Stop voting for fucking Tories

[fishfoodie]

That assumes he created these positions as an honest reflection of how he wanted to run the country. Which he did not, he created these positions to win the labour leadership, and then changed course to positions he thinks will win over the country. Which is fine politicking, but it's lying. And it's why people are right to say all politicians lie.

Name me a Politician who presented an accurate vision of their plans, got selected to lead their Party, & got elected by the populace, & then implemented it, all without changing the vision !

Bet you can't !

Starmer inherited a party still populated by the Corbynites, so either soft soaped them, or was guaranteed infighting & turmoil for his entire Leadership. If he wants's to win back the red wall, he can't just point out to the former Labour voters that they were fucking thick racists to believe the Tories about Brexit & immigration, so he has to be vague about what he'll do to reverse the damage of Brexit, without explicitly saying the decision was wrong.

Similarly he knows the Tories use zenophobia & racism to blame immigration for a lack of services, that's actually caused by years of underfunding & underinvestment, prticularly in Labour areas; but how does he honestly explain this to the people he wants to vote for him ?

Add to that the reality of an economy on its knees, & new financial timebombs cropping up on a weekly basis, & any Political party that isn't changing its economic policies are the ones who are Lying, not the ones who made a promise, then looked at the new projections, & modified the promise.

[I like neeps]

That assumes he created these positions as an honest reflection of how he wanted to run the country. Which he did not, he created these positions to win the labour leadership, and then changed course to positions he thinks will win over the country. Which is fine politicking, but it's lying. And it's why people are right to say all politicians lie.

Name me a Politician who presented an accurate vision of their plans, got selected to lead their Party, & got elected by the populace, & then implemented it, all without changing the vision !

Bet you can't !

Starmer inherited a party still populated by the Corbynites, so either soft soaped them, or was guaranteed infighting & turmoil for his entire Leadership. If he wants's to win back the red wall, he can't just point out to the former Labour voters that they were fucking thick racists to believe the Tories about Brexit & immigration, so he has to be vague about what he'll do to reverse the damage of Brexit, without explicitly saying the decision was wrong.

Similarly he knows the Tories use zenophobia & racism to blame immigration for a lack of services, that's actually caused by years of underfunding & underinvestment, prticularly in Labour areas; but how does he honestly explain this to the people he wants to vote for him ?

Add to that the reality of an economy on its knees, & new financial timebombs cropping up on a weekly basis, & any Political party that isn't changing its economic policies are the ones who are Lying, not the ones who made a promise, then looked at the new projections, & modified the promise.

Yes thank you for agreeing with my original point. All politicians lie. That is literally what I said to dpedin that started this off.

You get clowns like Johnson because rightfully we can't trust any of them anyway.

[tabascoboy]

Ultimately everyone lies even if only very rarely and with good intentions, even young children lie. It's the size of the lie and how much it is to the disadvantage or detriment of those lied to, or an attempt to hide unlawful acts, or for personal gain at the expense of others or a combination of all those that hurts us most.

I expect all politicians to lie even if only because it's human nature but persistent deliberate deceit as a character trait should be rooted out long before a politician gets to a position of representing constituents or an electorate - in an ideal world...which this isn't.

In the case of changing or ignoring manifesto pledges, I recognise that unexpected events outside their immediate control mean things sometimes have to be "flexible". It's certainly not unreasonable to demand a thorough and adequate explanation, and not be fobbed off with evasiveness or being talked down to by "those who know better".

[Simian]

For me, there’s an important distinction between ‘white’ lies told to get you and your party into the positions you need to be to enact the type of societal changes you genuinely believe are needed and lying simply to win, obtain status for the sake of it, maintain the status quo, and avoid any consequences of previous wrongdoing.

[fishfoodie]

That assumes he created these positions as an honest reflection of how he wanted to run the country. Which he did not, he created these positions to win the labour leadership, and then changed course to positions he thinks will win over the country. Which is fine politicking, but it's lying. And it's why people are right to say all politicians lie.

Name me a Politician who presented an accurate vision of their plans, got selected to lead their Party, & got elected by the populace, & then implemented it, all without changing the vision !

Bet you can't !

