Anything Political


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Cliff Ton said:

 

I agree. My problem is that I'm very uncommitted politically. I can see good and bad in both sides of most arguments.

 

I totally can't understand people who say "I always vote Labour, or I always vote Conservative". That to me is the worst kind of non-thinking. 

 

I think I can see your first point Kev, in that even I do not condemn everything the Tories do.  I do however have great issue with their general principles, and their obvious 'direction of travel'.

 

On your second point.. my position is simple, and 'non thinking' definitely doesn't figure. I have studied politics, and my own principles, for long enough to know that Labour still most closely align to the policies and principles which I believe are most likely to deliver the sort of society I wish to live in.  If that ever changes.. so will my vote.  I cannot forsee any time in the near future when I am likely to be satisfied with, much less enthusiastic about, the Conservative party.

 

I think you said a bit earlier that some posts had you losing the will to live..  Obviously you don't mean mine..:rolleyes: but the thing is that Politics is not a subject that can be discussed in any meaningful way via slogans.  The issues and the choices are complex.  Sloganisers seek to reduce things to soundbytes.which may grab votes in the short term.. but solve nothing in the long term.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

HSR: Col is given a 'free rein to spout his opinions' for exactly the reasons you are, only he does so with more civility.   Recently there have been a couple of attacks on the validity of t

True enough but none quite so 'in your face' or as blatant. To paraphrase Mone "I didn't lie to hide the the fact we're making £60 million and hiding it in a trust, it was to to protect my family

Why do you feel the need to influence others? What is your motivation for so doing? Is it because you think you know better than they? Is it because it feeds your ego if and when you succeed?  Is it b

52 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Politics is not a subject that can be discussed in any meaningful way via slogans. 

Don't know about political slogans in the UK but our pollies love three or four word slogans. They use these because they say that is all that the electors can remember. They then use them over and over again until on hearing them the electors want to vomit, they know then that they are getting the message through.

Some Liberal (Conservative) slogans, "Jobs and Growth" "Choose real Change" "Stop the boats"

Some Labor slogans "A new way" "Australia deserves better" "We'll put people first"

The Greens "A future for all of us"

Not forgetting the best of all time when back in 1977 Don Chipp leader of the Democrats coined "Keep the bastards honest" which gained the party the balance of power in the Senate (The Upper House). I think this is still relevant today.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

He's been married three times.  Johnson is known to have had many many affairs, which in itself is not something I get all moralistic about.. but these have occurred whist he has been married and in the case of Ms Accuri, whilst he was in public office and sorting out Govt. cash for her.

But you can't defend him by saying 'well the other chap is worse'

 

I'm not getting bent of shape about his love life to be honest. Johnson is hardly 'loves young dream' so his lady friends knew what they were getting into. 

 

29 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

My first response to that is to say that sympathy for causes does not imply sympathy for methods.

 

Understandable had he said when making a speeches at these meetings, 'I'll support your cause if you give up the violence', but he didn't. It seems to me he made no conditions or caveats. Denying he had ever met with the IRA was a lie and an easily proven one at that. I'm not talking about Sinn Fein meetings.

Perhaps he suffers from selective memory loss. The government admitted they had dealings with the IRA leadership so why continue to deny it?

I fail to understand anyone  who wants a united Ireland simply because  both sides occupy the same bit of rock and a distorted sense of history.

IF the people of Ulster decide for themselves, then fine, other wise no.

You are quite right I confused the Anglo-Irish agreement ...

 

If  we are taking the history into account then perhaps Canada. New Zealand, Australia and the US should be handed back. Maybe Alaska back to Russia or even further back Spain claimed the territory. 

 

Hamas and Hezbollah have not, as far as I know, threatened the UK but who they threaten is not a prerequisite for establishing  their credentials as terrorists. Showing his ability to switch and change he now says that he regrets calling the people (Hamas) who  financed his trip, a series of three to the middle east, 'friends'.

They would hardly pay for Corbyn and his wife to have a freebie jaunt if they thought he was an enemy. He was even reported to the Parliamentary Ethics Committee.

As for the Palestine conflict again applying historical data Israel existed hundreds of years before the tribes of Palestine came along, so who has a legitimate claim?

 

35 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

 As you well know, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter

 

The difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is in the name. One uses terror tactics on innocents whilst  the other does not deliberately target women and children.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

I can't comment.. having seen none of this stuff.

