1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Off Topic Politics Thread

Discussion in 'Southampton' started by ChilcoSaint, Feb 23, 2016.

  1. Archers Road

    Archers Road Urban Spaceman

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    57,449
    Likes Received:
    64,934
    You seem to forget we already tried a Clown Car comedy government under Boris Johnson - and it was a disaster.
     
    #58241
    thebronze14 and StJabbo1 like this.
  2. StJabbo1

    StJabbo1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2019
    Messages:
    11,460
    Likes Received:
    13,612
    upload_2025-10-23_9-18-22.jpeg upload_2025-10-23_9-21-50.jpeg upload_2025-10-23_9-20-33.jpeg
     

    Attached Files:

    #58242
  3. tomw24

    tomw24 Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    70,588
    Likes Received:
    39,465
    Of course, the current government is doing so much better. Under Johnson it was corrupt, under Starmer it is incompetent.
     
    #58243
    ImpSaint and BackFromBeyond like this.
  4. BackFromBeyond

    BackFromBeyond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,670

    IMG_2542.png
     
    #58244
    ImpSaint and tomw24 like this.
  5. Archers Road

    Archers Road Urban Spaceman

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    57,449
    Likes Received:
    64,934

    If you think you've seen corruption and incompetence, wait til Pound Shop Oswald Mosley and his assorted flag-shaggers, spivs and headbangers form a government (God forbid).
     
    #58245
  6. Ian Thumwood

    Ian Thumwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    4,200
    Likes Received:
    3,737
    I think IOAG will blow his beans if that happens.
     
    #58246
  7. BackFromBeyond

    BackFromBeyond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    Its the lies that come with Reform and it's galivanting American Dad MAGA which worries me. Is it related to increasing online life and decreasing attention spans? That the case has be be made and won simultaneously, with memes and intense disembodied clips in mind? Contradictions no longer undermine the message when each message is consumed in isolation. You can be simultaneously anti-establishment and pro-billionaire, pro-freedom and pro-authoritarian, because people encounter these positions as stand alone moments, rather than a manifesto or cogent belief system to evaluate; but then again people are messy too.

    "If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do." JD Vance.

    Like a "goodie" spy in movie against a seemingly insurmountable foe, lies and deception are noble and for the greater good. "He's willing to say what needs to be said" or "he's fighting dirty because the stakes are too high for messing about with civility." Vance not just instinctively lying like Trump. But it is of course a lie within a lie; the "liberal media conspiracy." Vance's lies - ie; "Haitian immigrants eating pets," are being amplified and treated as legitimate news stories; by conservative dominated media landscape, which ensures his untruths receive saturation coverage.


    Never apologise, Liedology -101. I mean Starmer's had a crack at it, but he is - like politics in general - just not very good at it! His lawyerly approach often comes of as evasion and actually trips him up, "Its not illegal, no law has been broken" (those adenoidal strains). His trademark "grown-up" caveats look like weakness; like waving a policy document about in the cut and thrust of online dopamine fight. Its like you can hear the "well actually" before he even speaks.

    Meanwhile Farage can just say the contradictory things I mentioned above, often false, vibes-based things - and they land because they're emotionally coherent even when logically incoherent. "Take back control" while backing billionaires who want to dismantle worker protections, "Free speech" while threatening to sue critics, etc. Starmer keeps answering questions nobody's asking while failing to address the ones many people feel.

    Anyway, Starmer's just a convenient - albeit wavering- counterpoint here, he's not going to last. But interestingly enough here comes Polanski, "The Truth Speaker".
     
    #58247
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2025 at 6:07 PM
  8. ImpSaint

    ImpSaint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    2,266
    Well the Greens want to make it another election based on Brexit vs Rejoin and it was exactly that setup that resulted in Boris' majority in 2019! And that was despite the constant tales of buyer's remorse et al!

    Polanski was doing quite well but I think making it about Brexit will just push more into reform's hands while the remainers are much more spread out.
     
    #58248
  9. ImpSaint

    ImpSaint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    2,266
    Like you would have if Great Uncle Corbyn had got that little bit more to beat Theresa May? Lol. Weird how tribal things have become again!
     
