The 2024 General Election - July 4th

[egg]

32 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

It was a stupid thing for Sunak to say but Starmer isn’t exactly helping himself either. Why he couldn’t just say, “a woman is a person with female reproductive organs. You’re welcome to believe something different but if elected I won’t be passing any laws on it,” I don’t know. We could all just leave it at that and get on with the actual issues that people really care about, instead of these gutter politics.

Most people are. Starmer is. It was Sunak who keeps dragging this up. The masses don't give a monkeys about what Starmer thinks on this issue. As you say, it's gutter politics from a busted flush of a PM. 

[egg]

44 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Where did I say that? I am, aware there is no choice but labour at the next election it doesn't mean that it's not possible to discuss the positives and negatives of that decision. 

You said you wouldn't want someone with Starmer's views in charge, or some such. The choice is him or Rishi so unless I'm missing something, you'll have to plump for Rishi if Starmer offends you do much. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

You said you wouldn't want someone with Starmer's views in charge, or some such. The choice is him or Rishi so unless I'm missing something, you'll have to plump for Rishi if Starmer offends you do much. 

What is going to happen and what you would want are twe different things. I would have thought that was obvious. To use a recent analogy, I could be a south africa fan who lost in the afcon last night. Nigeria or ivory coast are going to win the thing but it doesn't mean i want it to happen even though one of them winning is a certainty. 

[rallyboy]

On the Comms front Sunak is very poorly advised at the moment, and appears to be too out of touch to realise.

So he stands there in his school trousers and parrots rubbish he's been told will sit well with the corners of his party that he's already lost.

It's a car crash, he's done.

[Fan The Flames]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

No, I never suggested anything like that. He can believe whatever he likes as well, but he doesn’t. That’s why the Tories keep dragging this up, Starmer doesn’t even know what he thinks it is that people want him to believe.

You did say that and now you claim to know what he does and doesn’t believe. The obsession with Stamer and this issue is odd.

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

You did say that and now you claim to know what he does and doesn’t believe. The obsession with Stamer and this issue is odd.

Out of interest - and not as a gotcha - can you answer the question? 

[Fan The Flames]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Out of interest - and not as a gotcha - can you answer the question? 

I'm happy to understand a woman to be someone with female genitals or someone who identifies as a woman.

I also think that trans women, shouldn't compete in womens sport or have an automatic right to go into women only spaces.

I find it interesting and ironic that the militant trans women are bringing mens belligerent and lecturing behaviour into the womens sphere.

I believe that as a bunch of adults we should be able to navigate this without being absolutists about it.

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I'm happy to understand a woman to be someone with female genitals or someone who identifies as a woman.

I also think that trans women, shouldn't compete in womens sport or have an automatic right to go into women only spaces.

I find it interesting and ironic that the militant trans women are bringing mens belligerent and lecturing behaviour into the womens sphere.

I believe that as a bunch of adults we should be able to navigate this without being absolutists about it.

"someone who identifies as a woman" 

What are they identifying as? It seems to me that the people who think this question is an irrelevance are largely those who cannot adequately answer it themselves. 

Edited February 8 by hypochondriac

[Fan The Flames]

29 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

"someone who identifies as a woman" 

What are they identifying as? It seems to me that the people who think this question is an irrelevance are largely those who cannot adequately answer it themselves. 

I know you want to go off on your pre-rehearsed arguement on your favourite hobby horse. But some people think differently to you on this subject and yiu just have to accept that.

Incidentally I was happy with the simplicity of before, but I'm prepared to accept other people think differently to me. I'm not on this planet to stop anyone identifing as a different sex, it's their life. I don't give a fuck what they do.

[Farmer Saint]

9 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I know you want to go off on your pre-rehearsed arguement on your favourite hobby horse. But some people think differently to you on this subject and yiu just have to accept that.

Incidentally I was happy with the simplicity of before, but I'm prepared to accept other people think differently to me. I'm not on this planet to stop anyone identifing as a different sex, it's their life. I don't give a fuck what they do.

This, who am I to reject the way they feel. It could be a woman, a man, a fucking brick, I don't care. However, they should not be allowed to compete as women or go into women only spaces - they lose that right when they choose to act on the way they feel. Sounds harsh, I know, but unfortunately it has to be that way.

[hypochondriac]

23 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I know you want to go off on your pre-rehearsed arguement on your favourite hobby horse. But some people think differently to you on this subject and yiu just have to accept that.