 

I'm amazed!

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

Also, it was not a lie about the economy, or employment etc.

 

 

I didn't say it was but, when is something not true a lie? He said the highest ever, you say he meant the highest for a long time. Is this a nuance, or a lie?

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

'Boasted' ?  Really?.. or just 'said'?   Any way, it's true he attended North London Poly.. but it doesn't automatically follow that the course he pursued was a HE course.  Info is sketchy.

 

There seems little to no reason the mention it unless it was to make a point, something he is proud of, i.e.  boasting. The course could be cake decorating for all I care but. he denied attending 'any' further education and it's simply not true.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

He is so fundamentally human that he tries far too hard to please all of the people all of the time.

 

And we all know how successful a policy of appeasement was ...

He may be temporary at the moment but I believe and his Momentum cohorts are planning a more permanent position, They have made a start by weeding out moderates who may oppose him.

 

By the way I'm please the hospital doodah went OK   thumbsup  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oztalgian said:

They use these because they say that is all that the electors can remember.

 

It's perfectly true Ozt, Joe Public has the attention span of a goldfish. Advert copy writers know this and strive for a snappy by line that conveys the message but is easily remembered.  

£350 million for the NHS

Leave means leave

Get Brexit done 

For the many not the few ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brew, DJ360, 

Is it a given that the views on Brexit which is a one-off issue will likely decide the outcome of the election?

Here in OZ our mainstream media doesn't give us much coverage of their other policies and looking at UK media it is hard to get a balanced and unbiased picture of what is being offered. Is there a neutral source?

As an outsider it appears that Brexit has blown apart the traditional Labour/Conservative support base and I doubt the accuracy of any of the pollsters or pundits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Long answer made short OZ … no.

 

Col and I will probably differ on the degree of bias in the various media. Col sees the BBC as right wing, I think it has its moments but on balance it's about as neutral as it gets. Some critics even claim it as a hotbed of socialism. It's all a matter of perspective. Something will always be a 'fair and unbiased view' when you agree with what it says and part of a conspiracy when you don't.

One thing you have understood is how far the nation has split. I have had an interest in current affairs since my days as a student. In that long, long time I've never known circumstances, not even the miners strike, polarise  people to the same degree as  Brexit. It doesn't help of course when it's almost impossible to trust the current crop of politicians.

The conservatives are totally obnoxious and after getting rid of any with half a sense of decency, led by a complete slime ball and a prat.

Labour is a step towards totalitarianism led by the sinister group Momentum and fronted by a man who has turned prevarication and obfuscation into a fine art.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

HOT OF THE PRESS it seems a close run thing between the Bullingdon buffoon and Catastrophic Corbyn but latest reports show lord Biro and the Elvis militant party just edging it with the save the Frogs policy according to last nights Nottingham Post   Although I thought we had saved the Frogs twice already  no matter must catch up with Celebrity get me out of here and the latest kate price press release   I may even get chance to catch Diane Abbots facebook page Bliss  isnt it a wonderful time we live in excitement plus   meeowed

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Brew said:

But you can't defend him by saying 'well the other chap is worse'

 

 

But whatever your intention Brew. that's the effect of your posts on Corbyn.  You don't usually dismiss Johnson et.al. in the same way, or continually hark back to his past failings.  You really really don't like Corbyn and it shows. ;)  My view is as ever.  He wouldn't be my first choice, but there's nothing in his policies that I find objectionable and nothing in his past which I can't forgive. Whether Corbyn's policies are achievable or practical frankly worries me far less than what I previously described as the 'direction of travel' of the Tories. This latter because I genuinely believe Corbyn's always been driven by the correct, humanitarian objectives, even if he's got the immediate actions wrong.  Which of us can claim that we always got things right?

 

By coincidence, I've just read something on Facebook which says.. in effect :  " I don't care how much you hate Corbyn. I don't care if he goosed your mother in 1978.  Nothing that Corbyn has ever done or ever will do can be as bad as what the Tories have done to this country in the last 10 years and will continue to do in the future if you elect them again".  That pretty much sums up my view.

 

Also.. if we turn this on its head.  How much terrorism is actively supported by the likes of Saudi Arabia and other countries which the UK continues to support, for the benefit of our arms industry etc? 

 

9 hours ago, Brew said:

He may be temporary at the moment but I believe and his Momentum cohorts are planning a more permanent position, They have made a start by weeding out moderates who may oppose him.

