Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%
  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%

  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
The Times, not a Tory newspaper, coming out firmly against the strike. Government must not give in, as a string of striking occupations are queuing behind, and inflation will be sent skywards with disasterous results.

Meanwhile Johnson has asked Sunak to look at removing restrictions on the pay of directors and non-execs.

Bosses pay isn't inflationary, apparently.
 
Meanwhile Johnson has asked Sunak to look at removing restrictions on the pay of directors and non-execs.

Bosses pay isn't inflationary, apparently.

Yes, designed to attract business into the UK. Hard argument to make when public sector told to tighten their belts. Can't see it happening
 
The Times, not a Tory newspaper...

Well, it's owned by Murdoch and endorsed the Tory Party in the 2019, 2017, 2015, and 2010 elections. Many of it's best commentators have strong links to the Tory Party: Finkelstein, Parris, Hague, Rifkind, Phillips etc. If that's not a Tory paper, I don't know what is! That's not a critique, it's my favourite paper, but it certainly leans very heavily blue.
 
Well, it's owned by Murdoch and endorsed the Tory Party in the 2019, 2017, 2015, and 2010 elections. Many of it's best commentators have strong links to the Tory Party: Finkelstein, Parris, Hague, Rifkind, Phillips etc. If that's not a Tory paper, I don't know what is! That's not a critique, it's my favourite paper, but it certainly leans very heavily blue.

The Times backed New Labour, so how could it be a Tory paper? The Daily Mail is a Tory paper, though less so now Dacre has gone.

The fact that The Times didn't endorse the blithering Ed Miliband or extremist Jeremy Corbyn does not make it a Tory stalwart imo. You mention Matthew Parris. He is passionately against the current government and has moved into Lib Dem territory. Max Hastings is a self confessed Labour supporter. Sam Coates and Beth Rigsby both wrote for The Times. Edward Lucas was a Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate. Janice Turner is ex Guardian. Trevor Phillips is not Tory so far as I know. Nor Giles Coren. I don't agree The Times is "very heavily blue". Given the state of the Labour Party, it may currently be slightly right of centre but it's certainly very critical of the government.
 
The Times backed New Labour, so how could it be a Tory paper? The Daily Mail is a Tory paper, though less so now Dacre has gone.

The fact that The Times didn't endorse the blithering Ed Miliband or extremist Jeremy Corbyn does not make it a Tory stalwart imo. You mention Matthew Parris. He is passionately against the current government and has moved into Lib Dem territory. Max Hastings is a self confessed Labour supporter. Sam Coates and Beth Rigsby both wrote for The Times. Edward Lucas was a Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate. Janice Turner is ex Guardian. Trevor Phillips is not Tory so far as I know. Nor Giles Coren. I don't agree The Times is "very heavily blue". Given the state of the Labour Party, it may currently be slightly right of centre but it's certainly very critical of the government.

It backed Labour when the Tory Party was in complete disarray in '01 and '05 and a Lab win was a shoe in. The exception to the rule. Couldn't bring themselves to back Labour in 1997 though and backed a bunch of anti-EU independents.

Anyway, not going to spend more time on this. It's not worth our time, and to most people is commonly accepted.
 
The Times withdrew a story about Johnson trying to appoint his then bit on the side (he was still married to someone else at the time) now wife as his chief of staff (taxpayer funded role) when he was Foreign Secretary. Cummings also claims Johnson tried to get her an official job in 2020. There is no injunction against repeating this story, but Downing Street asked the Times to withdraw it and it did pretty sharpish (this was last Saturday). The paper is now declining to tell its readers why it made this decision.

I have a subscription to the Times, it’s very easy to filter out its blue bias which is mostly confined to editorial/comment. However, if it decides it’s journalism has to be pro Tory as well, I’ll have to think again.
 
