Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Stevo_666 said:
OK, so you're going down the protest/tactical voting route currently.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Brian, you really need to get off the fence about BJbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
He may well be, but I've already explained my position upthread in the team vs manager analogy.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Not sure. This sort of thing often happens mid term though.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Bad news if a GE is imminent I guess...briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The fact that they need to mount a campaign to try to achieve this should tell you something...ddraver said:Credit where it's due, For Day 1 of "Operation Make Starmer Look Not Boring", PMQs was not a bad start...
A long ways to go for sure, but....
Considering how boring he is, I wonder what the Tories are doing wrong to be trailing so badly...
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Too early to tell, obvs.
But even so, my point still stands. I'm not going to argue that he's not boring, or has charisma. But despite that, Labour is ten % points up. Why do you think that would be?
Try 'Johnson'. That would be a start. That you recognised that Corbyn was toxic, but won't admit that Johnson is now an electoral liability is bizarre.
If you're going to stick with a rubbish analogy, it doesn't stop anyone from pointing out that the manager is a lying, lazy, unprincipled charlatan, who is merely using the team/club to further his own ends. In fact, that's what I'd expect a proper club supporter to do. I'd rather the Tories weren't being dragged down to Johnson's level... I'd have thought that would have been your focus too, since you os strongly believe in them. It wouldn't be a sign of weakness on your part to call him out.
The analogy was deliberately kept simple.
So let's cut to the chase - is he bad enough for you stoop to voting Labour in the next GE?
I'll vote for however is most likely to give the Tories a kicking, which is probably LDs in East Devon. If the Tories won't get rid of Johnson, then the Tories have to go.
I'd rather be voting for someone because of a broad spectrum of policies I agree with, but politics is broken with Johnson at the helm. Once he's gone, I'll look at their policies.
Interestingly the Lib Dem candidate int the recent local elections had her main selling point as 'vote for embecause Labour haven't got a hope in hell round here'. Which is probably true, although she may have found that having purple hair probably didn't win over too many of the local population who might have been wavering.
Yup. I'd rather not, but Johnson needs to go.
The Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon has some bizarre poster message like "Keep doing what we've been doing", which, presumably, is Googling tractor porn, breaking laws, lying to Parliament, and raising taxes.0 -
Does that beat the Wakefield guy, who's going with "I'm not Harold Shipman"?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
OK, so you're going down the protest/tactical voting route currently.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Brian, you really need to get off the fence about BJbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
He may well be, but I've already explained my position upthread in the team vs manager analogy.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Not sure. This sort of thing often happens mid term though.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Bad news if a GE is imminent I guess...briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The fact that they need to mount a campaign to try to achieve this should tell you something...ddraver said:Credit where it's due, For Day 1 of "Operation Make Starmer Look Not Boring", PMQs was not a bad start...
A long ways to go for sure, but....
Considering how boring he is, I wonder what the Tories are doing wrong to be trailing so badly...
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Too early to tell, obvs.
But even so, my point still stands. I'm not going to argue that he's not boring, or has charisma. But despite that, Labour is ten % points up. Why do you think that would be?
Try 'Johnson'. That would be a start. That you recognised that Corbyn was toxic, but won't admit that Johnson is now an electoral liability is bizarre.
If you're going to stick with a rubbish analogy, it doesn't stop anyone from pointing out that the manager is a lying, lazy, unprincipled charlatan, who is merely using the team/club to further his own ends. In fact, that's what I'd expect a proper club supporter to do. I'd rather the Tories weren't being dragged down to Johnson's level... I'd have thought that would have been your focus too, since you os strongly believe in them. It wouldn't be a sign of weakness on your part to call him out. The analogy was deliberately kept simple.
So let's cut to the chase - is he bad enough for you stoop to voting Labour in the next GE?
I'll vote for however is most likely to give the Tories a kicking, which is probably LDs in East Devon. If the Tories won't get rid of Johnson, then the Tories have to go.
I'd rather be voting for someone because of a broad spectrum of policies I agree with, but politics is broken with Johnson at the helm. Once he's gone, I'll look at their policies.
Interestingly the Lib Dem candidate int the recent local elections had her main selling point as 'vote for embecause Labour haven't got a hope in hell round here'. Which is probably true, although she may have found that having purple hair probably didn't win over too many of the local population who might have been wavering.
Yup. I'd rather not, but Johnson needs to go.
The Tory candidate in Tiv & Hon has some bizarre poster message like "Keep doing what we've been doing", which, presumably, is Googling tractor porn, breaking laws, lying to Parliament, and raising taxes.0 -
That might be a vote winner down your end of the world.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
OK, so you're going down the protest/tactical voting route currently.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Brian, you really need to get off the fence about BJbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
He may well be, but I've already explained my position upthread in the team vs manager analogy.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Not sure. This sort of thing often happens mid term though.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Bad news if a GE is imminent I guess...briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The fact that they need to mount a campaign to try to achieve this should tell you something...ddraver said:Credit where it's due, For Day 1 of "Operation Make Starmer Look Not Boring", PMQs was not a bad start...
