Off Topic General Election 4/7/24 - News, Views, Results…..

He may have been a competent Chancellor, but Rishi Sunak is not a capable Politician.
He lacks warm, charm and sincerity.
And he is obviously clueless about the real struggles in poorer people's lives.
The staggering wealth he married insulates him from the Britain most of us have to live in.

Even reminding everyone that he was "Mr Furlough" back in 2020 doesn't really cut any ice.
The Conservatives have tried to present their Lockdown strategies as acts of brilliance that nobody else would have thought of.
But furlough schemes and most of the other stuff they did was replicated right across Western Europe.
In fact was probably done over there first, then replicated here.
And if there had been a Labour Government in 2020 they would have done pretty much the same.

The Tories have implied in the past that Labour would have simply abandoned locked-down workers.
That is utter Cobblers, and they know it.

Rishi's advisors should have told him not to mention the Euro's while in Wales.
But maybe he thinks he can do the off-the-cuff "call me Dave" spiel - which he plainly cannot.

Hey ho.
I expect some nasty personal attacks on Keir Starmer soon.
Dirty tricks and slanderous campaigning is the only weapon the Tories have left.
They are so far behind in the polls that they have little more to lose by fighting a gutter war for the next six weeks.

PS:

I'm looking forward to Nigel Farage sticking it to the Tories in weeks to come...
(When he's not cheerleading for the Donald in the US).
Farage does have the gift of a bruising turn of phrase, while coming across as a decent bloke himself.

 

Sir Keir should reflect on the result of the London Mayoral election. Khan campaigned on an unpopular policy, ULEZ, and won with a large majority. He looked a more principled man than Starmer, who wanted him to ditch the policy after the Uxbridge byelection. The conventional wisdom is that tax cuts win elections, but people do know that public services are skint. If a political party was brave enough to tell the truth, that the only way to invest môre in them is through taxation, they might just be rewarded. We will never know.

 

Cabinet Minister and Arch Brexiteer Michael Gove is quitting before the General Election.
He's got wind that he was likely to lose his seat.

Who's next - Jeremy Hunt?
Apparently he too is in danger of being ousted on July 4th.

 

Will be what he is remembered for in years to come. He doesn’t give a sh*t though.

 

Wally without a brolly.
You're right, he doesn't need the hassle
He can now spend more time with his money.

 

The rats are fleeing the sinking ship.

Gove and Leadsom gone today, plus 70 other Tory MP’s so far, not bothering to fight and lose their seats at the GE.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-69051548

 

GET SOME IN!

The Tories will bring back National Service for all 18 year olds if they win the General Election.

Points for originality at least. That policy came right out of the blue.
Can't see many of the 'woke' generation of tree-hugging Planet saving youngsters embracing it though.
I think we'd see a fair bit of draft dodging. Spotty teenagers hiding in the attic or under the stairs
"Right you 'Orrible lot! Get your bleedin' hair cut!"

Labour have called the idea 'desperate' and I would tend to agree.
Another move from the Conservatives towards the right and away from the centre.
They have always regarded working class youth as cannon fodder.

 

In truth a form of National Service or community volunteering would do many youngsters a power of good. BUT to suggest it with just a few weeks to the election and after you’ve been in power for 14 years is simply pathetic.

Interesting though that you see it as a move to the ‘right’. It isn’t. It’s just going back to what used to be the norm and the centre, but you are probably correct that in today’s woke, leftie country it IS now seen as to the right. That’s how the country is now I’m afraid and it’s definitely worse for it.

 

It's more damage limitation.
The Conservatives pinching a policy that is popular with right-wing Reform UK supporters.
Effectively pulling themselves closer to the Reform UK agenda in order to win back a few votes from Tice and Farage.

Looks like the Conservatives aren't going to bother trying to regain any centre ground.
They've surrendered that to Keir Starmer.
And with it, they have surrendered any hope of winning the General Election.
The People of this Country are not as polarised as our politicians are. Something the Tories cannot see.
They will never win an election by moving away from the centre ground.

All they are doing now is attempting to avoid a total wipe-out.
They want to try and hang on to maybe 200 MP's if they can.
Good luck to them.

 

I agree. But my point is that I don’t think this type of policy is only popular with the right or Reform supporters. I suspect that many ordinary, working class families would like to see more discipline, respect for others and national pride put back into today’s youth. Of course that’s primarily the job of the families themselves, but support and encouragement from Government would help enormously.