Starmer inherited a party still populated by the Corbynites, so either soft soaped them, or was guaranteed infighting & turmoil for his entire Leadership. If he wants's to win back the red wall, he can't just point out to the former Labour voters that they were fucking thick racists to believe the Tories about Brexit & immigration, so he has to be vague about what he'll do to reverse the damage of Brexit, without explicitly saying the decision was wrong.

Similarly he knows the Tories use zenophobia & racism to blame immigration for a lack of services, that's actually caused by years of underfunding & underinvestment, prticularly in Labour areas; but how does he honestly explain this to the people he wants to vote for him ?

Add to that the reality of an economy on its knees, & new financial timebombs cropping up on a weekly basis, & any Political party that isn't changing its economic policies are the ones who are Lying, not the ones who made a promise, then looked at the new projections, & modified the promise.

Yes thank you for agreeing with my original point. All politicians lie. That is literally what I said to dpedin that started this off.

You get clowns like Johnson because rightfully we can't trust any of them anyway.

You get clowns like Disgraced Confirmed Liar Johnson, because your electorate preferred the bare faced lies he told, to the inconvenient truths that the other Parties told them. They did this despite him being a well known liar for decades.

If Electorates were smart enough to accept the truth, & not have to have reality sugar coated for them, then perhaps they would get Politicians who were more honest with them, when even the best still feel the need to dissemble

[I like neeps]

Name me a Politician who presented an accurate vision of their plans, got selected to lead their Party, & got elected by the populace, & then implemented it, all without changing the vision !

Bet you can't !

Starmer inherited a party still populated by the Corbynites, so either soft soaped them, or was guaranteed infighting & turmoil for his entire Leadership. If he wants's to win back the red wall, he can't just point out to the former Labour voters that they were fucking thick racists to believe the Tories about Brexit & immigration, so he has to be vague about what he'll do to reverse the damage of Brexit, without explicitly saying the decision was wrong.

Similarly he knows the Tories use zenophobia & racism to blame immigration for a lack of services, that's actually caused by years of underfunding & underinvestment, prticularly in Labour areas; but how does he honestly explain this to the people he wants to vote for him ?

Add to that the reality of an economy on its knees, & new financial timebombs cropping up on a weekly basis, & any Political party that isn't changing its economic policies are the ones who are Lying, not the ones who made a promise, then looked at the new projections, & modified the promise.

Yes thank you for agreeing with my original point. All politicians lie. That is literally what I said to dpedin that started this off.

You get clowns like Johnson because rightfully we can't trust any of them anyway.

You get clowns like Disgraced Confirmed Liar Johnson, because your electorate preferred the bare faced lies he told, to the inconvenient truths that the other Parties told them. They did this despite him being a well known liar for decades.

If Electorates were smart enough to accept the truth, & not have to have reality sugar coated for them, then perhaps they would get Politicians who were more honest with them, when even the best still feel the need to dissemble

Would be easier to "accept the truth" if you have honest politicians who told it. Let's go from 2008 - Brexit referendum. You have Brown (I think he's fairly honest but he was in too deep with Blair and the Iraq war lies etc that really did have people lose a lot of faith and there's clear examples of his lying e.g. that woman was a bigot, accept it), Miliband (took a lot of policy positions on austerity that he clearly didn't believe in), Corbyn (everyone knew he was a leaver really), Farage, Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg et al - which truth teller are we taking there? And then you have the other reason there's so many liars in politics - the press who never told a truth in that time either.

The only two around that time I'd say we're honest would class Ruth Davidson as an honest politician but she didn't have a national profile or any real influence. Maybe I'd have said Sturgeon, maybe, but I'll await the outcome of the ongoing shenanigans.

[tabascoboy]

You get clowns like Disgraced Confirmed Liar Johnson, because your electorate preferred the bare faced lies he told, to the inconvenient truths that the other Parties told them. They did this despite him being a well known liar for decades.

If Electorates were smart enough to accept the truth, & not have to have reality sugar coated for them, then perhaps they would get Politicians who were more honest with them, when even the best still feel the need to dissemble

Welcome to the Post-Truth world of Trump and friends!

[fishfoodie]

Yes thank you for agreeing with my original point. All politicians lie. That is literally what I said to dpedin that started this off.

