The 2024 General Election - July 4th

[badgerx16]

22 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Imagine there’s no migrants

It’s easy if you try

The asylum seekers in small boats

Tip them up and let them die

Imagine all the migrants

Living life in Rwanda, oh oh

You can call me a racist, but I’m not the only one

I hope one day they will be on a plane

And the white people can live as one.

Not sure it's 'white' people but rather more specifically white 'English' people.

 

There is also the fundamental contradiction of promoting a 'Comprehensive free speech Bill' whilst claiming they will clamp down on 'left wing bias' and mandating the use of English.

Edited June 17 by badgerx16

[Sheaf Saint]

28 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

Fair play, they managed to get "woke" into the second sentence of their launch document.

Fuck me, they really have nothing of any substance other than nationalistic ideologies. It'll appeal to a certain base but it's so transparent that they're basically running on a manifesto purely of "brown people are bad".

They just need to start selling red hats with "MUKGA" printed on them now.

[rallyboy]

I had the misfortune of seeing the Telegraph on Saturday and suddenly it all makes sense.

It leads with marvellous news about our beloved princess of Wales with an enormous shot of her leaning against a tree, like the cover of a 70s easy listening LP.

The rest of the front page leads to a heavyweight and probing piece on the fantastic MP Suella, written by one of her former university friends, telling us how great she is, how everyone in Fareham and Waterlooville loves her and what a super leader she would make, in fact, it's so glowing it's as if she wrote it herself.

Down the bottom it claims nasty Labour has launched a bitter class war, alongside a cartoon suggesting Tories are great at managing the economy and Labour are reckless...

Inside it gives a whole page to scaremongering and massive tax fibs direct from Tory HQ, even trying to link Starmer and Corbyn together, opposite a page where they manage to carefully weave an attack on the leftie woke BBC with a free plug for Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage.

I didn't get beyond page 5, it's a shadow of a real paper, aimed squarely at easily-led pensioners - but it explains a lot if some people are still stupid enough to gulp down this lazy drivel masquerading as news.

 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Gary Lineker, Carol Vorderman, Lefties and the Wokerati! 😤

They’ve got their work cut out.

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

They just need to start selling red hats with "MUKGA" printed on them now.

To go along with “FUKEM”

Free the UK from Economic Migrants

[Gloucester Saint]

7 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Fair play, they managed to get "woke" into the second sentence of their launch document.

Fuck me, they really have nothing of any substance other than nationalistic ideologies. It'll appeal to a certain base but it's so transparent that they're basically running on a manifesto purely of "brown people are bad".

As Whitey Grandad commented, who do they believe they are reclaiming the UK (well, England really) from? Clearly going by this, the black, brown, people with disabilities, women, and people with multi-long term conditions (95% of their over-65s base they are eroding from the Tories) covered by the 2010 Equality Act they want to abolish.

The IFS estimated it as being erroneous by a margin of tens of billions https://ifs.org.uk/articles/reform-uk-manifesto-reaction

Their summary is that there’s some clear sense of purpose but not a huge amount of it is affordable so hence many more savings would be needed and no prospect of the £17bn they want to raise for reducing NHS waiting lists (knowing that Farage wants to replace the NHS really). It concludes by saying there would be a huge cut in the size of the state, bearing in mind the dissatisfaction with austerity laid the ground for Brexit in a lot of areas. And these cuts would be far beyond what Cameron did.

Not least given the scale of the tax giveaways which Reform say will cost £70bn but economists estimate at £93bn - bigger than Truss attempted and £23bn would be a huge unfunded gap. If the Tories had a brain, they’d latch onto this as Sunak also opposed Truss’s loony plans, but they are still fixated with Starmer.

Edited June 17 by Gloucester Saint

[Wade Garrett]

Fucking hell, Reform have shown what a load of cunts they are today!

Absolute fucking onions.

[The Kraken]

33 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Fucking hell, Reform have shown what a load of cunts they are today!

Absolute fucking onions.

Today?

Christ. 

[Fan The Flames]

Heard some twat in Ashfield say, when asked why he is voting for Reform, that they'll put the great back in GB. That was it, no explanation on how, people are so easily won over.

Expect PTGBIGB hats.

[sadoldgit]

As Boris Johnson and Donald Trump have already shown us, just give some people what they want to hear and they will swallow it hook, line and sinker. Farage has this off pat. He knows exactly what to say to appeal to a certain section of the public and they lap it up. They never learn.

