Anything Political


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DJ360 said:

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.

 

It has always been the incumbent that receives more coverage than the opposition, fact, Gordon Brown had more air time than Cameron.

Why do you need an analysis?  You must see why they restrict themselves as far as  possible to the facts. Anything more will bring cries of bias from those who disagree and praise from those who do.

You on TV? why not? If you had the same number of followers, if you engaged with the party, if you attended rallies and made speeches, if you get your self elected why not? You can even get on Question Time if you try hard enough ...  :Shock:

 

3 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Yes. Really.

 

Earlier you said you could not get moralistic about Johnsons extra- martial affairs yet now you see fit to mention (in disparaging terms),someones private life. A journalist and a

nondescript  business man, both of whom choose to support Brexit. You even questioned why their relationship is not broadcast to the world through the BBC. So she left her husband, is that anyone's business but theirs? . Why and how is that  relevant to the discussion?  Why did she deserve to be pilloried and Boris does not?

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

don't care if they only achieve a fraction of the above

 

Hardly seems worth mentioning then if nobody believes it. However which fraction would you prefer, introducing an unfair division among the working population over retirement or council houses that cost £500,000 each? Clearly someone in the Labour party can't do simple arithmetic.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Who paid for them before?  My guess would be they were subsidised by local authorities

 

Yes they were, but do you honestly think councils will reinstate them? Even if they are given money  they will quickly decide it's not viable and put it towards a new tram line or some other vanity project.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

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

 

2% is the current spending level as well you know so there's no extra cost to the taxpayer over and above the present commitment. 

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

British Rail was worse than the current mess

 

Far worse, it's fine looking back at the romantic, golden age of steam, but take the rose coloured specs off and the image is somewhat less  than attractive. Old, slow and dirty rolling stock and huge amounts of taxpayers money to prop it up, far more than the present lot. They were not helped of course in that the rail unions were among the most bolshie.

Now along comes Corbyn sees the modernisation private enterprise has made, the new trains, tracks. stations and a modern IT infrastructure and thinks we'll have that.

Any system as big as the railways will always have room for improvement , I'm just not sure nationalisation is the way to do it.

  • Like 1
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

Until the manifesto is made legally binding these pie in the sky aspirations will continue from both parties   People have not forgotten Tony Blair his spectre still looms large over the labour party like the grim reaper    I am sure if Corbyn gains access to number ten his first press conference out side the door would resemble an episode of Jim Bowens bullseye  Look what you would have won   meeowed

Link to post
Share on other sites

After the Dams Raids, it was suggested to Guy Gibson that he might forge a career in politics. Having given it some thought, he declined, saying that, "There is little more to politics than wisdom and sincerity." 

 

Perhaps things were different in 1943? Or perhaps he was a worse judge of people than his superiors thought.

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

Earlier you said you could not get moralistic about Johnsons extra- martial affairs yet now you see fit to mention (in disparaging terms),someones private life.

 

Yes. Because she is presented as a 'journalist' or whatever when the reality is that she's also deeply involved with Brexit by her acquaintances, including Tice.  I don't care who she sleeps with, but her political affiliations are part of the story.  The BBC need to be a bit more careful about such things.

 

I also said I didn't care about Johnson's affairs from a moral P.O.V., but I do when it comes to his relationship with someone to whm he provided public money.  Do you see the parallel?

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Hardly seems worth mentioning then if nobody believes it. However which fraction would you prefer, introducing an unfair division among the working population over retirement or council houses that cost £500,000 each? Clearly someone in the Labour party can't do simple arithmetic.

 

 

In all honesty, I wish that Labour would spend less time on inflated promises and more time countering the falsehoods about them propagated by he Tories.  These aren't my words.. but they sum up my view.

Quote

One thing that constantly baffles me is that Labour never fight back against the Tories economically. Why don’t they attack with the hard cold facts that the Conservatives have presided over two consecutive down-grades of the UK credit rating (AAA to AA to AA negative) and have increased the national debt year on year since 2010?