You get clowns like Johnson because rightfully we can't trust any of them anyway.

You get clowns like Disgraced Confirmed Liar Johnson, because your electorate preferred the bare faced lies he told, to the inconvenient truths that the other Parties told them. They did this despite him being a well known liar for decades.

If Electorates were smart enough to accept the truth, & not have to have reality sugar coated for them, then perhaps they would get Politicians who were more honest with them, when even the best still feel the need to dissemble

Would be easier to "accept the truth" if you have honest politicians who told it. Let's go from 2008 - Brexit referendum. You have Brown (I think he's fairly honest but he was in too deep with Blair and the Iraq war lies etc that really did have people lose a lot of faith and there's clear examples of his lying e.g. that woman was a bigot, accept it), Miliband (took a lot of policy positions on austerity that he clearly didn't believe in), Corbyn (everyone knew he was a leaver really), Farage, Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg et al - which truth teller are we taking there? And then you have the other reason there's so many liars in politics - the press who never told a truth in that time either.

The only two around that time I'd say we're honest would class Ruth Davidson as an honest politician but she didn't have a national profile or any real influence. Maybe I'd have said Sturgeon, maybe, but I'll await the outcome of the ongoing shenanigans.

Would you say Sturgeon is honest about the Economics of an Independent Scotland, or is she sugar coating it, so she can get her core policy, but doesn't trust the electorate with the absolute truth ?

[tabascoboy]

Well the opposite tactic I guess, where you tell people they have to swallow a triple layer shit sandwich in the hope that they are happy when what they get is only a single layer shit sandwich hasn't worked to well either I suppose

[I like neeps]

You get clowns like Disgraced Confirmed Liar Johnson, because your electorate preferred the bare faced lies he told, to the inconvenient truths that the other Parties told them. They did this despite him being a well known liar for decades.

If Electorates were smart enough to accept the truth, & not have to have reality sugar coated for them, then perhaps they would get Politicians who were more honest with them, when even the best still feel the need to dissemble

Would be easier to "accept the truth" if you have honest politicians who told it. Let's go from 2008 - Brexit referendum. You have Brown (I think he's fairly honest but he was in too deep with Blair and the Iraq war lies etc that really did have people lose a lot of faith and there's clear examples of his lying e.g. that woman was a bigot, accept it), Miliband (took a lot of policy positions on austerity that he clearly didn't believe in), Corbyn (everyone knew he was a leaver really), Farage, Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg et al - which truth teller are we taking there? And then you have the other reason there's so many liars in politics - the press who never told a truth in that time either.

The only two around that time I'd say we're honest would class Ruth Davidson as an honest politician but she didn't have a national profile or any real influence. Maybe I'd have said Sturgeon, maybe, but I'll await the outcome of the ongoing shenanigans.

Would you say Sturgeon is honest about the Economics of an Independent Scotland, or is she sugar coating it, so she can get her core policy, but doesn't trust the electorate with the absolute truth ?

No I wouldn't say that tbf yeah scratch her off. There you go, who should the electorate trust to tell them these hard truths.

I guess you had Rory Stewart too but it's few and fair.

[I like neeps]

For me, there’s an important distinction between ‘white’ lies told to get you and your party into the positions you need to be to enact the type of societal changes you genuinely believe are needed and lying simply to win, obtain status for the sake of it, maintain the status quo, and avoid any consequences of previous wrongdoing.

Okay but that's not how democracy should work. I'm going to tell you what you want to hear so you vote for me then I'm going to make massive changes you didn't agree to because you voted for me on the understanding that I do something else. If that's how people behave (and I think you're right that it is e.g. Johnson's Tory leadership Vs prime minister and Starmer labour leadership Vs labour leader) then I think I'm right people should not trust them.

[fishfoodie]

Would be easier to "accept the truth" if you have honest politicians who told it. Let's go from 2008 - Brexit referendum. You have Brown (I think he's fairly honest but he was in too deep with Blair and the Iraq war lies etc that really did have people lose a lot of faith and there's clear examples of his lying e.g. that woman was a bigot, accept it), Miliband (took a lot of policy positions on austerity that he clearly didn't believe in), Corbyn (everyone knew he was a leaver really), Farage, Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg et al - which truth teller are we taking there? And then you have the other reason there's so many liars in politics - the press who never told a truth in that time either.