Reform aren’t a political party, like UKIP they are a pressure group. Farage is using them to worm his way into the Tory Party which he wants to recreate in his own image. It’s his best bet at getting his hands on power. Let’s hope that the decent people in Clacton turn up and keep him out.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

A common sense, low key, fully costed manifesto ...

https://www.countbinface.com/manifesto

 

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

As Boris Johnson and Donald Trump have already shown us, just give some people what they want to hear and they will swallow it hook, line and sinker. Farage has this off pat. He knows exactly what to say to appeal to a certain section of the public and they lap it up. They never learn.

Reform aren’t a political party, like UKIP they are a pressure group. Farage is using them to worm his way into the Tory Party which he wants to recreate in his own image. It’s his best bet at getting his hands on power. Let’s hope that the decent people in Clacton turn up and keep him out.

It's what all manifestos do.

That's why they get scrapped on day 1 in parliament.

[LuckyNumber7]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

As Boris Johnson and Donald Trump have already shown us, just give some people what they want to hear and they will swallow it hook, line and sinker. Farage has this off pat. He knows exactly what to say to appeal to a certain section of the public and they lap it up. They never learn.

Reform aren’t a political party, like UKIP they are a pressure group. Farage is using them to worm his way into the Tory Party which he wants to recreate in his own image. It’s his best bet at getting his hands on power. Let’s hope that the decent people in Clacton turn up and keep him out.

That's literally what an election is, voting for the party who says they'll do the things you want them to.

Of course most of them never actually do these things once they're in power.

Edited June 18 by LuckyNumber7

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

That's literally what an election is, voting for the party who says they'll do the things you want them to.

Of course most of them never actually do these things once they're in power.

I was thinking more along the lines of telling them that the reason their lives are crap is because of migrants.

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I was thinking more along the lines of telling them that the reason their lives are crap is because of migrants.

Standard practice around the World, blame foreigners; Africans, Arabs, the French, Chinese, Mexicans, the Frenvh, Poles, Turks, the French, everybody is somebody's scapegoat.

Edited June 18 by badgerx16

[sadoldgit]

Listened to the phone in on Nick Ferrari’s show with Keir Starmer this morning. He sounds much more comfortable with the questioning now than he did on that first televised debate with Sunak.

One thing I don’t get though is his reluctance to say if he would have served in a government lead by Corbyn. He was the deputy leader of the party and a member of the shadow cabinet so why wouldn’t he and why would that be an issue? It would be more of an issue if he had not surely? It doesn’t mean that he will be the same as Corbyn as a leader. Own it Keir.

[hypochondriac]

5 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Heard some twat in Ashfield say, when asked why he is voting for Reform, that they'll put the great back in GB. That was it, no explanation on how, people are so easily won over.

Expect PTGBIGB hats.

Bit of a sad indictment of other parties that it takes so little to win over votes. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Listened to the phone in on Nick Ferrari’s show with Keir Starmer this morning. He sounds much more comfortable with the questioning now than he did on that first televised debate with Sunak.

One thing I don’t get though is his reluctance to say if he would have served in a government lead by Corbyn. He was the deputy leader of the party and a member of the shadow cabinet so why wouldn’t he and why would that be an issue? It would be more of an issue if he had not surely? It doesn’t mean that he will be the same as Corbyn as a leader. Own it Keir.

Because even the mention of the sad old communist and any association to him turns off many of the floating voters that he is looking to attract. 

[tdmickey3]

Full blown desperation in the tory party now, they have brought the  Fat, lying, unkempt, self serving prick back to the front... 🤣

[Fan The Flames]

34 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Bit of a sad indictment of other parties that it takes so little to win over votes. 

You're naive if you think it works like that.

[Fan The Flames]

34 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because even the mention of the sad old communist and any association to him turns off many of the floating voters that he is looking to attract. 

Sad that Nick Ferrari has to do the Torys job for them.

[Fan The Flames]

6 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Full blown desperation in the tory party now, they have brought the  Fat, lying, unkempt, self serving prick back to the front... 🤣

Which one.

[Lord Duckhunter]

21 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because even the mention of the sad old communist and any association to him turns off many of the floating voters that he is looking to attract. 

Yeah, the Toolmakers son has turned his back on his “friend” pretty quickly. Nearly as quickly as he backed tracked on his “pledges” that got him elected.
 

Reading the last couple of pages you’d have thought Nigel was the only politician to ever promise their target audience exactly what they wanted. 
 

Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners

Abolish Universal Credit 
 

The common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; 

 

Will scrap punitive sanctions, two-child limit and benefits cap

 

Finally, the abolition of tuition
fees. 

