Do you want to discuss boring politics? (12 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

Ladies and gentlemen, the Tories!

I’ve got 20 pallets I need delivering, send the van round would you. What’s that? Weight you say 1500kgs each. What do you mean a van can only take one at a time because of its weight limit ? Well send 20 then.

Not sure he’s thought this through.

 

---

[Grendel]

Ladies and gentlemen, the Tories!

Well John Redwood actually

 

[shmmeee]

Also “on line”

 

[skybluetony176]

Well John Redwood actually

Not really, they’ve all basically been on the same spin of it’s everyone else’s fault, don’t mention brexit. Just John Redwood out Tories most Tories.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

so as we slide into a winter of chaos created by staggering government incomptence

Well John Redwood actually

Hes a massive clueless twat......but at least his tweet has got a slight whiff of an actual issue that is currently important to the people of the country.....even if hes talking utter drivel.....

Meanwhile, the "opposition" (ha) "leader" (ha ha) is tackling the big issues....

Labour conference: Not right to say only women have a cervix, says Starmer

The Labour leader calls for "mature, respectful debate" over trans rights after MP's comments.

www.bbc.com

..hard hitting as usual from the nowhere man.......how the fuck have we had 11 years of constant tory clusterfuck, ably aided by the liberal democrats (who are neither liberal nor democratic).....and we've still got zero vialble opposition.....

Its so farcical now its actually funny.....

 

[JAM See]

Ladies and gentlemen, the Tories!

Saw him in an airport once.

I didn't run up and kick him on the arse, Bishop Brennan style.

Still regret it.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Who'd vote for these chumps? Genuinely not a chance I'll vote for new Labour mk II



We've just been in an economic shock event equivalent to WW2 with rising poverty and reducing living standards, broken energy markets, public services struggling after years of obliteration and this drivel is all they can come up with.

 

[shmmeee]

Who'd vote for these chumps? Genuinely not a chance I'll vote for new Labour mk II



We've just been in an economic shock event equivalent to WW2 with rising poverty and reducing living standards, broken energy markets, public services struggling after years of obliteration and this drivel is all they can come up with.

Arent they the same fiscal rules that McDonnell had (borrow for capital, tax for ongoing costs)?

Nick Robinson was still giving it the old “where will you get the money from?” Stuff to her this morning so not sure it’ll make much difference in messaging either.

TBH I’m pretty much done with the party at this point. Going back to my approach 2005-2015 of barely voting and sniping from the sidelines I think.

 

[clint van damme]

Arent they the same fiscal rules that McDonnell had (borrow for capital, tax for ongoing costs)?

Nick Robinson was still giving it the old “where will you get the money from?” Stuff to her this morning so not sure it’ll make much difference in messaging either.

TBH I’m pretty much done with the party at this point. Going back to my approach 2005-2015 of barely voting and sniping from the sidelines I think.

She's too right wing for me but she's a much better media/public performer than Starmer I'll give her that.

 

[shmmeee]

She's too right wing for me but she's a much better media/public performer than Starmer I'll give her that.

She is, though seeing her still get the treatment of “OMG you’ll spend all the money” and not pointing out that historically it’s the Labour Party governments that pay down debt and run surpluses (if that’s what you’re into) annoys me.

(Awaits Grendel post about GFC as if it means something about government fiscal competence)

 

[Liquid Gold]

I think I'm just going to vote Green for a while.

I don't particularly like them either but if they get a bump it might focus some minds in the main parties that it's actually important.

 

[Ian1779]

Arent they the same fiscal rules that McDonnell had (borrow for capital, tax for ongoing costs)?

Nick Robinson was still giving it the old “where will you get the money from?” Stuff to her this morning so not sure it’ll make much difference in messaging either.

TBH I’m pretty much done with the party at this point. Going back to my approach 2005-2015 of barely voting and sniping from the sidelines I think.

Will you keep your membership going? I still have mine but to be honest given the changes agreed it sounds like there probably won’t be much chance of a candidate standing on a platform that will resonate anymore.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

I think I'm just going to vote Green for a while.

I don't particularly like them either but if they get a bump it might focus some minds in the main parties that it's actually important.

Thats basically what I've been doing since the 90s.....but I've given up on them now too....

Until the ballot provides a box for "none of the above" and it gets counted, I'll probably no longer bother or just vote for the loonies.....

 

[Liquid Gold]

Thats basically what I've been doing since the 90s.....but I've given up on them now too....

Until the ballot provides a box for "none of the above" and it gets counted, I'll probably no longer bother or just vote for the loonies.....