The only two around that time I'd say we're honest would class Ruth Davidson as an honest politician but she didn't have a national profile or any real influence. Maybe I'd have said Sturgeon, maybe, but I'll await the outcome of the ongoing shenanigans.

Would you say Sturgeon is honest about the Economics of an Independent Scotland, or is she sugar coating it, so she can get her core policy, but doesn't trust the electorate with the absolute truth ?

No I wouldn't say that tbf yeah scratch her off. There you go, who should the electorate trust to tell them these hard truths.

I guess you had Rory Stewart too but it's few and fair.

I'd take Davidson off too, because while I like her, she for me is guilty of supreme hypocrisy by being gay, & a member of a political party whose defining characteristic for the last few decades is crusades against minorities.

[Simian]

For me, there’s an important distinction between ‘white’ lies told to get you and your party into the positions you need to be to enact the type of societal changes you genuinely believe are needed and lying simply to win, obtain status for the sake of it, maintain the status quo, and avoid any consequences of previous wrongdoing.

Okay but that's not how democracy should work. I'm going to tell you what you want to hear so you vote for me then I'm going to make massive changes you didn't agree to because you voted for me on the understanding that I do something else. If that's how people behave (and I think you're right that it is e.g. Johnson's Tory leadership Vs prime minister and Starmer labour leadership Vs labour leader) then I think I'm right people should not trust them.

I completely agree that it’s not how it should work and I also agree that people should be wary of politicians for precisely this reason. My point is really that there is one of these types that people should be warier of than others and that the democratic system in most places is sort of set up to cope with one of those ‘types’ (the ones motivated by a genuine desire to deliver what they believe is the right course of action for the country) but extremely ill equipped to cope with those who are simply acting in bad faith and motivated by the desire to win power etc.

[GogLais]

Pitching yourself as something to win one election, and then pitching yourself as something else to win a different election is lying. This is not complicated.

Not by any recognised definition of lying. Inconsistent? Maybe.

Eh saying things that you don't mean to further your goal is the very definition of lying?

For example: https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2021/09/ ... alisation/ what on earth is this but a lie?

I’m not saying that politicians should be exempt from charges of lying and I’m sure you can find examples of that. Equally I accept that in the interests of party discipline they have to support policies they don’t agree with and tailor their policies to changing circumstances. Anyway, we all lie sometimes.

[GogLais]

Would you say Sturgeon is honest about the Economics of an Independent Scotland, or is she sugar coating it, so she can get her core policy, but doesn't trust the electorate with the absolute truth ?

No I wouldn't say that tbf yeah scratch her off. There you go, who should the electorate trust to tell them these hard truths.

I guess you had Rory Stewart too but it's few and fair.

I'd take Davidson off too, because while I like her, she for me is guilty of supreme hypocrisy by being gay, & a member of a political party whose defining characteristic for the last few decades is crusades against minorities.

Well yes but what if she agrees with everything else about Conservatism?

[fishfoodie]

No I wouldn't say that tbf yeah scratch her off. There you go, who should the electorate trust to tell them these hard truths.

I guess you had Rory Stewart too but it's few and fair.

I'd take Davidson off too, because while I like her, she for me is guilty of supreme hypocrisy by being gay, & a member of a political party whose defining characteristic for the last few decades is crusades against minorities.

Well yes but what if she agrees with everything else about Conservatism?

I think she needed to resign from the leadership, move to the back benches, & loudly let everyone know why you'd done so.

Become a massive pain to the leadership until they reform.

[GogLais]

I'd take Davidson off too, because while I like her, she for me is guilty of supreme hypocrisy by being gay, & a member of a political party whose defining characteristic for the last few decades is crusades against minorities.

Well yes but what if she agrees with everything else about Conservatism?

I think she needed to resign from the leadership, move to the back benches, & loudly let everyone know why you'd done so.

Become a massive pain to the leadership until they reform.

Are you saying she should have worked her way up to the leadership and then resigned on the principle once she got it?