 

 

I see that as just the normal process of party 'in fighting'.  It was something many true Labour supporters argued for after the 'Tory-Lite' Bliar years. Similar battles have gone on forever in all parties, though the Tories do tend to be better at hiding theirs.  Is that good for democracy?  Don't you also recognise the same process in the Tories?  Also, elsewhere you've raised the spectre of 'Totalitarianism' in the same breath as Labour.. yet you don't seem as worried by the fact that a minority Tory Govt. has used every weapon at its disposal.. the Press/Media, a totally amoral coalition with the DUP, and a deliberate series of actions against the will of parliament and even challenging the Law, to push through its own will.  Is that not Totalitarian?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Brew said:

Long answer made short OZ … no.

 

Col and I will probably differ on the degree of bias in the various media. Col sees the BBC as right wing, I think it has its moments but on balance it's about as neutral as it gets. Some critics even claim it as a hotbed of socialism. It's all a matter of perspective. Something will always be a 'fair and unbiased view' when you agree with what it says and part of a conspiracy when you don't.

 

My view is that the BBC is something of a 'Curate's Egg'.. 'good in parts' as they say.

 

In simple terms, the BBC is culturally and socially liberal.  It does not censor discussion on things such as race, gender, sexual orientation etc.  Nor does it supress elements of the arts in the way that for example, the Russian, Chinese and many state broadcasters in religious states do.  It is this cultural liberalism which I believe leads some to see the BBC as 'socialist', largely because it's a simple fact that many on the far right adopt , at least publicly.. a very  socially/culturally conservative view of things.

 

By contrast, I see the BBC as biased in party political terms, though I see much of that as the result of ineptitude, plus an excessive obsession with 'balance', which in my view produces the opposite of the desired result. It's also obvious that the BBC is 'scared' of offending the government of the day.. for fear of being penalised through funding measures and so on.

 

To expand on the above paragraph.  Take BBC Question Time.  Time and again it is shown that the audience has been packed with 'plants', who claim to be members of the public, but turn out to be local politicians, agitators etc.  This is either deliberate, or just plain poor management.  Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections, along with the likes of Isabel Oakshott.. who is the very personification of a political 'player' and 'insider', who uses her alleged position as a journalist and commentator, to push her odious far right views and those of her close associates in the Brexit Party.  So, she gets introduced as ''Journalist and Writer', with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party.

Also worth noting that the 'Brexit Party' should be disqualified from such exposure because it isn't a political Party in anything other than name, has no manifesto, opaque funding, no membership etc.

 

Another thing I've noticed over the years.. is that the BBC reporting of party politics, seems to subtly alter.. if they detect a similar alteration in public mood.  So. currently, the BBC is rather less brutal towards Corbyn than in recent times, as he is increasingly seen as a genuine and credible alternative to Johnson's shambolic present government, appalling record over 10 years, and endless lies.  But, it is undeniable that for E.g., the BBC's top political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, started out her appointment by always referring to Jeremy Corbyn as just 'Corbyn', with barely concealed venom.. and also was found to have deliberately altered a video of him to give a negative view of what he said.  Defintitely not something which the BBC should be facilitating or condoning.  To be fair Ms Kuenssberg has become a lot more apparently balanced in her approach.. though she, and BBC journos in particular are notably lax at asking the questions which really need asking.. and demanding answers.  Far too much of the BBC reporting of current affairs goes.  " Government today said 'A'.. Opposition pointed out 'B', but  Government insisted 'A'" and there it ends.. no analysis, no real question..no holding to account.. just a pointless commentary.

 

As for the press.  all but some minor papers owned and directed by big business, the ultra rich and often those don't even live in the UK.  Daily Mail, Telegraph, even the Times are just Tory mouthpieces.  I don't buy any.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How on earth you can think the BBC is right wing is beyond comprehension  All the red paint should tell you something  The seeding of the question time audience has gone on since the days of nick griffin and the BNP  The one thing labour seem unable or unwilling to grasp is at the start of any labour government all the money goes off shore  No one on the planet volunteers to pay tax  The north sea oil companies simply turn off the taps and leave the good old taxpaying public to pick up the bill for corbyns pipe dreams   Every labour government since the war has ended in economic disaster and yet they go lemming like for more of the same meeowed

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

To expand on the above paragraph.  Take BBC Question Time.  Time and again it is shown that the audience has been packed with 'plants', who claim to be members of the public, but turn out to be local politicians, agitators etc.  This is either deliberate, or just plain poor management.  Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections,

 

You and I have agreed that QT is an appalling mishmash of talking heads who's sole objective is generating controversy. Is it bad management? no, it's quite deliberate with plants in the audience and the panelists  primed with the questions before the programme even starts.