    #58249
  10. ImpSaint

    ImpSaint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    2,266
    This kind of "snip" out of context attack and defend stuff has been in politics way before social media. Yes social media has amplified it but it is not a right wing thing to take a small snippet of a text and say "see, she/he said this." If anything the left have been more guilty of trying to present arguments based off out of context snippets over the past decade than the right although the right is quite obviously doing it a lot now.

    Even last week Starmer did it when he took half a sentence of something Kemi stated in a government document about "China = Enemy" and she had to correct that if he read to the end he would have seen context and a meaning that countered the way he had framed the snippet he used. And then Cleverly had to step up at the end of PMQs to make it clear that he had been misquoted by someone else! Both sides are at it all the time!

    On the Farage bit. Free Speech is not the same as libel! Sueing someone for libel or slander is not contradicting free speech! You are free to slander or libel me for example. That is your right! But if you are libelling/slandering me then I can sue you! I didn't stop you from saying these things about me!

    And I fear Polanski today (as stated above) got a bit too confident and has opened the door if he makes the next election all about Brexit / rejoin again! We saw how that ushered in a majority for Boris and remain votes, even if it is true there are more now, do not congregate in one place like the leave ones will! It will be an own goal unless his strategy is to become the 2nd place party in the UK and get ahead of the other left wing groups!
     
    #58250

  11. BackFromBeyond

    BackFromBeyond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    You're comparing apples and orchestrated disinformation campaigns (mainly), Imps.

    Yes, politicians have always selectively quoted each other - Starmer doing it to Kemi at PMQs is standard political point-scoring. That's not what I'm talking about.

    "This kind of "snip" out of context attack and defend stuff has been in politics way before social media."

    I'm talking about lying as explicit, stated political doctrine. JD Vance didn't "selectively" quote someone - he said openly: "If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention... then that's what I'm going to do." That's not spin. That's conscious fabrication as a political strategy.

    Trump unleashed the power of the unvarnished lie - it's a kind of power play delivered with swagger, it short-circuits liberal media leaving them in the dust crying foul as another zinger is hours if not minutes away. And the knowledge of minimal consequences oils the machine's mechanisms and productivity.

    Farage does the same: "four-star hotels" for asylum seekers (they're basic accommodation centres where rooms are dormitories and service is so curtailed they wouldn't attain one star, nobody wants refugees in housed in this way), claiming a Palestine protest was celebrating a Jewish man's murder in Manchester (it was organized long before and a peaceful demonstration). These aren't misquotes or out-of-context snippets - they're constructed false narratives designed to generate emotional reactions. The lie is the tactic.

    He's had a crack at Liedology. But Starmer is constantly having to lie adhoc and defensively. Apparently this Labour Government being "the pro-business, politically sanguine "adults in the room'", prepared to get on with it and hold their noses when required - as if morals and ethics are for the young and naïve! - means getting into bed repeatedly with the shadiest of characters. Then having to squirm and lie about the mess it's repeatedly created. That's not being grown up... it's being dickheads. He keeps having to lie, but most often not on his own terms! Unlike Trump, Farage and Vance.

    "And I fear Polanski today (as stated above) got a bit too confident and has opened the door if he makes the next election all about Brexit / rejoin again! We saw how that ushered in a majority for Boris and remain votes, even if it is true there are more now, do not congregate in one place like the leave ones will! It will be an own goal unless his strategy is to become the 2nd place party in the UK and get ahead of the other left wing groups!" Good points here, I agree. Will be interesting to see how the campaigns take shape. Left-wing popularism vs Right-wing popularism

    PS: you're obviously completely right about the libel point.. again!
     
    #58251
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2025 at 9:28 PM
    ImpSaint likes this.
  12. Ian Thumwood

    Ian Thumwood Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    4,200
    Likes Received:
    3,737
    Surprised that The Bloody Sunday trial concluding with Not Guilty has not raised a mention. I find this really staggering.whilst i can understand that accounts some fifty years after the event are not safe enough for a conviction, the case should have been tried in the mid 1970s. I do not understand why we are still discussing this in 2025 ! It is difficult to appreciate how the deaths of civilians have never been prosecuted. The murderers should be inside along with those who have swept this under the carpet for two generations.
     
    #58252

Share This Page