[JM2K6]

Pitching yourself as something to win one election, and then pitching yourself as something else to win a different election is lying. This is not complicated.

Not by any recognised definition of lying. Inconsistent? Maybe.

Eh saying things that you don't mean to further your goal is the very definition of lying?

For example: https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2021/09/ ... alisation/ what on earth is this but a lie?

Are we really a) using a site somehow worse than Skwakbox to help with our definitions over what lying is, angering the very gods of irony themselves, and b) still arguing over why Starmer back tracked on pledges made prior to a fucking pandemic and Tory ransacking of the economy?

I guess the Corbynites really are obsessed with the leadership pledges because talking a good game is all Corbyn was ever in a position to do. Easy to make and stick to promises if there's no way you're actually ever going to be able to enact them. The good news is that all the people upset that Labour are led by someone who no longer stands by every pledge made four years ago or whatever it was will actually be able to decide for themselves which party to vote for to enact the things they want to see enacted.

Boris repeatedly says stuff he knows is not even close to true as his default approach. There is no evidence that Starmer does this, and same goes for a number of politicians, the recent Tory crop excepted. It betrays a fundamental ignorance of what's actually happened in the UK and USA over the last 5-10 years to think otherwise.

[fishfoodie]

Well yes but what if she agrees with everything else about Conservatism?

I think she needed to resign from the leadership, move to the back benches, & loudly let everyone know why you'd done so.

Become a massive pain to the leadership until they reform.

Are you saying she should have worked her way up to the leadership and then resigned on the principle once she got it?

I don't know how the hell she ended up in a Party which has so many homophobes, if I were feeling charitable, I'd suggest that maybe she entertained the idea she could change the Party, if uncharitable, I'd say she just focused on climbing the greasy pole, & ignored the stench.

[Tichtheid]

I don't know how the hell she ended up in a Party which has so many homophones,

Aye, they all sound the same these bigoted Tories


Soz, it was an open goal, I only tapped it in.

[fishfoodie]

I don't know how the hell she ended up in a Party which has so many homophones,

Aye, they all sound the same these bigoted Tories


Soz, it was an open goal, I only tapped it in.

[tabascoboy]

Another one goes, though jumping before probably being pushed

David Warburton quits as MP, triggering another by-election

A Conservative MP who was suspended following allegations of sexual misconduct has resigned.

David Warburton, who represents Somerton and Frome in Somerset, is the fourth MP in eight days to announce their resignation.

Mr Warburton said the past 14 months since allegations were published in a national newspaper had been "extraordinarily difficult".

He added that the allegations about him had been "malicious".

The MP had been accused of taking drugs and making unwanted advances towards two women,after they and another woman spoke to the Sunday Times about his conduct. That led to his suspension from the Conservative Party in April last year.

He announced his resignation in an interview with the Mail On Sunday in which the paper reports him as admitting to taking cocaine after drinking "incredibly potent" Japanese whisky.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65941710

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And although not a new revelation,

Video emerges of Tory staff partying during Covid

A video has emerged showing some Conservative Party workers drinking and dancing at a Christmas party during the Covid pandemic.

In the video, published by the Mirror, one person is heard saying it is OK to film "as long as we don't stream that we're, like, bending the rules".

The paper says the video sheds new light on a gathering that police had previously looked into.

The Conservatives said disciplinary action had already been taken.

The video, taken at the Conservative party's headquarters in Westminster, dates from December 2020 when London was in Tier 2 restrictions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65941549

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I think she needed to resign from the leadership, move to the back benches, & loudly let everyone know why you'd done so.

Become a massive pain to the leadership until they reform.

Are you saying she should have worked her way up to the leadership and then resigned on the principle once she got it?

I don't know how the hell she ended up in a Party which has so many homophobes, if I were feeling charitable, I'd suggest that maybe she entertained the idea she could change the Party, if uncharitable, I'd say she just focused on climbing the greasy pole, & ignored the stench.