The Times withdrew a story about Johnson trying to appoint his then bit on the side (he was still married to someone else at the time) now wife as his chief of staff (taxpayer funded role) when he was Foreign Secretary. Cummings also claims Johnson tried to get her an official job in 2020. There is no injunction against repeating this story, but Downing Street asked the Times to withdraw it and it did pretty sharpish (this was last Saturday). The paper is now declining to tell its readers why it made this decision.

I have a subscription to the Times, it’s very easy to filter out its blue bias which is mostly confined to editorial/comment. However, if it decides it’s journalism has to be pro Tory as well, I’ll have to think again.

For £120k you can have dinner and ask him yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobmid and kiwiqpr
It backed Labour when the Tory Party was in complete disarray in '01 and '05 and a Lab win was a shoe in. The exception to the rule. Couldn't bring themselves to back Labour in 1997 though and backed a bunch of anti-EU independents.

Anyway, not going to spend more time on this. It's not worth our time, and to most people is commonly accepted.

You personally see The Times as very heavily blue because you have liberal views. Here's an interesting YouGov survey from 2017:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic.../07/how-left-or-right-wing-are-uks-newspapers

You will see you're in the extreme 14% that think The Times is very right wing. Then there are 12% who think The Times is very left wing - that'll be the Norman Tebbits. For the rest, most see the paper as centre or slightly right of centre, and 28% as fairly right.

But does this make The Times a Tory paper? I'd say it's an Establishment paper, but any newspaper that supports the Labour Party in two successive elections cannot be Tory paper. Here's a test. The Daily Mirror is a Labour paper. If it supported the Tories in two successive elections, could it still be called a Labour paper?

I don't think so.
 
You personally see The Times as very heavily blue because you have liberal views. Here's an interesting YouGov survey from 2017:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic.../07/how-left-or-right-wing-are-uks-newspapers

You will see you're in the extreme 14% that think The Times is very right wing. Then there are 12% who think The Times is very left wing - that'll be the Norman Tebbits. For the rest, most see the paper as centre or slightly right of centre, and 28% as fairly right.

But does this make The Times a Tory paper? I'd say it's an Establishment paper, but any newspaper that supports the Labour Party in two successive elections cannot be Tory paper. Here's a test. The Daily Mirror is a Labour paper. If it supported the Tories in two successive elections, could it still be called a Labour paper?

I don't think so.

If the Mirror supported the Tories in 2017 because Corbyn was a danger to the nation, I'd still think of it as a Labour newspaper.

Also, you're putting words in my mouth. I said, "leans very heavily blue", not "is very right wing". Those are very different things. I think the link you've shared rather proves my point! Most people see it as a right of centre (i.e. blue) paper.
 
If the Mirror supported the Tories in 2017 because Corbyn was a danger to the nation, I'd still think of it as a Labour newspaper.

Also, you're putting words in my mouth. I said, "leans very heavily blue", not "is very right wing". Those are very different things. I think the link you've shared rather proves my point! Most people see it as a right of centre (i.e. blue) paper.

Except The Times didn’t leave the Tories because they were a danger, but because it preferred what a Labour government offered. So it’s like the Mirror saying, this David Cameron, we’ll throw our weight behind him!

I read “very heavily blue” as very solid Tory, encompassing both wings of the Party ie incl ERG. Which is substantially to the right obviously.

I don’t see The Times as a Tory paper, but I accept opinions differ.
 
Jeez just seen piers Morgan trying to goad Lynch because he has the hood from thunderbirds as his profile pic, well to give Morgan his credit at least he didn’t mention Meghan
 
The government put billions and billions of pounds into the railways during the pandemic to keep them going.
Apparently though, it was the government that called this politicised strike and not the Unions.

****ing Tories.......

All hail Arthur Scar.....no wait, Mick Lynch.
What a hero.
How much of this tax payers money was handed out to shareholders?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willhoops
Blimey, withe every passing PMQ's, it becomes ever so more apparent that Johnson truly doesn't give a flying **** about this country or its inhabitants. Its like he's being paid to destroy it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoop-Leif