 

It's the Tory version of the Nanny State.

Richard Tice is quite correct when he says the modern Conservative Party represents just another brand of Socialism.
High taxes, low skills, exploitation of cheap foreign labour.
Now telling teenagers they have to do community service or learn how to kill people.

It's interesting that the Party of Liberal Conservatism under Boris Johnson in 2019, dedicated to freeing the People of the UK, has morphed into a Big State, bullying Government that re-defines reality (Rwanda is safe because Parliament says so) and compels youngsters to salute the Flag.

 

Rwanda is safe because Rwanda is safe, not because the Government says so.

You have to remember that the people who were going to be sent there were supposedly fleeing for their very lives and were desperate just to get to a country other than their own where they wouldn’t be murdered by their Government or different clans or religions or whatever else they were claiming.

Anyone to whom that genuinely applied would have no problem at all going to Rwanda, on safety grounds.

 

The High Court, which has no political agenda, ruled that Rwanda was not safe.
A decision reached after careful research into evidence, by learned and educated people.

So the Government changed the law to enable it to send people there anyway and circumvent the Courts, by declaring unilaterally that it was safe in total disregard of any evidence to the contrary.
And striking multiple deals that were very lucrative for the corrupt regime that rules there.
Granted the UK Government was elected and UK High Court judges are not.
But the Government also has a political agenda, which the High Court does not.

Sending people to Rwanda is meant as a deterrent. The Government is quite open about that.
The deterrent effect is fear.
People do not fear being sent to a safe Country.
But the Government knows Rwanda does not have a reputation for being a safe place.
It is soaked in the blood of one million people who were hacked to death in the space of a few weeks.
Men, women and children.
Atrocities have been committed in most African Coutries at one time or another, but nothing approaching that scale.
Rwanda was not chosen by chance. It was chosen because of the Genocide.

That is the deterrent.
And that's why the Rwanda policy is sick, depraved and obscene.
I am very happy that nobody will now be sent there.
And I think Rishi Sunak knows that nobody would ever have been sent there. Even if he had waited until January 2025 to call the election.
One reason he called the GE in six weeks time is that he'll have that as a fig leaf. An excuse for the fact his £500m policy produced zero results.

The whole thing was an ill-conceived fantasy which assumed the majority of people in this Country enjoy being cruel to poor desperate people.
But they don't.
No more than the majority of people in this Country are millionaires who get driven around in limousines, get paid £50,000 for making after dinner speeches, sit on the boards of fat cat companies for two weeks a year and live in gated mansions. Or claim thousands in expenses, and get honours and peerages automatically dished out to them.

If the British People approved of the Rwanda Policy the Government's poll ratings would have gone up over the last two years, not steadily declined to around 20%.
Even Reform UK and the Reclaim Party have trashed the Rwanda insanity.

 

Sending people to Rwanda was indeed meant to be a deterrent and had it not been blocked by judges it would undoubtedly have been so. Numerous illegal immigrants have gone on record to say the same. And the Irish government is complaining about the deterrent effect and numerous nations across Europe are now accepting our idea that there needs to be a deterrent of this sort to stop the flow. And had it been allowed to work by the judges and the number of illegal immigrants fell significantly, then it would undoubtedly have been a vote winner for the Government.

But it’s not a deterrent of fear, because there’s nothing to fear in the contract under which they would have been sent there. The deterrent is simply that it wasn’t where they wanted to go and it would have been bloody difficult for them to get back to where they wanted to go from Rwanda, ie back to the UK.

But if you are happy that some out of touch, unelected bloke in a wig from the 18th century, who will not be affected in the slightest by the decisions he is making and imposing on those that will be, can overturn the will of a democratically elected government, then that of course is your right.

And if you believe that these people do not fear being sent to a safe country, even though they have just travelled through numerous safe countries to get here and refuse to go back to any of those countries and haven’t even provided any evidence that their own country is unsafe for them, then that is your right,

And if you are happy that men like Abdul Ezedi will still be free to come to this country and pour corrosive substances over UK citizens because unlike in their own country, women in the UK have a right to say no to being molested and raped by scum like him, then again that’s your right.

And if you are happy to say that no matter how dangerous, depraved and contrary to this country’s wellbeing someone is, once they make it to our shores there is nothing we can do about it, then that’s your right.