I'd be very much behind compulsory voting with a none of the above option

 

[shmmeee]

Will you keep your membership going? I still have mine but to be honest given the changes agreed it sounds like there probably won’t be much chance of a candidate standing on a platform that will resonate anymore. ☹

I might try and cancel again. Last two times it hasn’t stuck. Harder to leave than the Trust that place. Just very disillusioned even with Starmer on his own terms. I actually think a swing to the centre is what’s needed electorally but he’s incapable of that. Just ends up pissing everyone off.

That said he’s now ahead of Johnson for best PM so WTF do I know.

 

[shmmeee]

I think I'm just going to vote Green for a while.

I don't particularly like them either but if they get a bump it might focus some minds in the main parties that it's actually important.

I can’t vote Green. Them and the LDs have gone full bat shit. If I’m voting left Labour is still the best of a bad bunch, but JFC what a bunch.

 

[Evo1883]

Who'd vote for these chumps? Genuinely not a chance I'll vote for new Labour mk II



We've just been in an economic shock event equivalent to WW2 with rising poverty and reducing living standards, broken energy markets, public services struggling after years of obliteration and this drivel is all they can come up with.

Sadly , whilst people won't vote for these chumps , then what chance do we have of the tories losing an election ?

As stated earlier , they are still waffling about trans rights etc .. really hard hitting policies that effect almost fucking nobody

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Sadly , whilst people won't vote for these chumps , then what chance do we have of the tories losing an election ?

All the way through Blair's government I'd have called myself left, radical compared to that impersonation. Since then, I've become more pragmatic - Blair's government wasn't what I wanted, but it was a damned site better than what came before and after. Therefore, if that's what it takes to get the current lot out... I'll deal with the devil.

 

[Evo1883]

All the way through Blair's government I'd have called myself left, radical compared to that impersonation. Since then, I've become more pragmatic - Blair's government wasn't what I wanted, but it was a damned site better than what came before and after. Therefore, if that's what it takes to get the current lot out... I'll deal with the devil.

A vote for anybody else is a vote for the tories sadly ..that's how I see it

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I can’t vote Green. Them and the LDs have gone full bat shit. If I’m voting left Labour is still the best of a bad bunch, but JFC what a bunch.

Seems Labour are doing the same.

All the crap going on and the thing Starmer decides to take a stance on - whether only a woman can have a cervix.

I'm sure this isn't him. Like with Milliband he's being made to look an idiot by his advisors. I can't see anybody thinking that that's the best thing to be talking about when we've got massive problems with the pandemic, more pressure on low-income people with UC cut and NI rise, corruption in govt contracts, Brexit problems aplenty including most of what Johnson promised not happening.

The only people that would do would be people with clipboards of market research that tell them that the people on the street are more concerned about who does and doesn't have a fanny than a government shafting them from every direction.

 

[shmmeee]

Seems Labour are doing the same.

All the crap going on and the thing Starmer decides to take a stance on - whether only a woman can have a cervix.

I'm sure this isn't him. Like with Milliband he's being made to look an idiot by his advisors. I can't see anybody thinking that that's the best thing to be talking about when we've got massive problems with the pandemic, more pressure on low-income people with UC cut and NI rise, corruption in govt contracts, Brexit problems aplenty including most of what Johnson promised not happening.

The only people that would do would be people with clipboards of market research that tell them that the people on the street are more concerned about who does and doesn't have a fanny than a government shafting them from every direction.

People don’t care about who has a fanny, but while Labours “top media performers” keep responding like this the media will keep asking for the lols:

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

People don’t care about who has a fanny, but while Labours “top media performers” keep responding like this the media will keep asking for the lols:

Ironically they need to show some balls and just call it out for the nonsense it is.

Can't say I know anything about the procedure involved in gender reassignment surgery, but even then you wouldn't, biologically, have a cervix. At most you would have something that was a facsimile. A cerfakes.

 

[shmmeee]

Ironically they need to show some balls and just call it out for the nonsense it is.

Can't say I know anything about the procedure involved in gender reassignment surgery, but even then you wouldn't, biologically, have a cervix. At most you would have something that was a facsimile. A cerfakes.

Its not about that. It’s about some biological women not wanting to be identified as women but as trans men or non-binary. And also that trans women “are women” and don’t have a cervix.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Its not about that. It’s about some biological women not wanting to be identified as women but as trans men or non-binary. And also that trans women “are women” and don’t have a cervix.

It's utterly ridiculous. As I've said before this is an issue of 'gender' versus 'sex'. IMO the ingrained gender roles are the problem. People are saying they're a man/woman because they don't fit into what society has long suggested people of that sex should be.