Any time you coalesce a number of people you're going to have some shits in the group. There's no shortage whatsoever of homophobia in Labour either, frankly there's no shortage in the Lib Dems, I've never been to Green Party conference but maybe there too

If she believes in lower taxation, smaller government and that's what drives her political ideology then fine, I don't see why her life and/or politics needs to be defined by being gay, even before she may think joining a group is a good way to effect change anyway

[GogLais]

Anyway, as far as I’m aware the position of gays is no worse under the Tories than it was under Labour, in fact same-sex marriage came in under Cameron didn’t it? Unless we’re going back 40 years to Clause 28.

[sockwithaticket]

Anyway, as far as I’m aware the position of gays is no worse under the Tories than it was under Labour, in fact same-sex marriage came in under Cameron didn’t it? Unless we’re going back 40 years to Clause 28.

More Tories voted against that bill than for it. Tory MPs voted 139 nay to 132 yay plus 75 abstentions.

I don't the party an awful lot of credit for that one, although Cameron does get some for bringing it to parliament in the first place.

[dpedin]

Anyway ... Tories have had a shockingly bad week, again, even by their own miserably low standard! Johnson Privileges Committee report was bad enough but his behaviour after receiving the report was dreadful! Apparently the Committee sent the report to him which he was allowed to read under condition that he did not disclose its contents and that the Civil Servant who took it to him was not allowed to let the report out of his/her sight. No copies were allowed and his comments re accuracy etc were requested. Within hours he had broken these rules and started his campaign to rubbish the report and the Committee. This was in clear breach of the HoC rules hence the increased punishment. His diminishingly few mates in the HoC began a concerted effort to rubbish the Committee, the HoC and the Tory Party. His Resignation Honours List is a who's who of Blonde bumblecunts crooked mates. He then behaves like a spoiled child who covered in chocolate denies having raided the cookie jar and immediately breaks ACOBA rules by not seeking approval to take on the Daily Heil columnist job and produces a pile of AI generated shite about losing weight as his first effort! Finally the video of the CCHQ party in December 2020 breaks and show the complete distain the they had for Covid rules and the public. Worse is that 2 of those on his honours list are implicated in the episode. Now we have Gove saying it has been dealt with and look over there! Keegan is refusing to release the Pay Review Body report on Teachers pay recommendations until after end of term. The Tories also continue to fight the Covid Enquiry and refuse to release WhatsApp messages to the independent judge it itself appointed. Meanwhile the Tory MP who sexually abused women and snorted coke has now resigned to force another by-election, whereas the deluded Nadine is refusing to go quietly until she gets her Damehood and is demanding info on the process that she has no legal right to access. It just goes on and on and where is the Eton Head Boy who is supposed to be providing leadership on all of this? Shitting himself because he is also implicated in the incredibly awful covid reponse, huge covid fraud, the financial mess we are in, the PPE debacle, the collapsing economy, Covid Partygate, etc. He is up to his neck, which to be fair is not very high, in all of the above!

How anyone can vote for, support or even excuse this pile of steaming turds is just barmy! Even the most committed Tories must want to see the end of this shitshow?

Breakfast eaten, rant over, off to play golf now!

[GogLais]

Anyway, as far as I’m aware the position of gays is no worse under the Tories than it was under Labour, in fact same-sex marriage came in under Cameron didn’t it? Unless we’re going back 40 years to Clause 28.

More Tories voted against that bill than for it. Tory MPs voted 139 nay to 132 yay plus 75 abstentions.

I don't the party an awful lot of credit for that one, although Cameron does get some for bringing it to parliament in the first place.

Fair enough, I didn’t remember the voting figures.

[fishfoodie]

Breakfast eaten, rant over, off to play golf now!

Watch out for lightening, it's dangerous out there the last few days !

I can't help wonder if the latest resignation wasn't encouraged by Team Oaf ?

They know that Rishi, technically can't be challenged in his first year, but the Oaf got ousted, not just because of a stream of scandals, but because those scandals made them getting re-elected less, & less likely, & the By-Election losses in the safest of seats showed that the polls weren't lying.

Now RIshi is going to have a series of iffy votes before the Party Conference, & a bunch of malcontent shits lobbying against him.

[Tichtheid]

David Cameron was PM when same sex marriage became lawful, yeah, why does no one talk about Lynne Featherstone, Lib Dem, who was the architect of the bill?