A long ways to go for sure, but....
Considering how boring he is, I wonder what the Tories are doing wrong to be trailing so badly...
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Too early to tell, obvs.
But even so, my point still stands. I'm not going to argue that he's not boring, or has charisma. But despite that, Labour is ten % points up. Why do you think that would be?
Try 'Johnson'. That would be a start. That you recognised that Corbyn was toxic, but won't admit that Johnson is now an electoral liability is bizarre.
If you're going to stick with a rubbish analogy, it doesn't stop anyone from pointing out that the manager is a lying, lazy, unprincipled charlatan, who is merely using the team/club to further his own ends. In fact, that's what I'd expect a proper club supporter to do. I'd rather the Tories weren't being dragged down to Johnson's level... I'd have thought that would have been your focus too, since you os strongly believe in them. It wouldn't be a sign of weakness on your part to call him out. The analogy was deliberately kept simple.
So let's cut to the chase - is he bad enough for you stoop to voting Labour in the next GE?
I'll vote for however is most likely to give the Tories a kicking, which is probably LDs in East Devon. If the Tories won't get rid of Johnson, then the Tories have to go.
I'd rather be voting for someone because of a broad spectrum of policies I agree with, but politics is broken with Johnson at the helm. Once he's gone, I'll look at their policies.
Interestingly the Lib Dem candidate int the recent local elections had her main selling point as 'vote for embecause Labour haven't got a hope in hell round here'. Which is probably true, although she may have found that having purple hair probably didn't win over too many of the local population who might have been wavering.
Googling tractor porn"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
That might be a vote winner down your end of the world.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
OK, so you're going down the protest/tactical voting route currently.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Brian, you really need to get off the fence about BJbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
He may well be, but I've already explained my position upthread in the team vs manager analogy.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Not sure. This sort of thing often happens mid term though.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Bad news if a GE is imminent I guess...briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The fact that they need to mount a campaign to try to achieve this should tell you something...ddraver said:Credit where it's due, For Day 1 of "Operation Make Starmer Look Not Boring", PMQs was not a bad start...
A long ways to go for sure, but....
Considering how boring he is, I wonder what the Tories are doing wrong to be trailing so badly...
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Too early to tell, obvs.
But even so, my point still stands. I'm not going to argue that he's not boring, or has charisma. But despite that, Labour is ten % points up. Why do you think that would be?
Try 'Johnson'. That would be a start. That you recognised that Corbyn was toxic, but won't admit that Johnson is now an electoral liability is bizarre.
If you're going to stick with a rubbish analogy, it doesn't stop anyone from pointing out that the manager is a lying, lazy, unprincipled charlatan, who is merely using the team/club to further his own ends. In fact, that's what I'd expect a proper club supporter to do. I'd rather the Tories weren't being dragged down to Johnson's level... I'd have thought that would have been your focus too, since you os strongly believe in them. It wouldn't be a sign of weakness on your part to call him out. The analogy was deliberately kept simple.
So let's cut to the chase - is he bad enough for you stoop to voting Labour in the next GE?
I'll vote for however is most likely to give the Tories a kicking, which is probably LDs in East Devon. If the Tories won't get rid of Johnson, then the Tories have to go.
I'd rather be voting for someone because of a broad spectrum of policies I agree with, but politics is broken with Johnson at the helm. Once he's gone, I'll look at their policies.
Interestingly the Lib Dem candidate int the recent local elections had her main selling point as 'vote for embecause Labour haven't got a hope in hell round here'. Which is probably true, although she may have found that having purple hair probably didn't win over too many of the local population who might have been wavering.
Googling tractor porn
Apparently not in Tiverton & Honiton. At present, a 24k majority all but wiped out.0 -
Starmer joined the call to rule out free movement across Europe, FFS.
State of politics in this country, give me strength.0 -
To be fair to Starmer he did what no Labour leader has done for a long time and come out against the rail strikes. Albeit on the basis that otherwise, it would make Labour look as cr@pp as the unions that are instigating it.rick_chasey said:Starmer joined the call to rule out free movement across Europe, FFS.
State of politics in this country, give me strength."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
So why did the police bother investigating? If there was clearly no case to answer they would have said so.ddraver said:A few of us put on in the Tory thread.
Not really much to discuss, everyone knew it was nonsense from the start..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Daily Mail not taking it well that they didn't get their man.
0 -
The irony is of course that Sue Gray & the Met both bottled their investigations of the ABBA party in the Downing St flat.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Because their Met colleagues didn't do their job properly. You don't seriously think Starmer would have gambled on the outcome do you?Stevo_666 said:
So why did the police bother investigating? If there was clearly no case to answer they would have said so.ddraver said:A few of us put on in the Tory thread.