Amazonians wouldn't recognise our idea of what a 'woman' should be. Neither would the Spartans. It's all just a load of nonsense and a man saying they're a 'woman' or vice-versa is just them adding to the problem by giving credence to the gender roles that society has assigned. They're not a woman, they're a man how doesn't match the bullshit norms expected of them by society.

So keep the male/female/man/woman stuff to biology and consign the gender expectations of those terms to the dustbin of history where they belong. And once you do that, only women can have a cervix.

 

[Ian1779]

Seems Labour are doing the same.

All the crap going on and the thing Starmer decides to take a stance on - whether only a woman can have a cervix.

I'm sure this isn't him. Like with Milliband he's being made to look an idiot by his advisors. I can't see anybody thinking that that's the best thing to be talking about when we've got massive problems with the pandemic, more pressure on low-income people with UC cut and NI rise, corruption in govt contracts, Brexit problems aplenty including most of what Johnson promised not happening.

The only people that would do would be people with clipboards of market research that tell them that the people on the street are more concerned about who does and doesn't have a fanny than a government shafting them from every direction.

Labour allow themselves to be caught up in this kind of debate because currently have no plans, ideas or vision at to what they stand for. Take the nationalisation of energy companies, it has majority support in this country, which includes across the political divide… and when their moment comes to sieze it they literally blow it…. The most open of open goals and Starmer bottles it. Again today, Reeves announces they will create a new government department focusing on not wasting money (that will undoubtedly waste shit loads of money in setting it up for no net gain) it’s truly fucking tragic. It’s like the shit bits from 15 years of the Apprentice all rolled into one.
Starmer’s single achievement of the conference is to give a bunch of shit MP’s even more control over who runs the cabal. And he thinks that’s what the electorate want.

 

[clint van damme]

People don’t care about who has a fanny, but while Labours “top media performers” keep responding like this the media will keep asking for the lols:

This is madness.
Reeves also said today that Labour would not restore freedom of movement, surely that is a far bigger talking point wherever you Stand on it?

 

[It’sabatch87]

Shadow Cabinet member quits after Starmer 'tells him to oppose £15 minimum wage'
Shadow Cabinet member quits after Starmer 'tells him to oppose £15 minimum wage'

 

[shmmeee]

Shadow Cabinet member quits after Starmer 'tells him to oppose £15 minimum wage'
Shadow Cabinet member quits after Starmer 'tells him to oppose £15 minimum wage'

Why didn’t he quit under Corbyn then, who wanted £10 NMW?

Press Releases – The Labour Party

labour.org.uk

 

[It’sabatch87]

Why didn’t he quit under Corbyn then, who wanted £10 NMW?

Press Releases – The Labour Party

labour.org.uk

They really are a long way away from government.

 

[Grendel]

Ouch

Labour Party conference: Andy McDonald quits shadow cabinet with attack on Sir Keir Starmer's leadership

Andy McDonald, who had been shadow secretary of state for employment rights and protections, says his position as a member of Sir Keir Starmer's top team had become "untenable".

www.google.co.uk

 

[shmmeee]

They really are a long way away from government.

Im inclined to agree. But I don’t think it’s because they aren’t 50% more left wing than Corbyn.

 

[Evo1883]

People don’t care about who has a fanny, but while Labours “top media performers” keep responding like this the media will keep asking for the lols:

Why do Labour have to be the party of this nonsense? Absolutely shite

 

[skybluetony176]

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Labour allow themselves to be caught up in this kind of debate because currently have no plans, ideas or vision at to what they stand for. Take the nationalisation of energy companies, it has majority support in this country, which includes across the political divide… and when their moment comes to sieze it they literally blow it…. The most open of open goals and Starmer bottles it. Again today, Reeves announces they will create a new government department focusing on not wasting money (that will undoubtedly waste shit loads of money in setting it up for no net gain) it’s truly fucking tragic. It’s like the shit bits from 15 years of the Apprentice all rolled into one.
Starmer’s single achievement of the conference is to give a bunch of shit MP’s even more control over who runs the cabal. And he thinks that’s what the electorate want.

This non-money wasting govt dept - isn't that a main part of the OBR remit? So as far as I can see it'd pretty much just be a rebrand of something that already exists.

It's not that we need a new dept, it's that the people involved in it at the moment couldn't give a fuck.

 

[fernandopartridge]

This non-money wasting govt dept - isn't that a main part of the OBR remit? So as far as I can see it'd pretty much just be a rebrand of something that already exists.

It's not that we need a new dept, it's that the people involved in it at the moment couldn't give a fuck.

Cabinet Office does it at the level she's talking about. She's coming up for a solution to a specific problem that was essentially the Tories capitalising on the panic of the early part of the pandemic.