Incidentally I was happy with the simplicity of before, but I'm prepared to accept other people think differently to me. I'm not on this planet to stop anyone identifing as a different sex, it's their life. I don't give a fuck what they do.

I wasn't going off on anything, I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the argument. Being unable to define the word woman without referring to the word itself or providing a circular definition is absurd. Putting aside any of the politics of it, you must see that it is nonsensical. 

The thing is, it's an important issue to many because it does have actual real world consequences. It's largely easy for some men to dismiss the issue as unimportant because it often doesn't affect them. 

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

This, who am I to reject the way they feel. It could be a woman, a man, a fucking brick, I don't care. However, they should not be allowed to compete as women or go into women only spaces - they lose that right when they choose to act on the way they feel. Sounds harsh, I know, but unfortunately it has to be that way.

Hard to disagree with that. My issue is when there's a trampling on the rights of others or mandated language. Otherwise do whatever you like as long as you're not affecting others. 

[Tamesaint]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I wasn't going off on anything, 

Oh yes you are. 9 posts on this subject in the last 3 hours. Can't be arsed to count the number last night. You are obsessed by this subject. 

I want a PM who sorts out the economy. Who sorts out the Nhs. Who gets public services back to something resembling normality. He could declare the moon is made of cheese, that the world is flat and that all women are really just aliens from another planet. I want the important things in this country  sorted out. 

[Tamesaint]

Just now, Tamesaint said:

Oh yes you are. 9 posts on this subject in the last 3 hours. Can't be arsed to count the number last night. You are obsessed by this subject. 

I want a PM who sorts out the economy. Who sorts out the Nhs. Who gets public services back to something resembling normality. He could declare the moon is made of cheese, that the world is flat and that all women are really just aliens from another planet. I want the important things in this country  sorted out. 

Update. It is now 11 posts in 3 hours.FFS get a grip. 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Oh yes you are. 9 posts on this subject in the last 3 hours. Can't be arsed to count the number last night. You are obsessed by this subject. 

I want a PM who sorts out the economy. Who sorts out the Nhs. Who gets public services back to something resembling normality. He could declare the moon is made of cheese, that the world is flat and that all women are really just aliens from another planet. I want the important things in this country  sorted out. 

It's a current topic of conversation given what Sunak said yesterday. I've responded to some who consider the question to be irrelevant. Personally I'd like a PM who can sort out as many of the things I care about as possible and that includes safeguarding the rights of women and children. Being unable to coherently articulate what a woman is matters because it shows that he will largely say what he knows to be an incoherent argument if he thinks it will get him into power. This is one example but there's plenty of other times he has come up with a policy and then completely changed when he doesn't think it's fashionable or if something is remotely controversial. There's loads of his policies I have an issue with but in a weird way I'd rather he stuck by what he actually believed in even if it's not something I'm a fan of. At least then we can be more confident of what we are voting for. 

[hypochondriac]

9 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Update. It is now 11 posts in 3 hours.FFS get a grip. 

I assume you can answer the question then. Given you're keeping score that's 13 now. 

[Tamesaint]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I assume you can answer the question then. Given you're keeping score that's 13 now. 

🥱🥱🥱

[revolution saint]

23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It's a current topic of conversation given what Sunak said yesterday. 

Which, of course, is exactly what he wants it to be given Sunak is hopeless in defending his own policies.

[Lighthouse]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

You did say that and now you claim to know what he does and doesn’t believe. The obsession with Stamer and this issue is odd.

If he does know what he believes and is simply choosing not to say it then he comes across as a fool and a coward and it’ll affect his performance in the election. People want a leader, we need someone who’s prepared to stand up to a mad man like Putin, with military action if it comes to it.

If your main opponent keeps asking you what 6 plus 6 is, you say 12, shut them up and make them look stupid. If you keep saying, “yes, well obviously I know what the answer is,” you look stupid.

This is why Trump. God knows I hate the man on pretty much every level but when he stands there and says, “we’re going to build the wall. Hilary is going to jail. I know the system is corrupt, I’ve been exploiting it for years,” it resonates with people.

This is all the Tories have got now and Starmer is playing right into their hands. 

[sadoldgit]

33 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Which, of course, is exactly what he wants it to be given Sunak is hopeless in defending his own policies.