The Tories elected Boris "tank-topped bum boys"* Johnson as their leader, they have carried out a war on woke as their main strategy because they have such an appalling record on everything in government over the last 13 years.
They even do this from the dispatch box.

Fuck them, they are no friends of LBGT+ people


*in case anyone has forgotten, Johnson wrote that remark in wake of Peter Mandelson's resignation.

[C69]

So Gove is going to abstain the the vote tomorrow.
Sunak may be having a state visit with someone.

The new Party video is going to reignite the fire.

Pretty bad week for the Tories with 4 by elections coming up.
The really does feel like the end of the Tories reign of incompetence.

Mortgages, energy and food prices are going to destro so many people.

It's going to get very very messy.

[tabascoboy]

If they still insist proceeding with the shameful shit that is the Resignation Honours List, can we at least rename it to something more appropriate like 'Roll of the most Useless Tossers" and replace the medals with a dog turd

[I like neeps]

Not by any recognised definition of lying. Inconsistent? Maybe.

Eh saying things that you don't mean to further your goal is the very definition of lying?

For example: https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2021/09/ ... alisation/ what on earth is this but a lie?

Are we really a) using a site somehow worse than Skwakbox to help with our definitions over what lying is, angering the very gods of irony themselves, and b) still arguing over why Starmer back tracked on pledges made prior to a fucking pandemic and Tory ransacking of the economy?

I guess the Corbynites really are obsessed with the leadership pledges because talking a good game is all Corbyn was ever in a position to do. Easy to make and stick to promises if there's no way you're actually ever going to be able to enact them. The good news is that all the people upset that Labour are led by someone who no longer stands by every pledge made four years ago or whatever it was will actually be able to decide for themselves which party to vote for to enact the things they want to see enacted.

Boris repeatedly says stuff he knows is not even close to true as his default approach. There is no evidence that Starmer does this, and same goes for a number of politicians, the recent Tory crop excepted. It betrays a fundamental ignorance of what's actually happened in the UK and USA over the last 5-10 years to think otherwise.

It's literally Andrew Marr on the BBC questioning him my guy.

You're the one comparing Johnson and Starmer. I said all politicians lie, so politicians like Johnson get away with it. Starmer lied to the labour membership to become leader, and now he magically has a lot of new policies that aren't even close to what he "pledged". That's a liar. I get that it's politicking and you agree with the strategy. But you're agreeing with a fundamentally dishonest strategy.

[JM2K6]

Eh saying things that you don't mean to further your goal is the very definition of lying?

For example: https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2021/09/ ... alisation/ what on earth is this but a lie?

Are we really a) using a site somehow worse than Skwakbox to help with our definitions over what lying is, angering the very gods of irony themselves, and b) still arguing over why Starmer back tracked on pledges made prior to a fucking pandemic and Tory ransacking of the economy?

I guess the Corbynites really are obsessed with the leadership pledges because talking a good game is all Corbyn was ever in a position to do. Easy to make and stick to promises if there's no way you're actually ever going to be able to enact them. The good news is that all the people upset that Labour are led by someone who no longer stands by every pledge made four years ago or whatever it was will actually be able to decide for themselves which party to vote for to enact the things they want to see enacted.

Boris repeatedly says stuff he knows is not even close to true as his default approach. There is no evidence that Starmer does this, and same goes for a number of politicians, the recent Tory crop excepted. It betrays a fundamental ignorance of what's actually happened in the UK and USA over the last 5-10 years to think otherwise.

It's literally Andrew Marr on the BBC questioning him my guy.

You're the one comparing Johnson and Starmer. I said all politicians lie, so politicians like Johnson get away with it. Starmer lied to the labour membership to become leader, and now he magically has a lot of new policies that aren't even close to what he "pledged". That's a liar. I get that it's politicking and you agree with the strategy. But you're agreeing with a fundamentally dishonest strategy.

It's not Marr calling him a liar or saying he lied to get the leadership, my guy.

Again, you don't seem to understand what the difference is or even what this debate is about. I get it, you're terminally bitter about Corbyn and loathe Starmer. But there is zero evidence that Starmer lied to the membership to win the race. Pledges made years ago not surviving contact with Covid and a rapacious Tory government is not the same thing as lying about them in the first place.

