General Election 2024: General UK Politics Discussion here

[Mister M]

 

 

Awww so innocent about his precious Tories.

 

Yeah right.

[Norbert]

5 minutes ago, High Chaparral said:

What has been your top Job?  

 

I'm not planning on running the country, so it's irrelevant.

 

But Deputy Inspector of something in the Civil Service

[RollingJ]

Just now, Mister M said:

 

 

Awww so innocent about his precious Tories.

 

Yeah right.

He is actually deluded about many things, but let's see what 'new, improved' Labour get up to when they've been in office for a little while longer, shall  we?

[RollingJ]

2 minutes ago, Norbert said:

 

I'm not planning on running the country, so it's irrelevant.

 

But Deputy Inspector of something in the Civil Service

So you didn't even know what you were supposed to be inspecting? 🤣

[High Chaparral]

2 minutes ago, Norbert said:

 

I'm not planning on running the country, so it's irrelevant.

 

But Deputy Inspector of something in the Civil Service

Only deputy inspector of something says it all.   Let us all know when you find out what the something in the Civil Service is.

[Mister M]

4 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

He is actually deluded about many things, but let's see what 'new, improved' Labour get up to when they've been in office for a little while longer, shall  we?

Oh I've no doubt that as time goes on - rules will be broken, ministers will make mistakes and back benchers will get up to all sorts of shenanigans - that's just the nature of Governments. 

But the 2019 - 2024 lot were spectacularly awful.

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Mister M said:

Oh I've no doubt that as time goes on - rules will be broken, ministers will make mistakes and back benchers will get up to all sorts of shenanigans - that's just the nature of Governments. 

But the 2019 - 2024 lot were spectacularly awful.

Maybe, and I don't care what colour rosettes they wear, politicians should set a high example -and stick to it, if they think they can tell the rest of us what we can/can't do.

[Tony]

4 hours ago, Prettytom said:

There’s nothing substantive to respond to in your post. All you’ve done is fling a load of unevidenced mud around, hoping that it will stick.

 

So, instead of responding to your fascinating pot of rumour soup and conjecture, I chose to laugh at your suggest that Oakeshott was worthy of serious consideration. It is a ridiculous claim.

 

Now, if you’ve anything proper to say, let’s have it. But do spare us all the nudge, nudge, wink, wink nonsense.

 

There you go again, imagining what was said instead of reading the actual words.

 

I didn't claim to offer anything substantive. It's a rumour (an "open secret" no less) which is extremely pertinent to the discussion but how would I have anything substantive? I explained why a rumour might be true in light of a super injunction and how you shouldn't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message. 

 

So what did you go and do? You shoot the messenger because you don't like the message. 

 

If you can't discuss something because there's not a signed confession in the Sunday Times you really aren't cut out for grown up chat on an internet forum.  I'm certain that you are better than that and while this ain't the Oxford Union, please, at least give it a shot at honest debate.

[Tony]

4 hours ago, Mister M said:

Yes it was me who brought her into the conversation because after you mention the term "super injunction being the term of next week".

You also described her as an "Independent source". She is nothing of the sort, but a very politically motivated right wing journalist married to Richard Tice. That doesn't make her independent in my book. 

She also spread the rumour about David Cameron sticking his penis in a pig's mouth. Which makes her a liar, and a dirty minded one at that. 

 

But you speak as if it is.

 

So the stuff about freebies is being "heavily reported" because journalists can't talk about what they want to talk about which is Keir Starmer's sexuality - in spite of the fact that no super injunction has been issued or even mentioned by Starmer.

Nonce in a discussion about homosexuality. Very original 

Incidentally while researching all this, apparently Keir Starmer got beaten up at school for standing up for a friend who is gay. Does that contradict those alleged set of values?

Or perhaps people are waiting for facts rather than speculating bordering on wish fulfilment, or more mundanely people don't care?

 

You are entitled to a different opinion, and time may tell is the rumour is true. You or I have no idea so I wouldn't be in a rush to either accuse or defend. We can certainly talk about the issues and implications, but there's an awful lot of egg to go around for everyone who drops on one side or the other at the moment. 

 

What you are not entitled to do is make homophobe accusations against me and not expect a response. You drew a conclusion which wasn't suggested and ignored the (I thought rather stylish) allegory of a pious politician preacher who was guilty of a hypocrisy. The important bit in the metaphor is the preaching, not so much the noncing. 

 

No need to respond, we can leave that there. 

[alchresearch]

16 hours ago, High Chaparral said:

You need to go to your Doctors and ask for some tablets to cure your anti Tory disease. Rosie Duffield has resigned because the Labour party stated they would be better and more honest than the Tories. After less than 3 months in government the new Labour government under the leadership of Sir Keir Starmer have shown they are worse and more dishonest than the Tories.  Sir Keir Starmer will go down in history as the most dishonest and corrupt person ever to be prime minister of the UK.

 

 

Labour supporters while Tory MPs were jumping ship to Labour and there were no by-elections - silence

 

 

Labour supporters on Rosie Duffield today - calls of "RESIGN", "BY-ELECTION" and no end of abuse and hostility.

 

Edited September 30 by alchresearch