pedestrians...
The reason your comments are racist is that you are taking an example of dickish behaviour and reasoning that, because the people happen to be Muslim, that they are behaving badly specifically because they are Muslims – therefore insinuating that Muslims are bad people.
You are conflating all sorts of things...
Somethings are dickish and some of those things only happen with one group of people.
People can be in multiple groups ... you can be a driver and cyclist and pedestrian and you can be any and all and be black, gay or of most faith's (making a bit of an exclusion for Hamish)
Each of these subgroups has numerous subgroups... and even more specific behaviours .... and most importantly people will come to conclusions about much WIDER groups of which these are sub-groups based on their experience and interaction with even smaller subgroups.
Some generalisations are also true...others are not, others are true but greatly exaggerated overall.
Most importantly what is "good" and "bad"? I don't mean going out and murdering people .. I mean societal norms.
I could write a discourse on if it is good or bad that it's a societal norm for both parents to work full time... and from what age of a child etc.
And/OR I/we could discuss if this should be a CHOICE ... and shouldn't be forced or coerced by societal norms.. AND/OR if people should be economically forced because the COL is inflated due to this. What about our societal norm's fought for so hard like allowing women to be educated?
Calling someone racist for pointing out a different norm or fact isn't productive and also just a way to avoid actually discussing a subject. No accommodation will ever get reached if we simply close down discussion.
This is a terrible road to go down, it really is.
In a world/country that regulates thought perhaps.
Let's skip some even more potentially unsavoury items like female circumcision ... and just look at gender rights. Just briefly this is what I'm terming a "local societal norm" because it is restricted to very very specific subgroups but many other less extreme ones exist.
Belief is a weird thing ... (not only when it comes to religion) but especially when it comes to something children are indoctrinated by and backed up by a societal norm. Should we allow women to choose not to receive an education because of belief's but perhaps more importantly should that belief be backed up by a societal norm when should it be a concern?
Quite often the local societal norms are NOT pervasive or widespread... some drivers also ride.. some ride e-bikes... some ride road and others only singletrack...
There are no magic answers ... it is just something that can only be resolved through talking about it.
My perspective is that if 50% of women in a certain society living in the UK can't speak a native language to a basic level then there is something wrong measured against our broader societal norm. Condemning this fact as racist because it is a particular subgroup of a religion isn't going to resolve the conflict of norms.
It is dis-ingenious to pretend their religion has nothing to do with it.. or that potentially this societal norm is in conflict with a general UK societal norm. At the same time sensible discourse will reveal that some is not all or even most.... but first you have to accept it's OK to say "it's more likely that" ..
Don’t disagree, but the second a new person steps into his position the Tory smear canon will just change it’s aim and start splurting out the lies again.
The hard right press will relentlessly smear the next prospective candidates and the “moderates” will happily join in unless said candidate dances to their right wing demands. Just look at what happened to Ed Milliband.
This has always been the issue and, for sure, there would need to be some very careful vetting of any candidates as regards their past actions and pronouncements, but surely Corbyn isn't the best Labour can come up with?
steve - its rubbish because those issues that were claimed to be particular to Muslims are not .
So two bits of rubbish based on racist sterotypes. 1) all muslims are fundamentalists and 2) only muslims behave like this
Both are simply wrong.
Using sterotypes to smear a whole group is racist
Try replacing jew / judaism in that piece instead of Muslim / islam
Our number one centrist on here has repeatedly attacked Corbyn for about two years – demonstrably mixing up propaganda and facts.
Hi!
So is this propaganda or fact then comrade?
Today the Tory party will anounce their right-wing dog-whistle policy, designed specifically to appeal to racists Brexiteers - a reduction in immigration.
One day in advance of this, Len McClusky, one of Corbyns small and shrinking inner circle, right on cue, announces that the labour party should commit to reducing immigration. Not their present policy
So... one of the leaders right hand men has just pre-emptively endorsed Tory policy and pointed out that Labour policy is presently wrong and should be changed to be a bit more... well... Tory.
Genius!
Sheer, utter and complete clueless, incoherent *ing incompetence
Which, unfortunately, is the singular hallmark of Corbyn and all those around him
They couldn't be trusted to run a bath! And I'll still vote for the useless doddering old * because he's better than the alternatives. Will enough people do the same, to deliver a labour government?
Not a cat in hells chance!
He needs to be gone. He should have been gone 2 years ago
he should have stepped aside in 2017
Yes, of course he should. Is it not possible that this view that all labour need to is change their leader and they'll automatically win a little naive? What you're effectively saying is that the primary criteria for the choice of labour leaders should be the whims and preferences of a few billionaire media barons. Do you not see a problem with that? And it's not as if they haven't tried that in the past, and look what happened.
No, the labour party should choose it's leader, not the media and their establishment friends. Quite frankly the more flak the leader gets the better in my opinion. It means they are a threat to them and that they want to change things. I don't want a labour party which does what it's told by the media, captains of industry or anyone else who will lose out as a result of their policies. I want a labour party and a leader who take their lead from working people, and do things in the interests of working people. Corbyn, for all his faults, does that better than many who have come before him, and whoever succeeds him should carry on doing it.