This 100%. He and his party have got nothing to fight with so they are desperately trying to create “issues” that they can use to fight the next election. with. One of those “issues” being created is the “cultural war”. The fact that a very minor issue has ruffled so many feathers shows that it is possible to take a minor issue that is a big deal to a minority and make it a more widespread big deal by repeating it endlessly. Sunak made a fool of himself yesterday but Badenoch immediately piped up and added more fuel to the fire, making it a major talking point. This country is on its knees but we have a failed government whose only response is to weaponise a small percentage of the population who really should be treated more sympathetically. I think most normal, rational people see this for what it is. 

 

[Fan The Flames]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I wasn't going off on anything, I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the argument. Being unable to define the word woman without referring to the word itself or providing a circular definition is absurd. Putting aside any of the politics of it, you must see that it is nonsensical. 

The thing is, it's an important issue to many because it does have actual real world consequences. It's largely easy for some men to dismiss the issue as unimportant because it often doesn't affect them. 

I'm not dimissing the real world issues, I stated my position on them. I said that as adults we should be able to sort the real world issues out. But at the moment there are a lot of peope just shouting at each other about definitions of words.

There should be some sports categories that people with a penis or people born with a penis can't enter. There should be spaces that people with a penis can't go. That's my starter for ten solution. What's yours?

Edited February 8 by Fan The Flames

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I'm not dimissing the real world issues, I stated my position on them. I said that as adults we should be able to sort the real world issues out. But at the moment there are a lot of peope just shouting at each other about definitions of words.

There should be some sports categories that people with a penis or people born with a penis can't enter. There should be spaces that people with a penis can't go. That's my starter for ten solution. What's yours?

Right so you support woman only spaces and women's sports then so we agree on that point. You seem happy to separate people based on their sex which is what i support too. The only real difference appears to be that you believe that someone can identify as a woman but without being able to define it.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic but I genuinely don't understand why you can't see the contradiction with that. I get that for you the concept and word woman isn't particularly important but equally you must accept that for a number of people it really matters. I totally understand the frustration felt by many women when they talking about being erased or when male rapists are reffered to as she, put in women's jails or when obvious men enter female toilets and young women and girls feel extremely intimidated by their presence. 

[The Kraken]

Available in good book shops and some rubbish ones. Maybe.

 

[pingpong]

Turns out it was starmers fault.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68237826

And he's stopped using Brianna's pronouns now, preferring to just make nonsensical sentences instead.

Hard to know which depths they will go to next, the dearth of quality in the conservative party right now is astonishing. 

 

[Farmer Saint]

15 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Turns out it was starmers fault.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68237826

And he's stopped using Brianna's pronouns now, preferring to just make nonsensical sentences instead.

Hard to know which depths they will go to next, the dearth of quality in the conservative party right now is astonishing. 

 

He's doubling down isn't he? Fucking hell man, just apologise.

[badgerx16]

 

Edited February 8 by badgerx16

[pingpong]

Excruciatingly, it seems they've all been instructed not to use pronouns for brianna and use her name only, and  it's leading to some very odd sentences and slip ups 🤔

 

 

Edited February 8 by pingpong

[badgerx16]

Squirm little piggy, squirm.

Mind you, the whole media circus should itself show some respect to the family by coming to a consensus on how their surname is pronounced. I have heard "gay"', "ghee', "guy', and '"jay"'.

Edited February 8 by badgerx16

[Fan The Flames]

3 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Available in good book shops and some rubbish ones. Maybe.

 

"By the time former heads of government get around to writing their memoirs, they usually look exclusively backwards, focused only on legacy. This is not the case with former Prime Minister Liz Truss"

Daming with faint praise. There is no legacy to brag about.

[Fan The Flames]

Chris Philp is such an arse licker.

[Tamesaint]

Chris Philp sums up whst is wrong with the modern day Tory party. His business career before he became an MP was full of dodgy dealings as highlighted by Private Eye. He was the first minister to claim that Liz Truss's Budget was well received by the financial world. Today he was skewered by several interviewers. 

Corrupt, stupid and incompetent. Sums up many Conservative MPs. 

 

Edited February 8 by Tamesaint

[Weston Super Saint]

50 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Corrupt, stupid and incompetent. Sums up most MPs. 

 

Fixed it for ya.

[The Kraken]

4 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Fixed it for ya.

Maybe, but it’s just that tiny bit easier to be corrupt when you’re actually in the party that’s leading the country. So not quite “they’re all the same”.

[Gloucester Saint]

5 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

"By the time former heads of government get around to writing their memoirs, they usually look exclusively backwards, focused only on legacy. This is not the case with former Prime Minister Liz Truss"

Daming with faint praise. There is no legacy to brag about.