 

 

[sadoldgit]

42 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because even the mention of the sad old communist and any association to him turns off many of the floating voters that he is looking to attract. 

So Sunak being Chancellor for the sad, fat, lying, narcissistic, incompetent, other people’s wife shagging mentalist is not likely to attract floating floaters to him either? Didn’t your choice, Badenoch, serve under another batshit crazy PM, Liz Truss? How will floating voters feel about that? 

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

So Sunak being Chancellor for the sad, fat, lying, narcissistic, incompetent, other people’s wife shagging mentalist is not likely to attract floating floaters to him either? Didn’t your choice, Badenoch, serve under another batshit crazy PM, Liz Truss? How will floating voters feel about that? 

What a bizarre response. What does any of that have to do with Labour? No one gives a shit about the crap Tory Party, they are history it doesn't matter what they do. 

[hypochondriac]

21 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

You're naive if you think it works like that.

Works like what? If for example the Tories had actually done some of what they'd promised during their time in power and if they hadn't been a total disappointment to many voters they had attracted for the first time then many wouldn't be gagging quite so much to jump ship. The reason that a significant number are jumping ship is because they are sick to death of the mainstream parties and don't want politics to be Labour and tory for evermore. 

[revolution saint]

On 07/06/2024 at 20:27, Lord Duckhunter said:

The Greens, Lib Dems, Taffs & Sweaties are just promising money left right and centre. It’s all money for this, money for that, more soliders, more doctors, more care workers. They’re going to fix the roads, build more houses. Fucking 6th form politics. Raynor, Penny & Nigel the only ones not living in fantasy land. 

 

36 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Yeah, the Toolmakers son has turned his back on his “friend” pretty quickly. Nearly as quickly as he backed tracked on his “pledges” that got him elected.
 

Reading the last couple of pages you’d have thought Nigel was the only politician to ever promise their target audience exactly what they wanted. 
 

Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners

Abolish Universal Credit 
 

The common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; 

 

Will scrap punitive sanctions, two-child limit and benefits cap

 

Finally, the abolition of tuition
fees. 

 

 

Is Nigel now living in fantasy land?

[Fan The Flames]

23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

What a bizarre response. What does any of that have to do with Labour? No one gives a shit about the crap Tory Party, they are history it doesn't matter what they do. 

That's a cop out.

What is bizarre in that in this general election is you think the only party that deserves scrutiny are Labour. 

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

That's a cop out.

What is bizarre in that in this general election is you think the only party that deserves scrutiny are Labour. 

No it isn't. I was simply pointing out that the reason Kier Starmer wants to distance himself from Corbyn is because he doesn't want to put off floating voters. That's a completely non controversial statement and is the truth. The fact that the Tories are crap and have useless people in their party is entirely irrelevant to that fact.

You can analyse any party you like to death, my point is that it's a total waste of time when the conservatives are quite rightly heading for a total collapse and it's fully deserved. You can scrutinise them to death but they shortly will have zero power and if they have any sort of revival will look completely different to the current incarnation so I don't see what purpose it serves. 

[Weston Super Saint]

52 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

That's a cop out.

What is bizarre in that in this general election is you think the only party that deserves scrutiny are Labour. 

The party that will win the election always deserves scrutiny doesn't it?

[Fan The Flames]

11 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The party that will win the election always deserves scrutiny doesn't it?

They all do mate.

This isn't as cut and dry as the right wing is making out, it's a tactic.

[Fan The Flames]

58 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

No it isn't. I was simply pointing out that the reason Kier Starmer wants to distance himself from Corbyn is because he doesn't want to put off floating voters. That's a completely non controversial statement and is the truth. The fact that the Tories are crap and have useless people in their party is entirely irrelevant to that fact.

You can analyse any party you like to death, my point is that it's a total waste of time when the conservatives are quite rightly heading for a total collapse and it's fully deserved. You can scrutinise them to death but they shortly will have zero power and if they have any sort of revival will look completely different to the current incarnation so I don't see what purpose it serves. 

Your cop out is that SOG gave you an example of an equivalent on the Tory side and you dismissed out of hand. It's either important or not, which is it.

We know why Kier wants to distance himself from Corbyn, the same reason why Ferrari and his mates want to keep bringing it up.

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Your cop out is that SOG gave you an example of an equivalent on the Tory side and you dismissed out of hand. It's either important or not, which is it.

We know why Kier wants to distance himself from Corbyn, the same reason why Ferrari and his mates want to keep bringing it up.