Not really much to discuss, everyone knew it was nonsense from the start...1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Apologies for it being JoB, and I'm not expecting Stevo to listen, but his analysis of how the Daily Mail harried Durham plod into reopening the case seems fair... all a cynical ploy to try to take the spotlight off Johnson's own actual despised criminal behaviour. The "They're all at it" gambit, in order to try to diminish the crimes of the guilty, is highly corrosive to politics, once all trust is lost.
1 -
Starmer bimself said it was not about risk, he was offering to resign on point of principle. Do you think he was lying?rjsterry said:
Because their Met colleagues didn't do their job properly. You don't seriously think Starmer would have gambled on the outcome do you?Stevo_666 said:
So why did the police bother investigating? If there was clearly no case to answer they would have said so.ddraver said:A few of us put on in the Tory thread.
Not really much to discuss, everyone knew it was nonsense from the start..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Just to help you out here, Stevo, in case you missed it:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/tom-swarbrick/jeremy-corbyn-keir-starmer-beergate-investigation-very-serious/
0 -
So do you think Stsrmer was lying when he said what he did?briantrumpet said:Just to help you out here, Stevo, in case you missed it:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/tom-swarbrick/jeremy-corbyn-keir-starmer-beergate-investigation-very-serious/"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
On point of principle if he was found to have broken rules. He was probably confident he hadn't hence what I assume was meant by gambling on the outcome?Stevo_666 said:
Starmer bimself said it was not about risk, he was offering to resign on point of principle. Do you think he was lying?rjsterry said:
Because their Met colleagues didn't do their job properly. You don't seriously think Starmer would have gambled on the outcome do you?Stevo_666 said:
So why did the police bother investigating? If there was clearly no case to answer they would have said so.ddraver said:A few of us put on in the Tory thread.
Not really much to discuss, everyone knew it was nonsense from the start...0 -
Not sure, but was interested to know if RJS thought he was lying as he appeared to suggest thatPross said:
On point of principle if he was found to have broken rules. He was probably confident he hadn't hence what I assume was meant by gambling on the outcome?Stevo_666 said:
Starmer bimself said it was not about risk, he was offering to resign on point of principle. Do you think he was lying?rjsterry said:
Because their Met colleagues didn't do their job properly. You don't seriously think Starmer would have gambled on the outcome do you?Stevo_666 said:
So why did the police bother investigating? If there was clearly no case to answer they would have said so.ddraver said:A few of us put on in the Tory thread.
Not really much to discuss, everyone knew it was nonsense from the start..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
On 30 April, England was under "Step 2" rules, which had been introduced on 12 April.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/61334893
Gathering indoors with people from outside your household or support bubble was against the law.
There was an exemption for "work purposes", although working from home was recommended in the guidance, but the rules did not mention socialising at work.
And there was an exemption if "the gathering is reasonably necessary for the purposes of campaigning in an election".
Bars, pubs and restaurants were allowed to open outdoors for groups of six people or two households, but indoor service was not allowed.
The question for police was whether Labour officials eating and drinking together was "reasonably necessary for work".
I'm sorry, he broke the rules and took the p1ss. Lets have some parity here!?0 -
-
What's that got to do with whether he flouted the rules or not?rick_chasey said:Starmer is literally a knighted lawyer. His issue is not bare faced lying or rule breaking.
0 -
Generally lawyers who break rules don’t stay lawyers for very long.focuszing723 said:
What's that got to do with whether he flouted the rules or not?rick_chasey said:Starmer is literally a knighted lawyer. His issue is not bare faced lying or rule breaking.
0 -
If the vast majority of the ordinary public were caught in similar circumstances he they would have been fined. Chr1st, when it was fully lockdown a couple at on a park bench could be fined.
It's tantamount the same arrogance to me, you have to be equally critical of both parties, whilst you're just the bloody same.
0 -
Consider the sentence: "if I am found to have ever won the tour de france, I will eat a whole lemon."
There's no lie, not even a hint of a lie, but I am not considering myself at risk of having to eat the lemon.0 -
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
No, they wouldn't havefocuszing723 said:If the vast majority of the ordinary public were caught in similar circumstances he they would have been fined.
But it wasnt so...focuszing723 said:
Chr1st, when it was fully lockdown a couple at on a park bench could be fined.
(Feel it might be prudent to ask forumites to check out several of my anti-Kier posts before replying here...)We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
The way it has been made out is that there's a equivalence between Johnson’s birthday cake and Starmer's beer and that's all the relevant events.
It's a joke.
Johnson and Sunak were really unlucky to get fined for that specific event, but Downing Street being party central throughout the pandemic seems relevant.0 -
NO, don't want to.pangolin said:
Perhaps you're all letting it go because it's not relevant to your political stance. I bet half of you pot head horse eaters wouldn't even frequent Cakestop if the Lib/Lab's were in power.0 -
Anyway, it's ott. I know I'm right, so I don't know why I'm trying to argue my obvious rightness.0