Does that actually say in the small print ‘lessons from the only Conservative in the room’? 😂😂🤣😆

Fucking heck, she’s got an ego for the worst Prime Minister in British history and arguably Western Europe post-war. At least when Richard Nixon also left office, he kept a lower profile until the late 1970s.

She does leave a legacy actually - total and utter personal humiliation, global disgrace and the crack pipe theories of the IEA in tatters.

[Fan The Flames]

7 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Does that actually say in the small print ‘lessons from the only Conservative in the room’? 😂😂🤣😆

Fucking heck, she’s got an ego for the worst Prime Minister in British history and arguably Western Europe post-war. At least when Richard Nixon also left office, he kept a lower profile until the late 1970s.

She does leave a legacy actually - total and utter personal humiliation, global disgrace and the crack pipe theories of the IEA in tatters.

I suppose if you were that shit and short lived you would have to double down and pretend you were the victim of circumstances rather than utterly shocking at the job. 

[Fan The Flames]

Tom Tugendhat said the only response to wearing a mask or carrying a flair is outrage, fuckin drama queen. 

3 months for climbing on a statue but crack on if you want to blow up a ULEZ camera. More culture war shite.

[rallyboy]

They've lost their way - I think people would prefer to see more effort put into banging up Post Office board members, people smugglers and PPE crooks right now.

[sadoldgit]

Short memory Rishi? Probably not the best idea to attack Starmer on U turns when you have plenty in your own cupboard.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-laura-trott-skewered-32082113.amp

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/rishi-sunak-u-turn-house-building-nhs-fines/

And yet another example of incompetence by a member of this government. It is beyond embarrassing.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/treasury-minister-laura-trott-in-car-crash-bbc-interview-over-economics_uk_65c55f8de4b069b665dec3e1/

 

 

Edited February 9 by sadoldgit
Add text

[Turkish]

18 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Short memory Rishi? Probably not the best idea to attack Starmer on U turns when you have plenty in your own cupboard.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-laura-trott-skewered-32082113.amp

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/rishi-sunak-u-turn-house-building-nhs-fines/

As someone who often plays the victim accusing others of deliberately misinterpreting what you’re saying in surprised to see you criticising Sunak for Starmer deliberately using his comment about what a women is or being a pretty low point scoring exercise by trying to make it about a murdered trans person. Then I remembered you probably think he’s an immigrant due to his skin colour and also doesn’t share the same views as you so in your open minded world you’re quite right to lambast him anytime you want 

Edited February 9 by Turkish

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

As someone who often plays the victim accusing others of deliberately misinterpreting what you’re saying in surprised to see you criticising Sunak for Starmer deliberately using his comment about what a women is or being a pretty low point scoring exercise by trying to make it about a murdered trans person. Then I remembered you probably think he’s an immigrant due to his skin colour and also doesn’t share the same views as you so in your open minded world you’re quite right to lambast him anytime you want 

What is it about the brown skinned Prime Minister that first repelled soggy?

[Gloucester Saint]

5 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Tom Tugendhat said the only response to wearing a mask or carrying a flair is outrage, fuckin drama queen. 

3 months for climbing on a statue but crack on if you want to blow up a ULEZ camera. More culture war shite.

WGS would have called it propaganda football - JPs are very constrained on issuing short custodial sentences when defendants appear with our prisons system full to bursting, at best. They certainly won’t be prioritising such sentences for somebody who climbs on a monument. I don’t agree with protestors doing it by the way either or drunken students come to that - it’s dangerous, people fall off them and hurt/kill themselves and it just leads to more culture war crap. I remember the student who was filmed urinating on the Sheffield cenotaph totally out of it (I think it was Sheffield?). The shame in public and employability impact in the future was a far worse penalty than the cost, which we pay for, of a short stint in the nick with genuine criminals to learn from.

Tugendhat having said that isn’t the worst modern day Tory around. If he calmed down the Israel and China stuff a bit. He won’t get the leadership next year, that’ll be a variation of Nigel Farage in a dress eg Braverman, Badenoch or just for the 😆 Truss. After that and another defeat they’ll start thinking about adults to lead the party by 2029/30 and he could be a serious option if he hasn’t got fed up by then with the idiots on the right. Mordaunt is more popular with the public - albeit because of carrying a sword - but can’t see 100k swivels amongst their senile membership voting for her.

 

[igsey]

On 08/02/2024 at 10:19, hypochondriac said:

The thing is, it's an important issue to many because it does have actual real world consequences.