The questions are by members of the public but. members of the public who apply to go on and qive the BBC details of the questions they want to ask. Anyone can apply but they need a virtual life history before you are considered. The more radical the question the more chance you have of asking it.

 

55 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections, along with the likes of Isabel Oakshott.. who is the very personification of a political 'player' and 'insider', who uses her alleged position as a journalist and commentator, to push her odious far right views and those of her close associates in the Brexit Party

 

And so they should! The minute you start censoring what people can say and what people can hear you have lost. I would allow Farage and even Tommy Robinson to have their say provided they stay within the law. It does not matter whether they are a 'recognised' political party or not. There is no requirement for a party to have a manifesto or formal membership. It's not even a requirement to register a political movement as a party. Just as anyone can put themselves forward for election as an independent so can a loose affiliation of like minded people.

I vehemently disagree with their message but the right of free speech is being eroded at an alarming rate. Who gets to decide who can speak and who can't?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

55 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

So, she gets introduced as ''Journalist and Writer', with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party.

 Really Col?  

55 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Far too much of the BBC reporting of current affairs goes.  " Government today said 'A'.. Opposition pointed out 'B', but  Government insisted 'A'" and there it ends.. no analysis, no real question..no holding to account.. just a pointless commentary.

 

What's wrong with that? They are reporting the news of the day without commentary and allowing us to make our own minds up. How can they give an analysis without accusations of bias? It can't be done. I said before the Beeb is between a rock and a hard place and simply can't win.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just listened to a fairy tale, some call it a manifesto:

 

£75bn to build 150,000 new council and social homes a year, within five years

( he said a million)

Introducing a "real living wage" of at least £10 an hour 

 

(which will simply raise the price of goods and services)

Reviewing the retirement age for people in hard manual jobs

(Why just labourers? do we not deserve to be treated equally?)

Introducing a second homes tax

 

(That should go down well, one Labour MP has three, two of them paid for by the taxpayer!)

Reversing inheritance tax cuts and imposing VAT on private school fees

 

(For the amount it will generate it's hardly worth the bother)

Giving EU nationals living in UK the automatic right to stay

(Fair enough if they have jobs)

Reinstating 3,000 bus routes that have been cut

 

(Who's going to pay for them?)

Free broadband for all, delivered by part-nationalising BT

 

( A sop pandering to the 'owt fer nowt' brigade Won't last long as a freebie once they realise how much it will cost)

A £3bn plan to offer adults in England free access to retraining

 

(As what? fine in principle but the devil will be in the detail)

A pledge to reduce all primary school classes to fewer than 30 children

 

( Some recent research says it not necessary)

An increase in the length of statutory maternity pay from nine months to a year

 

(OK, presumably the employer is going to be stuck with the costs)

Free personal at-home care in England for over-65s most in need of it

 

(Again who is going to pay for it?)

A pledge to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent and spend at least 2% of GDP on defence

 

(Ooo, one I agree with ) thumbsup

Reducing the voting age to 16

 

(No, it's too young, they are too naïve and impressionable, with a lack of life experience to make sound judgement.s) 

The reception was at best lukewarm from the audience the biggest applause came  in response to promises regarding the  NHS and even more so for free internet.

He will build a million new homes, where? and how much more farm land will we lose. We mentioned the Malthusian trap  not long ago this may hurry it along, we need more food producing land, not less.

Raising the minimum wages is all well and good and I agree their should be a minimum. All that will happen is the same as always the cost will be passed to the consumer so prices will rise.

Empowering tenants and setting rent controls. There is a lot of evidence rent control can have a negative effect and what exactly will he empower tenants to do?

He will create a million climate jobs along with a green and healthy economy doing what exactly.

I'm in two minds about nationalisation. The energy companies yes but I remember the shambles that was British Rail.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LizzieM said:

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

 

I wouldn't have thought it was exclusively so Lizzie but I would hazard a guess that there are more republicans among their ranks than there are among the Tories.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like the Queen - she has done her job very well over the years..... and I agree with the broad principles of Labour!  