And if you are happy that men who are prepared to trample on a child and fight each other while crushing that child and suffocating that child slowly until she dies, just so that they can get in front of her in the queue, then again that is your right.

 

The so-called 'concern' in some quarters for the lives of people who cross the Channel in small boats is as fake as the crocodile tears of Paula Vennells.
That is clearly shown by the dogs abuse given out to the RNLI.
The bravest and most selfless volunteers in our Country, slandered and vilified for doing exactly what some who support the Rwanda policy claim that they themselves want to do - save people's lives.
The people of the RNLI put their own lives at risk on the sea, time after time, to support their personal convictions. That's a whole lot braver in my book than someone who shows their 'concern for lives' by talking about invasions and hurricanes in the Commons, and at the Tory Party conference.

Why would the same people who abuse our lifeboat men and women care about the migrants they save from drowning?
Human beings all subjected to contempt and hatred. All branded criminals, rapists and enemies of the British way of life.
Offered not one word of sympathy - even when driven to suicide, like that man a few months ago on the barge.

The Rwanda policy is just another form of human trafficking.
People rounded up in dawn raids. Cuffed and chained, then marched and manhandled onto aeroplanes by uniformed thugs.
Then disappeared.
Morally as despicable as the smugglers who put those people into the boats in the first place.
But we have a piece of calf skin with the Seal of Parliament stamped on it that says it's legal.
I expect there are similar pieces of vellum at Westminster decreeing that the Slave trade was perfectly legal. And by extension, morally right and respectable.

Before you ask again, I don't know how to deal with the issue of illegal migration and small boat crossings.
But I know we don't deal with it by abuse and cruelty. Not in this Country.
The communities like Peckham where some of these people have been living won't have it. And the British electorate won't have it.

That's my last word on this particular election issue.
Roll on 4th July.

 

I agree about the crocodile tears and claiming that it’s about saving lives in the channel. I agree that it’s not.

But the rest is inaccurate and misleading.

I’m afraid that whether you like it or not ALL of these people HAVE committed a criminal offence by entering this country across the channel. They are not innocent victims being rounded up, chained and deported into some hell-hole never to be seen again. And the law which says that they ARE all criminals has been around for over 50 years. It’s nothing to do with the current crisis or this particular Government. It’s a law enacted to keep this country safer, but it’s a law which isn’t being enforced properly purely because of the numbers now arriving here. It’s just a form of invasion or anarchy and that’s not exaggerating, it’s simply true.

The law is not being enforced because there are too many people breaking it. Just the same as in a riot where law and order breaks down and nothing is done about it. People can loot, rape, assault, burgle and you can’t stop it.

Well we could stop this invasion but are prevented from doing so by the lawyers, judges and do-gooders.

We could debate endlessly about constitutional systems and morality but in the meantime the country is going down the toilet and becoming more and more dangerous, literally by the day. Nearly 600 arrivals in the last three days and that is a fraction of what it will be by the summer.

They ARE (apart from the children) ALL criminals who shouldn’t be here.

 

One of the Conservative MP's who is not standing at the GE has apparently been suspended from the Party, for endorsing the Reform UK candidate for her constituency on July 4th, rather than the next Conservative candidate!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kkzv12wndo

Lucy Allan says she resigned from the Conservative Party rather than being suspended.
Another headache for floundering Rishi.
Even his quitting MP's are turning on his Party.

 

At this rate Richi may well go down in history as the leader who killed the Conservative and Unionist Party.

What a dreadful backstabbing prat he’s turned out to be.

Getting rid of Boris could easily end up being the worst ever decision in history by a collective political party.

 

Boris didn't leave the Conservative Party much choice.
He was out of control.

It's a blessing that we do not have an elected President in this Country, who has the kind of powers that the President has in the USA.
The Republican Party failed to remove their leader when he went rogue.
And the potential consequences of their weakness are incalculable.

Rishi Sunak may be a back-stabbing number cruncher unfit to hold the office of Prime Minister.
But at least he is not a rabble rouser with messianic delusions, who inspires a cult of fanatical followers.
'Big Dog' Johnson still has a few, as we will see after the Election when the decimated Tory Party rips itself to pieces in a bitter civil war.

Poor old Rishi inspires about as much devotion (fanatical or otherwise) as the speaking clock