Off Topic Politics Thread

Good bye EWTD .

 

They are certainly going after trump. Is it possible we can go after Johnson in the same way a bit later on??

 

I think we should afford him the opportunity to fail before we begin talk like that.

 

As long as we don’t help him fail.....

 

very true....... Some are saying he has already started........

 

Has @fatletiss gone?

 

And just how do you suggest under English Law we do that ?

 

I have I missed something?

 

Verhofstadt backs associate EU citizenship after Brexit. Not sure what rights that would give us, but hopefully freedom of movement would be one of them.
Still chasing the dream.

https://scramnews.com/leading-eu-figure-guy-verhofstadt-backs-associate-eu-citizenship-brits-brexit/

 

Waste of time. He'll get impeached today and then the Senate will clear him in January. And then he'll be re-elected.

 

How the hell would I know I was just asking a question. Surely there has to be a way. Through our courts maybe I don’t know.......anyone know?

 

Well the Supreme Court found him guilty of lying to the Queen, and his sentence was to be re-elected with a majority of 80 for 5 years. I’d say he was pretty fireproof, wouldn’t you?

 

Let's hope for some good old in-fighting within the cabinet.and someone tell the fat pig to do one!!!

 

Javid rumoured to be in pole position to get the bum's rush. I must admit he is pretty unimpressive. But then so are so many others

 

Ian,
I'm not surprised you have been staggered by the magnitude of the Conservative victory. You predicted a Labour majority contrary to what everyone else was saying. Even the Corbyn fans on this board accepted that the best they could hope for was a hung parliament, it was obvious to most people you were being unrealistic.

This was the time for Labour to regain power after nine years, but they blew their golden opportunity because Momentum and McCluskey chose the wrong candidate. That's the direction to which you should be aiming your anger, I'm confident we would have a Labour government now if they weren't so misguided.
That a Conservative party led by Boris Johnson wasn't crushed is an embarrassment for Labour.
Corbyn was very unpopular, but it wasn't because of BBC bias or a smear campaign. It wasn't because of people being ignorant or stupid as you pompously said. It may come as a shock to you Ian, but people can form opinions from a number of different sources.
His prevarication on Brexit didn't help the cause at all, the potential Labour voters didn't confidently know the party's position.
The comments about antisemitism being a non-issue don't really stack up https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/16/louise-ellman-quits-labour-party-over-antisemitism. Also how many party members left during Corbyn's time? https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/...rs-a-day-according-to-latest-figures-1.487330
Your dismissal of the "terrorist sympathiser" accusations as stupid is typical of the attitude that many of his backers took before the election. Many people have long memories, they remember terrorist attacks in the UK and Corbyn's (and McDonnell's) stance on them. There is also plenty of information available to research. Disregard their views if you wish but it was mentioned to Labour campaigners time and time again.
You've made some cracking comments in your post Ian but this one nearly made me laugh out loud "During the campaign the most credible of all the politicians was John Mc Donnell". This "credible" politician was also a terrorist sympathiser. His comments "It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA" were later apologised for when he was threatened with expulsion from the Labour Party.
Your latest prediction is that the next election will yield a majority for the Labour Party, but then you go on to say that the tack of the party shouldn't change. In other words "same again" and quite likely with the same result.
Maybe a party split into two would be the right direction for Labour. A far left group run by Momentum that lives off a belief that they are on the moral high ground but never gets elected or a left of centre group that has a credible leader with a broader appeal and gets to govern now and again.

 

Matt Hancock, Secretary of State for Selling the NHS, said on live TV today:


“Every year at the moment, around 27,000 nurses leave the NHS. I want to reduce that number. Even if we didn’t have any new nurses, just by reducing the number who leave, you would end up with more nurses in the NHS. That contributes. That retention of existing nurses contributes to increasing the number of nurses in the NHS and that’s very important.

Also, we’re going to have new nurses and the combination of increasing retention, which means fewer nurses leaving and having more new nurses, including with our bursary today. So if you’re watching and you want to become a nurse and don’t think at the moment you’ve got the financial resources to do it, we are putting in place that extra support, on top of all the existing support.

The combination of reducing the number of nurses leaving and having new nurses coming through – that leads to an increase in the total number of nurses in the NHS, which is what matters from my point of view running the NHS and from a patient’s view for ensuring that there is patient care and that there are enough nurses on the ward.”

So that clears that up then.

 

Yep. Because if I give you a tenner, then I decide not to take it back, you have twenty quid.

Didnt you realise? #ToryMaths

 

This is ****ing embarrassing. ****ing shambles of a government, run by ****ing simpletons who have so little respect for the voting public that their standard go-to approach is lie. And when they aren't lying they are making straw men, throwing insults, passing the buck or being general **** bags.

Just say: we can't actually be ****ed to spend any more on the
NHS because it is for poor people and we personally don't need it.

At least that would be one honest thing.

 

Someone else said: If I decide not to have one of my testicles removed, that must mean I now have 3 testicles, or is that a load of bollocks?

 

One of the greatest examples of workers rights ever enacted, even if it’s ignored in many industries.