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Yes they were, but do you honestly think councils will reinstate them? Even if they are given money  they will quickly decide it's not viable and put it towards a new tram line or some other vanity project.

 

If councils are funded, and required, to do so.. then they will have no choice but to do so.  The Tories have no hesitation in cutting the Government funding element of local council funding whilst loading extra responsibilities onto them.  This topic is hugely significant, but barely gets a mention at present.

 

Also worth shouting loud and clear that what Laura Kuenssberg described this lunch time as 'a massively increased state', or words to that effect.. under Labour's plans.. actually is nothing of the sort, but in reality is simply a restoration of state funding and intervention. Even then, the UK %ge of GDP spent on public services will be well below the norm for civilised western countries.

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Far worse, it's fine looking back at the romantic, golden age of steam, but take the rose coloured specs off and the image is somewhat less  than attractive. Old, slow and dirty rolling stock and huge amounts of taxpayers money to prop it up, far more than the present lot. They were not helped of course in that the rail unions were among the most bolshie.

Now along comes Corbyn sees the modernisation private enterprise has made, the new trains, tracks. stations and a modern IT infrastructure and thinks we'll have that.

Any system as big as the railways will always have room for improvement , I'm just not sure nationalisation is the way to do it.

 

 

I think you are entirely missing the point.  Like many, I look back on the days of steam with affection and notstalgia, but I also recognise that after WW2 our rail system was outdated and shambolic.

However, I'm not comparing the current set up with the 1950s but with the period immediately before privatisation.. when the Inter City service was pretty decent and local trains worked.

 

It is clear to me that the whole privatisation stunt was  partially ideological but also, as with everything the Tories do to public services.. a deliberate mechanism to put public money into selected private hands.  Also, the facts show that the Public Money subsidy to the rail industry is no less, and most likely more.. than it ever was prior to privatisation.  There are admittedly some improvements, but Northern Rail. for e.g. is a disaster and all cross country services in the north are massively outdated, overcrowded etc.  Have you ever tried to get from say.. Leeds, to Liverpool? I reckon I could walk faster.  Or have you tried to get from the North west, to somewhere like Lincoln?  it's hopeless.  And as for Nottm. Station..  Least said I think..

Virgin Trains seemed to be pretty successful running the West Coast Mainlime with their Pendolinos.. yet they have been deprived of the contract and it's gone to God knows who. The East Coast Mainline ran very successfully as a public company and was making a profit, so naturally the Tories privatised it and it immediately went bad.

 

The Tory Rail Privatisation Project was always a massively over complicated exercise designed primarily to shift public money into private hands.  It has been mostly a complicated and costly failure.  I'm for re-nationalisation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, meeowed said:

Until the manifesto is made legally binding these pie in the sky aspirations will continue from both parties   People have not forgotten Tony Blair his spectre still looms large over the labour party like the grim reaper    I am sure if Corbyn gains access to number ten his first press conference out side the door would resemble an episode of Jim Bowens bullseye  Look what you would have won   meeowed

 

It's the Tories who are busily setting up fake websites etc., to try to undermine Labour.

It's the Tories who have spent ten years increasing public borrowing, attacking public services, attacking the poor and disabled, attacking the State Pension, attacking the NHS, failing to address the housing crisis which their policies have caused, failing to tackle child poverty, attacking education funding.. except where they have allowed schools to be sold off to bent 'managers', who have pocketed millions from 'academies', who have presided over crumbling roads and other infrastructure, who have turned this country from a World leading nation, to a laughing stock run by spivs, crooks and con men.

It's the Tories who have managed to lose the UKs 'Triple A' international credit status..... twice.

 

Fiscally responsible?  I should co co.  Bunch of crooks and thieves.  And now led by a lying crook who lied to Parliament, lied to the Queen and is known to have said 'f**k business'. 

 

Hardly a scintillating record is it?  And no.. the situation they inherited was not caused by Labour, but by the same international speculators and crooks they are now desperate to get into bed with again via their totally opaque and secret Brexit plans.