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brew said:

And so they should! The minute you start censoring what people can say and what people can hear you have lost. I would allow Farage and even Tommy Robinson to have their say provided they stay within the law.

 

It's not the fact that they get coverage.  It's the disproportionate amount they get. By your logic I should get on there weekly to deliver MY message..  :)  There's one of them on QT every week, not to mention other coverage.  Their support and their electoral success does not warrant that level of exposure alongside far more electorally successful politicians.  With 'others', the BBC is remarkably adept at finding the ones who just happen to be associated with far right politics.  I'm astounded that you don't see it.

9 hours ago, Brew said:

Really Col?  

 

Yes. Really.

 

Wiki: 

Quote

In 2018, she separated from her husband and began a relationship with businessman and Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice.[30]

 

 

9 hours ago, Brew said:

What's wrong with that? They are reporting the news of the day without commentary and allowing us to make our own minds up. How can they give an analysis without accusations of bias? It can't be done. I said before the Beeb is between a rock and a hard place and simply can't win.

 

It's wrong for the reasons I stated.  Govt view gets aired for free,  ... opposition view gets aired, .Govt view gets repeated.  2:1 ratio and no analysis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LizzieM said:

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

 

Not for me.  I have no problem with Madge.  She was landed with the job a bit sooner than she expected and even then only because her waster of an uncle couldn't hack it and bailed out dumping the job in her Dad's lap.  I genuinely believe she's done the job to the best of her ability and with considerable integrity.  I can't really say the same for the likes of her kids and others, but they mostly manage to stick to their brief of being neutral re: party political stuff.. so I'm not overly bothered by their presence.  A lot of the foreign tourism industry demands their continuing existence.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, meeowed said:

 Every labour government since the war has ended in economic disaster and yet they go lemming like for more of the same meeowed

 

Not borne out by evidence.  Just a (Tory owned) media construct which has been repeated so often it's become 'true'.  I don't see the current economy exactly bouncing after 10 years of Tory cuts and mismanagement.. and the coming Brexit disaster is going to be such a paradise that the Govt. pushing it refuses to publish any of its economic forecasts.

 

9 hours ago, meeowed said:

How on earth you can think the BBC is right wing is beyond comprehension

 

As I said above, I don't think the BBC is right wing overall.. but its political coverage certainly favours the right, and most of its journalists are known to be right of centre in their own politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Brew said:

Just listened to a fairy tale, some call it a manifesto:

 

£75bn to build 150,000 new council and social homes a year, within five years

( he said a million)

Introducing a "real living wage" of at least £10 an hour 

 

(which will simply raise the price of goods and services)

Reviewing the retirement age for people in hard manual jobs

(Why just labourers? do we not deserve to be treated equally?)

Introducing a second homes tax

 

(That should go down well, one Labour MP has three, two of them paid for by the taxpayer!)

Reversing inheritance tax cuts and imposing VAT on private school fees

 

I don't care if they only achieve a fraction of the above.  As I've said numerous times.. it's the overall intent and the direction of travel which matters to me.  The Tories are offering nothing but a partial repair of the 10 years of unneccessary damage and suffering they've caused and still plan to continue with their asset stripping and theft of publicly owned assets.  No contest for me.

 

Re: Public Schools.  I wouldn't ban them, but I would remove any possible financial breaks.  I'd also seek ways to break the system by which their output seems to get unwarranted access to Oxbridge etc.  They can't all be that bright .. whatever cash they've had spent on them.

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

Reinstating 3,000 bus routes that have been cut

 

(Who's going to pay for them?)

 

 

Who paid for them before?  My guess would be they were subsidised by local authorities, but since the Tories attacked local Govt spending it's become impossible.  Tory cuts again.  I had a shop owner moaning at me the other day that her shop wasn't profitable because 'the council' had put business rates up.  Doesn't seem to have sunk in that the Govt have cut local funding to the bone causing such issues.

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

A pledge to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent and spend at least 2% of GDP on defence

 

(Ooo, one I agree with )

 

Me too.. but .errr.. who's going to pay for it?  :laugh:

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

I'm in two minds about nationalisation. The energy companies yes but I remember the shambles that was British Rail.

 

And British Rail was worse than the current mess?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Cliff Ton changed the title to Anything Political

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...