And, to point out the obvious, they are pledges about what Labour would do if they won an election. Bearing in mind that the Labour leader has to actually lead the party first and then win an election years into the future, there's a big gap between "what I would do if we won an election in the current environment" and "what I am going to do as leader". You vote for an opposition party leader over how they're going to lead the party, not what they might campaign on in four years time.

Being tied down to pledges made in an entirely different scenario is just daft. If he'd won the election without changing his mind on these and then said he wasn't going to do X, then you could claim it was a lie.

It's breathtakingly naive to stamp your feet about pledges changing and claiming they were just lies. Immensely childish stuff.

[dpedin]

Breakfast eaten, rant over, off to play golf now!

Watch out for lightening, it's dangerous out there the last few days !

I can't help wonder if the latest resignation wasn't encouraged by Team Oaf ?

They know that Rishi, technically can't be challenged in his first year, but the Oaf got ousted, not just because of a stream of scandals, but because those scandals made them getting re-elected less, & less likely, & the By-Election losses in the safest of seats showed that the polls weren't lying.

Now RIshi is going to have a series of iffy votes before the Party Conference, & a bunch of malcontent shits lobbying against him.

Lightening forecast for tonight in Embra. Shitty game of golf with an 8 at par 5 and 6 at par 3 ruining my card, however I have my fathers day dinner to look forward to now.

Rishi is now captain of a slowly sinking ship but with no rescue in sight, miles from land and the crew becoming increasingly mutinous. It is beyond the point of saving and it is all about when will it reach the final tipping point and go under completely. He knows his days are now numbered and his decision is either go all in soon on an early GE and go down fighting or hang on as long as possible hoping for some good news but inevitably losing the GE in Autumn 2024. Hanging on will just mean death by a thousand cuts with internal sabotage by the mad bad Boris bunch, bad news from the emerging bad news from Covid Enquiry, continued shite in rivers and beaches, dire economic performance driven by a large number of mortgage defaults and possible housing market collapse. This coming winter will be awful for them economically, politically and within the party. They also have the forthcoming imposition of import checks and tariffs for goods and services from the EU at the end of this year which will drive up shortages and inflation further.

I honestly don't see the point in the Head Boy hanging onto the end of term and I would have thought the best advice would be to go for an early GE in Autumn, fight a good fight, retreat to regroup post the Blonde Bumbelcunt and start blaming Labour for all the shite they have created over the last 13 years, not least by shooting themselves in both feet with Brexit. It would however mean Sunak having to fight to keep the leadership but he must realise by now that the Party members dont want him and he will be gone s soon as they can get rid of him so he would be better off going down fighting, resigning gracefully after a GE defeat and then retreating to California with his Green Card and his mega rich wife and live the life he really wants in high tech for whatever. He really should call all their bluffs - the Anderson, JRM, Gullit, Clark, Fabricant, Benton et al - and watch from his large mansion as they all lose their seats, their MP salary and large expense accounts and have to sign on and disappear into the political void.

[tabascoboy]

Sunak's response when asked if he will vote on the Privileges Committee Report today:

A You're right to ask and I can today confirm that while I've used a slide rule and a calculator it's not for me to judge on which maths aid is superior. Thank you!

[sturginho]

Sunak's response when asked if he will vote on the Privileges Committee Report today:

A You're right to ask and I can today confirm that while I've used a slide rule and a calculator it's not for me to judge on which maths aid is superior. Thank you!

he has "commitments he cannot move"


in a fridge

[SaintK]

Nothing to do with us.........honest!!
I'd forgotten what an entitled, chinless wonder this twat is.

[Tichtheid]

Nothing to do with us.........honest!!
I'd forgotten what an entitled, chinless wonder this twat is.

How spending cuts have decimated public services since 2010, from libraries to youth clubs
https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/ ... remy-hunt/

Tory austerity ‘has cost UK half a trillion pounds of public spending since 2010
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... since-2010

[SaintK]

Awww. Poor little Lizzie didn't like the joke

[fishfoodie]

Awww. Poor little Lizzie didn't like the joke

On the whole I think the lettuce has the greater grounds for being upset at the comparison.