 

I'd sooner vote for the Monster Raving Looney Party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, meeowed said:

Corbyns visit to Birmingham didnt go to well did it   I think he touched a nerve  meeowed

 

It depends which Right Wing Tory Owned Newspaper you believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Monster Raving Loony party elected a moggie, named Catmando, as their joint leader. Catmando was a ginger and white Maine Coon, very handsome too. He spoke more sense than any politician I've ever encountered.

 

The Loonys also had an official named Tarquin Biscuit Barrel...at least, that is the abbreviated version of his name.

 

I have a cat named Tarquin and he's starting to resemble a biscuit barrel. Perhaps it's time for a little austerity in the food department?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly the MRLP had a candidate who changed his name by Deed Poll to (approximately) 'Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuit Barrel'.. which was if I recall correctly a name 'borrowed' from a Monty Python sketch.

 

I watched the results on TV that night, eagerly anticipating the returning officer's approach to the name.  I was devastated when the miserable so and so simply referred to him as 'Mr T Barrel'. Some people have no sense of humour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a couple of Maine Coons. They are big cats and very talkative!  They are also playful and highly intelligent. Nice moggies but need to be brushed and combed daily, which they don't always appreciate!

 

Ragdolls are also excellent house cats but, again, high maintenance where their coats are concerned.

 

Even larger are Norwegian Forest cats. Real characters. A friend has three of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Even then, the UK %ge of GDP spent on public services will be well below the norm for civilised western countries.

 

Actually they are about midtable and only a smidge behind the EU average. 

38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Yes. Because she is presented as a 'journalist' or whatever when the reality is that she's also deeply involved with Brex

 

She is presented as a journalist because that's what she is. Yes she is a staunch Brexiteer and make no secret of the fact. Her private life is no concern of your's, mine or anyone else.

Writing things like this is beneath you with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party.

What's your motto? ...          'play the ball not the man'. 

 

45 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

I wish that Labour would spend less time on inflated promises and more time countering the falsehoods about them propagated by he Tories

 

And the difference between an inflated promise and a falsehood is? The both look like lies to me.

 

48 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

One thing that constantly baffles me is that Labour never fight back against the Tories economically

 

Because they can't, they don't have the ammunition.  The same quote mentions debt since 2010. Not fair, it's like me blaming Brown for the crash of 2008 when borrowing went totally out of control. We have talked of this so I'll not rehash it. The Tories came to power after Brown left them with a poison chalice. They didn't handle it well but,  the rise in debt started to slow.

 

56 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

If councils are funded, and required, to do so

 

They will, for a short time only.

 

58 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

This topic is hugely significant, but barely gets a mention at present.

 

Perhaps Col because it's only you and few others that consider it so and are concerned. Were it worthy of more attention I've no doubt it would get it.

 

You may well be right about the railways, I'm not sure. Whilst it's true the directors and their ilk in the nationalised industries became overnight millionaires on privatisation, the bulk of the money went to the treasury.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jill Sparrow said:

I know a couple of Maine Coons. They are big cats and very talkative!  They are also playful and highly intelligent. Nice moggies but need to be brushed and combed daily, which they don't always appreciate!

 

Ragdolls are also excellent house cats but, again, high maintenance where their coats are concerned.

 

Even larger are Norwegian Forest cats. Real characters. A friend has three of them.

Just been looking at Maine Coon kittens for sale. Around £600!! They are so cute though.

 

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

It's the Tories who are busily setting up fake websites etc., to try to undermine Labour.

A stupid and underhand trick by anybody's standard and the electoral commission should grow a pair and deal with them.

 

58 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

It's the Tories who have spent ten years

 Phew, lets go through them in order.

10 years  of SLOWING down the rampant debt rise bequeathed to them by Gordon Brown. (Agreed not all his fault)

Attacking public services  - yet spending on them has continued to rise since the 80's under both Labour and Tory

Attacking the poor, under Gordon Brown and the 'New Deal' benefit cuts were made totalling 5 Billion pounds!