The actual thing is this: very very few people actually give a shit, particularly in Britain. The right keep trying to import tactics from the US (see also: 15 minute cities) but British people have a much more "you do you" kind of attitude to these types of things. I'd wager £1000 most people are much more concerned about how they are going to pay their mortgage going up by hundreds of pounds, or getting an appointment with their GP, or what would happen if a loved one needed to be rushed to hospital but had to wait hours for an ambulance.

Sure, there is a conversation that needs to be had about transgender issues, and it's a conversation that I, as a straight man, am not particularly qualified to be a part of (or, to be honest, very interested in). 

As Rishi is so keen to talk about "the British people's priorities", I'd suggest that a cast-iron definition of a woman is in about 600th place; between the correct shade of white for a street light and the latest acceptable date to take down your Christmas decorations.

[aintforever]

Here's a more recent survey carried out by Hypo/The Daily Mail:

[hypochondriac]

I find it bizarre that some people on here think you can't care about multiple things at once. There's all sorts of things I'd like labour to sort out. Starmer protecting women's rights and sorting out the GIDS scandal is one of many. 

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, igsey said:

The actual thing is this: very very few people actually give a shit, particularly in Britain. The right keep trying to import tactics from the US (see also: 15 minute cities) but British people have a much more "you do you" kind of attitude to these types of things. I'd wager £1000 most people are much more concerned about how they are going to pay their mortgage going up by hundreds of pounds, or getting an appointment with their GP, or what would happen if a loved one needed to be rushed to hospital but had to wait hours for an ambulance.

Sure, there is a conversation that needs to be had about transgender issues, and it's a conversation that I, as a straight man, am not particularly qualified to be a part of (or, to be honest, very interested in). 

As Rishi is so keen to talk about "the British people's priorities", I'd suggest that a cast-iron definition of a woman is in about 600th place; between the correct shade of white for a street light and the latest acceptable date to take down your Christmas decorations.

I bet the victims of Isla Bryson give a shit. 

[ecuk268]

10 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Tom Tugendhat said the only response to wearing a mask or carrying a flair is outrage, fuckin drama queen. 

3 months for climbing on a statue but crack on if you want to blow up a ULEZ camera. More culture war shite.

Generally, in this country we have policing by consent, ie most people obey the law.

If enough people break the law the police are pretty powerless. 

If, on a march of say, 20000 people, 80% of them wore masks, what would happen?

Maybe a few token arrests but each person detained has to be taken to a Police station and processed which takes manpower away from the march.

It's totally unworkable and I'm sure that the police aren't particularly interested in enforcing it.

[badgerx16]

9 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Short memory Rishi? Probably not the best idea to attack Starmer on U turns when you have plenty in your own cupboard.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-laura-trott-skewered-32082113.amp

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/rishi-sunak-u-turn-house-building-nhs-fines/

And yet another example of incompetence by a member of this government. It is beyond embarrassing.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/treasury-minister-laura-trott-in-car-crash-bbc-interview-over-economics_uk_65c55f8de4b069b665dec3e1/

 

 

I listened to the Laura Trott interview with Evan Davies. She was not happy to be told, quite correctly, that she was wrong.

My wife thinks she was holding the graph upside down.

Edited February 9 by badgerx16

[Tamesaint]

7 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

I listened to the Laura Trott interview with Evan Davies. She was not happy to be told, quite correctly, that she was wrong.

It is a bit frightening when the No. 2 in the Treasury does not know what Debt and GDP are. 

[Fan The Flames]

6 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Tugendhat having said that isn’t the worst modern day Tory around. 

He's my MP and I always thought he was in the One Nation camp, so it's a shame that he is dabbling in the culture war stuff. He came across as quite lightweight during the leadership campaign, so maybe he wants to be seen flashing a bit of thigh at Badenoch and co.

[Fan The Flames]

Trott was so certain that she was right at the beginning of the interview, with her passive aggressive assertion of her understanding of the facts. Then she try's ploughing on again, in the outside world, her Oxbridge Tory MP 'I'm more important than everyone' confidence and bloody-mindedness normally shuts people up, but ED was having none of it and she crumbled like a sucked empty lemon sherbet.

She then trotted out the same line that Rachel Reeves used to explain Labour's repositioning, the line about about following their fiscal rules first and foremost. When ten minutes earlier she was beating Labour up for it. Philp the day before and now Trott, they really are useless.