Just watching the news. Any doubts about cronyism and bribery during the Covid contracts completely gone after this insider betting scandal.
Once people get their postal votes they don't have to wait two weeks, they can send them off straight away, so people could be voting on what they know now, rather than what happens over the next two weeks. So if reform and lib dems are doing well, they could benefit from postal voting. I'm sure we've been here with Trump in America (and postal votes) lol.
In fairness, not sure who gets my vote now that Martin the Mackerel has dropped out of ours ... the rest just can't be taken seriously... the Tory is a fishy ****, but it's just not the same ...
Is it sinking in how easy it is to bullshit large numbers of gullible people, by telling them what they want to hear, delivered with a bit of blokeish charm? Yeah, think Boris showed that. What’s sad is that so many people never learn. Not all working class people are ****ing simpletons btw. See Mick Lynch for details
Don't agree with you. You see Mick Lynch in the same way as people see Boris or Farage. You just chose to use insults, such as calling some working class people simpletons, while supporting a champagne socialist yourself. He also is about what he says rather than what he has actually done himself for the people. Strikes are all well and good, until you come to pick up your pay packet and have to struggle to make ends meet that month, I very much doubt Lynch would struggle finanically in such a climate. Lynch just holds the public to ransom, or certainly those who rely on public transport, to achieve his goal. You therefore are just as gullible as everyone else, to someone with blokeish charm.
The difference I see from the outside on Lynch is that he was elected to get the best for his u ions members. And that’s what he tries to do.
Have to disagree here brb. Whilst im surr mick lynch doesnt ever starve and worry about his bills, whenever i have heard him speak he puts up a good fight using facts (admittedly not something i have fact checked but all sounded reasonable) whereas farage doesnt really talk about specifics, even an inkling of where he raises money etc (based on what i see here). boris i didnt like from the start so i wont comment as its clearly biased and i didnt really listen to him.
Farage puts up a good fight Bobby, he does exactly the same as Mick Lynch, and people chose their side based on what they say. Boris put up a good fight to win an election with a landslide victory, again because people liked what he said. What's changed on the railway Bobby, the ticket offices are still being closed. Customers will have to use ticket machines. The trains may still not run on time, and be overcrowded during peak periods. Crime will still increase on the railways and people assulted...and as a result of Mick Lynch those customers will probably have to pay higher train fares. They all have their positives and negatives, they all attract an audience on what they say, all three have the blokeish charm that appeals at different measures, all three probably like a pint. As for facts, it will be a fact that some people will have struggled financially or through inconvenience due to the strikes. The only difference I see is you pick a side.
If it's a contest about who lies and who does not, the point remains for me, people will have still suffered whether through lies or honesty due to an action of one of those men, and Mick Lynch like Farage and Boris, will have not.
I have decent terms and conditions at work due to the likes of Mick Lynch; the only people who have benefited from Boris and Farage, are themselves and a handful of their billionaire supporters
Of course it's bollocks because you don't like to hear it - it becomes tribal and you donate to Mick because of it. Hope he enjoyed his bottle of whiskey BTW, at least Farages pint is cheaper Enjoy your day bro,
Politics in the country cover too many areas. Maybe its easier for old mick because he only needs to focus and specialise on what the trains are doing. I think the general argument he is making is why are the train companies trying to reduce down staff/service cut everything down which has been happening over the years whilst taking relatively huge dividends (this is unfortunately the downsides of capitalism and privatisation on effectively a Monopoly) with loads of government subsidies. Hes fighting for the rights of the workers and jobs and i think its relatively reasonable. His plan is give them more money and take less dividends essentially, something i think i agree with. Farage and boris (from what i read here) dont actually have a proper plan. You can't really lower taxes and invest more and cut nothing. The maths dont add up. You are right though, right now the only person paying for it until a deal is agreed at the workers striking (although they certainly agree with mick lynch hence are following through with what hes fighting for) and the poor commuters/travellers who would like a better service and not have their travel plans kai-boshed by the workers striking. Again its the fact that rail travel is a monopoly which allows these strikes to be so impactful
I agree with everything you say Bobby in priniciple. All of it is tribal though. I wonder how many of those same union members support Farage, yet I'm told people supporting Farage are simpletons, so maybe I should regard union members as simpletons. It all comes down to the fundamentals of creating division. It's like Peej putting up the wrong link yesterday of an alleged child abuser, and the link made claims that this is the sort of individual that supports Reform - so are we (not you and i) suggesting people should be locked up based on their voting intentions, this sounds like Putins world to me. So for me it does not matter if you are Lynch, Farage or Johnson you create a banner that you hope to bring people under to support. I said some months back I knew nowt about Reform, now I know more than I cared to know, and we have seen Farages popularity grow, creating division creates populism. None of that is aimed at you btw, just my way of trying to explain.
It makes a difference to me at least if a person is speaking the truth or lies. It's all about intent. You may not always succeed telling the truth but you endeavour to make the country a better place. But lies and liars can only ever have one outcome and we're seeing that right now bcos of the likes of Bojo, Sunak, Farage. If wanting the truth and ppl in positions of power whose intentions are honourable (regardless of the outcome) is tribalism, then so be it. That's the tribe I want to belong to.
They are all liars, every single one of them, Blair was a liar, Starmer is telling lies to get elected. Any politician that says they are telling the truth is a liar. NONE of them have honourable intentions, they are all millionaires, most millionaires get where they are through lieing at some point in their life or less honourable intentions. The next party in power will be elected on lies. If we are measurng who tells the most lies , well
Which is exactly why I haven't a fcking clue who to vote for. I wouldn't put Mick Lynch in any of that bracket though. Ppl say he should be PM. Personally I'd love that. Bringing some integrity to politics might bring some desperately needed standards to the country as a whole which we're lacking. But the truth is, if he ever even attempted it, the system which is set up for mendacity and liars would chew him up and spit him out. Our press btw has A LOT to answer for in this respect. It's not just the politicians but their enablers.