Attacking the state pension. Gordon changed private pensions from a surplus to almost all of them having a black hole and struggling to meet their obligations. The DWP figures show that since 1985/6 state pension rates have risen more than the average earning and under the Tories the difference is increasing.

In work poverty (Labour like the more dramatic sounding 'Child Poverty') is a pressing problem, can't argue with that.

Attacking education funding, another one that has continued to rise under both governments

Selling to 'bent' managers is not only silly hysterical hyperbole, it's quite possibly libelous.

Tories lost the AAA rating true, but they didn't have to go cap in hand to the international monetary fund for a bail out the way Labour did.

Are we a laughing stock? we probably are but Labour has to take a fair bit of the blame if it's true.

Johnson is a liar … no argument

IF the Brexit plans are secret then at least they have one! Labour have no idea, but think they can achieve in six months what no ones been able to do in three and a half years,  unless they decide to hold a referendum when all the balls will be in the air again. Will that be a referendum to approve the deal and will it be before or after the referendum to revoke article 50. I'm  also a bit confused, can someone explain to me what a 'credible deal' is and what is not a credible deal?

The rest is just a specious diatribe

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the debate and no I have not stayed for the  analysis, I prefer to make my own mind up.

Corbyn on first and performed better than I thought he would, he was calmer, less rattled by the questions though his answers left a lot to be desired. He seems to think he can spend his way to No10

Swinson, Ah bless, totally out of touch with reality, but if Trump can take the white House who knows?

Sturgeon again better than expected in her presentation but had a couple of wobbly moments.

Boris, of course you can trust me, Johnson. How on earth did he get to the top?

 

The audience was as usual loaded.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbyn did well.  It's a bit unfair to accuse him of 'spending his way' etc.. without accusing Swinson and Johnson of doing exactly the same... if to a lesser extent. Dare I say he is too intelligent for much of his audience?

 

Swinson is more of a Tory than Johnson and was helpless in the face of scrutiny.  True enough.. she didn't exactly end up in tears on the floor, but she spent most of her allotted time admitting to being wrong.  Not a good look.

 

Sturgeon surprised me.  She mostly spoke very well. Very clear that there's no way she'd 'enable' Johnson.  Also pretty conciliatory towards Labour.  I logged that for the future.

 

Johnson.  Barely worth commenting that he even lied about the need to be truthful. A total disgrace as a leader, a politician and a human being.  Absolute morality free zone.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Dare I say he is too intelligent for much of his audience?

 

Obviously you dare, but how you make out that he is more intelligent than the audience I don't know when he can't divide 75 Billion by 150,000 ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ref: Rees-Mogg.

 

He's probably  been  given time off to get his overpriveleged and expensively shod foot out of his permanently smirking mouth.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Barely worth commenting that he even lied about the need to be truthful.

 

I'm not sure, but listening to what he said that may be a bit of a paradox Col.  :blink:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Brew said:

 

Obviously you dare, but how you make out that he is more intelligent than the audience I don't know when he can't divide 75 Billion by 150,000 ...

 

Yep.. well we all make mistakes.  I'm lousy at Maths too.. but it doesn't make me a bad person...;)

 

What I meant is that his ideas and his proposals are a bit more subtle and nuanced than 'It's yer brexit innit'.. 'Get Brexit done'.... or any of those who manage to interpret perfectly reasonably social democratic policies, proposed and enacted in a democracy..as somehow being Stalinist/Trotskyite(Take your pick) 'Totalitarianism'

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Brew said:

 

I'm not sure, but listening to what he said that may be a bit of a paradox Col.  :blink:

 

As I heard it, the first question from the audience was.. 'Do you think it's important to tell the truth? or similar.  To which he lied 'Of course'.or similar... knowing full well that almost everything he utters publicly is a lie.

 

So yep. It's paradoxical...  or it's what Churchill described as a 'mystery shrouded in an enigma'... except it's no mystery.  He's just a congenital liar.

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...