I dismissed it because it has no relevance to the discussion about why Starmer would want to distance himself from Corbyn. It might have relevance in other circumstances but is utterly irrelevant in that context. 

It is extremely odd that you are seemingly incapable of discussibg Labour without mentioning the Conservatives. 

[The Left Back]

Given the state of the polls I think it's understandable and legitimate that our next PM gets an increased level of scrutiny and particularly from those who don't instinctively trust the Labour Party.  Keir and crew have an enormous job trying to repair the toxic, divided, hollowed out mess they will inherit and so any lines of attack, whether from genuine curiosity or cynical dislike would be expected.  The Tories are getting less scrutiny in part because the scrutineers are their mates but more because their track record is there for all to see and also because almost no one expects their manifesto to be executed.

Personally I'd have liked Labour to have given itself more wiggle room in terms of fiscal policy, Europe and the climate but they've chosen a safer route to victory and I suppose who can blame them for that.

 

[sadoldgit]

40 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Your cop out is that SOG gave you an example of an equivalent on the Tory side and you dismissed out of hand. It's either important or not, which is it.

We know why Kier wants to distance himself from Corbyn, the same reason why Ferrari and his mates want to keep bringing it up.

It really doesn’t matter. It was 5 years ago and has no bearing on what is happening now. Corbyn is out and Starmer is the leader.

The focus should be on what he plans to do if he is elected rather on what he would our wouldn’t have done 5 years ago. Not surprisingly those on the right of the media are trying to do their level best to smear Starmer and they have very little to go with, hence making mountains out of molehills. Next time he should just say yes, he would have served in Corbyn’s cabinet, next question. There are plenty of people who serve in cabinets who don’t agree with every policy put forward. It really isn’t that important. He was deputy leader of the party. He was already implicated with Corbyn.

[sadoldgit]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

That's a cop out.

What is bizarre in that in this general election is you think the only party that deserves scrutiny are Labour. 

He has plenty of “previous.” His post count goes through the roof as soon as anybody criticises any right of centre politics. His mantra is “socialism is dangerous.” I’m not sure how he squares that when he visits the NHS Scot free or applies for benefits if he loses his job (if he has one).

You won’t see him get shirty about parliamentary candidates who have links to a high profile fascist but he certainly will over something which is of no importance in this election or the future of the country because it involves a 😱 socialist!  

What’s more of a big deal, hypothetically serving in a cabinet under Corbyn or Partygate, giving £££s to your mates for rubbish PPE. Crashing the economy, serving under a boss who lied daily etc etc etc?
 

 

Edited June 18 by sadoldgit

[hypochondriac]

36 minutes ago, The Left Back said:

Given the state of the polls I think it's understandable and legitimate that our next PM gets an increased level of scrutiny and particularly from those who don't instinctively trust the Labour Party.  Keir and crew have an enormous job trying to repair the toxic, divided, hollowed out mess they will inherit and so any lines of attack, whether from genuine curiosity or cynical dislike would be expected.  The Tories are getting less scrutiny in part because the scrutineers are their mates but more because their track record is there for all to see and also because almost no one expects their manifesto to be executed.

Personally I'd have liked Labour to have given itself more wiggle room in terms of fiscal policy, Europe and the climate but they've chosen a safer route to victory and I suppose who can blame them for that.

 

Exactly. Common sense post that I agree with. 

[AlexLaw76]

52 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

He has plenty of “previous.” His post count goes through the roof as soon as anybody criticises any right of centre politics. His mantra is “socialism is dangerous.” I’m not sure how he squares that when he visits the NHS Scot free or applies for benefits if he loses his job (if he has one).

You won’t see him get shirty about parliamentary candidates who have links to a high profile fascist but he certainly will over something which is of no importance in this election or the future of the country because it involves a 😱 socialist!  

What’s more of a big deal, hypothetically serving in a cabinet under Corbyn or Partygate, giving £££s to your mates for rubbish PPE. Crashing the economy, serving under a boss who lied daily etc etc etc?
 

 

When did this happen?

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

They all do mate.

This isn't as cut and dry as the right wing is making out, it's a tactic.

Or politics?

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

When did this happen?

When he went to Wales?

[The Kraken]

.

 

Edited June 18 by The Kraken

[Challenger]

What a plethora of crap we have spread before us to vote for on July 4th.

[trousers]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

It really doesn’t matter. It was 5 years ago and has no bearing on what is happening now. Corbyn is out and Starmer is the leader.

The focus should be on what he plans to do if he is elected rather on what he would our wouldn’t have done 5 years ago.

Can this "ignore what they did or said in the past" philosophy be applied to all politicians or just the ones you support...?

(Asking for someone who gives a toss about these futile political 'debates')

Edited June 18 by trousers

[hypochondriac]

41 minutes ago, trousers said:

Can this "ignore what they did or said in the past" philosophy be applied to all politicians or just the ones you support...?

(Asking for someone who gives a toss about these futile political 'debates')

Indeed. It's not like what a politician has done in the past has ever been a predictor of what they might do in the future or anything. That never happens... 

*waits for a post about something the tories have done. 

Edited June 18 by hypochondriac

[Holmes_and_Watson]

49 minutes ago, trousers said:

Can this "ignore what they did or said in the past" philosophy be applied to all politicians or just the ones you support...?

(Asking for someone who gives a toss about these futile political 'debates')

Starmer made a point of focusing on the Conservatives history in the first debate. That you couldn't ignore it. Heavens forbid we call them, or supporters, hypocrites, by not applying it to them.

And people do, recalling the alleged war criminal, the guy who sold off half our gold reserves, the state of the economy, unions and the milibands and Comrade Corbyn.

People know, as they watch Conservatives and Reform battle, that there's plenty of similar internal struggling within labour.

As for Starmer: politician in abandoning previous positions power bid shocker.

Not a chance he's going to link himself with Corbyn. No mention of any speeches or internal discussions agreeing with those positions will be volunteered. Just as there hasn't been for any of the pledges or various u-turns. He just has to hold the line for a couple more weeks, and he's in.

When he was looking particularly bland, one of his allies called him ruthless. He will ignore all the above, pointing to having made them electable. His positions, policies and stated views will continue to change with the circumstances. Which is just him doing what all of his predecessors, across all parties, have done.

[revolution saint]

Have the Tories got anything other than the fabricated tax rises of Labour?
Fuck me it’s tedious and coming from a party that’s given us the highest tax burden we’ve ever had, promised a high wage economy and then protested against wage increases, it’s hypocritical. 
Paraphrasing Alexie Sayle, Least you know where you are with the Tories, yeah, you’re fucked.

[Gloucester Saint]

Latest IPSOS-MRP poll showing similar to others, but Tories up over 100 seats to 117 on this one. Hoping for a bit more than 30-40 seats from a Lib Dem perspective but up from 8 currently would still be a very good outcome. Really need Labour voters to be tactically voting in areas where they can’t win and vice versa.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/18/labour-landslide-projected-tory-seats-conservatives-general-election

Some interesting micro trends:

- Corbyn not making any serious inroads vs Labour in Islington

- Farage predicted at present to win Clacton, and Anderson holding Ashfield. Suggesting 3 seats for Reform, and in close contests with the Tories in a few more. Modelling tricky apparently where the Brexit party didn’t stand vs Boris.

- Greens doing well in Bristol Central and N Herefordshire but could lose Brighton to Labour

- Hunt hanging on as it stands, but Mordaunt, JRM, Keegan and Michael Green/Grant Shapps on their way if this trajectory played out. Sunak ok in his seat on a much reduced majority

 

Edited June 18 by Gloucester Saint

[Fan The Flames]

5 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Or politics?

Yes it's politics, your point is what?

Edited June 18 by Fan The Flames

[whelk]

On 17/06/2024 at 17:38, rallyboy said:

I had the misfortune of seeing the Telegraph on Saturday and suddenly it all makes sense.

It leads with marvellous news about our beloved princess of Wales with an enormous shot of her leaning against a tree, like the cover of a 70s easy listening LP.

The rest of the front page leads to a heavyweight and probing piece on the fantastic MP Suella, written by one of her former university friends, telling us how great she is, how everyone in Fareham and Waterlooville loves her and what a super leader she would make, in fact, it's so glowing it's as if she wrote it herself.

Down the bottom it claims nasty Labour has launched a bitter class war, alongside a cartoon suggesting Tories are great at managing the economy and Labour are reckless...

Inside it gives a whole page to scaremongering and massive tax fibs direct from Tory HQ, even trying to link Starmer and Corbyn together, opposite a page where they manage to carefully weave an attack on the leftie woke BBC with a free plug for Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage.

I didn't get beyond page 5, it's a shadow of a real paper, aimed squarely at easily-led pensioners - but it explains a lot if some people are still stupid enough to gulp down this lazy drivel masquerading as news.

 

According to David Yelland the average age of a newspaper reader is 64. Dying breed thankfully. Their scare headlines are only working on old cunts who won’t be around for long 

[whelk]

Bless these desperate cunts