Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. " Yes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes." Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories " Oh hang on, Fabricate has hijacked this post and added his own criteria. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories " That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese." I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? " I am not sure what "by default" means in this context. But otherwise, welcome to the real world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? I am not sure what "by default" means in this context. But otherwise, welcome to the real world. " By default because of a lack of opposition. through lack of positive action rather than conscious choice. I am not criticising your decision but applaud your honesty , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? I am not sure what "by default" means in this context. But otherwise, welcome to the real world. By default because of a lack of opposition. through lack of positive action rather than conscious choice. I am not criticising your decision but applaud your honesty , " I'm not sure my honesty is heroic, it's how everyone votes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese." There are other options to vote for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? I am not sure what "by default" means in this context. But otherwise, welcome to the real world. By default because of a lack of opposition. through lack of positive action rather than conscious choice. I am not criticising your decision but applaud your honesty , I'm not sure my honesty is heroic, it's how everyone votes." I don’t, I would never vote for a party that I didn’t agree with ‘just because they are better than labour ‘, tbh though , Rishi Sunak had gone up in my estimations since he has decided to go to COP 27  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. " I won't be voting Tory at the election. Made my mind up during the Boris days. Liz certainly did not win me back. I see Rishi as a caretaker until the election, maybe a bit unfair but so be it. Still no idea who I will vote for as Labour have improved under SKS but not clear on their policies. Hoping a decent independent runs in my area I can lend my vote to | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. " Yes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes" The "and why" bit is what the OP was hoping for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes The "and why" bit is what the OP was hoping for." Seems you are the one asking that with your post. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. I won't be voting Tory at the election. Made my mind up during the Boris days. Liz certainly did not win me back. I see Rishi as a caretaker until the election, maybe a bit unfair but so be it. Still no idea who I will vote for as Labour have improved under SKS but not clear on their policies. Hoping a decent independent runs in my area I can lend my vote to" Labour improved not near enough they will fk us over again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. I won't be voting Tory at the election. Made my mind up during the Boris days. Liz certainly did not win me back. I see Rishi as a caretaker until the election, maybe a bit unfair but so be it. Still no idea who I will vote for as Labour have improved under SKS but not clear on their policies. Hoping a decent independent runs in my area I can lend my vote to Labour improved not near enough they will fk us over again. " They have not won my vote yet but there is still time. I hope your wrong as regardless of my vote I think it's highly likely that they will be next in government | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. I won't be voting Tory at the election. Made my mind up during the Boris days. Liz certainly did not win me back. I see Rishi as a caretaker until the election, maybe a bit unfair but so be it. Still no idea who I will vote for as Labour have improved under SKS but not clear on their policies. Hoping a decent independent runs in my area I can lend my vote to Labour improved not near enough they will fk us over again. " Unfortunately, the tories have fucked us over as well | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes The "and why" bit is what the OP was hoping for. Seems you are the one asking that with your post." No, the OP definitely posted the OP. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I will be voting tory,as I have done since I was 18,I believe bo jo shouldn't have walked as he did nothing wrong. He delivered brexit after the country voted for it,with covid he did as his MEDICAL ADVISORS told him to do" Comedy gold  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system." How many should they have allowed to die? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? " I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know." You suspect? Do you have any expect knowledge to back up that claim | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. You suspect? Do you have any expect knowledge to back up that claim " Nobody will ever know will they? No country of similar size, demographics and population density didn't lock down. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know." If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money?" Just allow them to die | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die " Which is cheaper? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper?" Firing squad? Who decides who gets killed? Boris ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper?" It is not the case that all risks to life should be eliminated at any cost. Every day all of us take risks, so an acceptable balance is needed. The only way to eliminate all risk is not to do anything at all. The way covid was handled with lockdown reduced some risk but at a huge financial cost. There was also huge non-financial cost in terms of other illnesses and diseases not being treated, mental health, education etc. So, on balance, not worth it in hindsight. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes. Despite the odd blip and occasional minor scandal that gets blown out of all proportion by the miserable leftie sandalistas, still the only show in town to form a government " Yes that's right. Only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption and self serving politics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper? It is not the case that all risks to life should be eliminated at any cost. Every day all of us take risks, so an acceptable balance is needed. The only way to eliminate all risk is not to do anything at all. The way covid was handled with lockdown reduced some risk but at a huge financial cost. There was also huge non-financial cost in terms of other illnesses and diseases not being treated, mental health, education etc. So, on balance, not worth it in hindsight." So, on balance, how many should have been allowed to die, roughly speaking | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes. Despite the odd blip and occasional minor scandal that gets blown out of all proportion by the miserable leftie sandalistas, still the only show in town to form a government Yes that's right. Only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption and self serving politics. " Except when the expenses scandal broke about a decade back? Showed they have their snouts in the trough also. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes. Despite the odd blip and occasional minor scandal that gets blown out of all proportion by the miserable leftie sandalistas, still the only show in town to form a government Yes that's right. Only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption and self serving politics. " I hope he hasn’t been radicalised to think that is true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper? It is not the case that all risks to life should be eliminated at any cost. Every day all of us take risks, so an acceptable balance is needed. The only way to eliminate all risk is not to do anything at all. The way covid was handled with lockdown reduced some risk but at a huge financial cost. There was also huge non-financial cost in terms of other illnesses and diseases not being treated, mental health, education etc. So, on balance, not worth it in hindsight. So, on balance, how many should have been allowed to die, roughly speaking " However many were going to die. As above, I suspect that it would have been up to twice the number of covid deaths so far. If covid was a really deadly disease and was likely to have a significant impact on population then lockdown starts to become more beneficial than letting the disease run its course. Significant may be more than 10% of the population. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper? It is not the case that all risks to life should be eliminated at any cost. Every day all of us take risks, so an acceptable balance is needed. The only way to eliminate all risk is not to do anything at all. The way covid was handled with lockdown reduced some risk but at a huge financial cost. There was also huge non-financial cost in terms of other illnesses and diseases not being treated, mental health, education etc. So, on balance, not worth it in hindsight. So, on balance, how many should have been allowed to die, roughly speaking " So someone that twists a thread to show indignation at hypothetical child abuse is in favour of neglect leading to death of the elderly. Shocking behaviour | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but when you run a country you don't only take advice from medical professionals. You have to be prepared to allow deaths so the majority of folk, and the country, is in the best situation at the end. That clearly didnt happen under the current system. How many should they have allowed to die? I suspect that if we didn't lock down the death toll would have been 1.5 to 2x what it was as the most vulnerable died anyway. That would have been a more cost beneficial solution so would have been acceptable. Acknowledging that, although the risk was very low, one of those deaths could have been any one of us or someone we know. If cost benefit is more important than human life. Shouldn't all elderly and disabled people be executed to save money? Just allow them to die Which is cheaper? It is not the case that all risks to life should be eliminated at any cost. Every day all of us take risks, so an acceptable balance is needed. The only way to eliminate all risk is not to do anything at all. The way covid was handled with lockdown reduced some risk but at a huge financial cost. There was also huge non-financial cost in terms of other illnesses and diseases not being treated, mental health, education etc. So, on balance, not worth it in hindsight. So, on balance, how many should have been allowed to die, roughly speaking However many were going to die. As above, I suspect that it would have been up to twice the number of covid deaths so far. If covid was a really deadly disease and was likely to have a significant impact on population then lockdown starts to become more beneficial than letting the disease run its course. Significant may be more than 10% of the population." 6.6 million? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes. Despite the odd blip and occasional minor scandal that gets blown out of all proportion by the miserable leftie sandalistas, still the only show in town to form a government Yes that's right. Only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption and self serving politics. Except when the expenses scandal broke about a decade back? Showed they have their snouts in the trough also." So not only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption? Make up your mind. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes. Despite the odd blip and occasional minor scandal that gets blown out of all proportion by the miserable leftie sandalistas, still the only show in town to form a government Yes that's right. Only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption and self serving politics. Except when the expenses scandal broke about a decade back? Showed they have their snouts in the trough also. So not only "leftie sanalistas" are against corruption? Make up your mind." Ay? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. " Nope, I voted for BJ because who doesn't love giving a good BJ. I don't particularly like anyone else in the party ... well maybe Reese-Mogg he looks kinky.
X Katie X | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What complete and utter drivel. The Tory Party are scandal ridden and completely incompetent. Almost bankrupted the country ,split us from our biggest trading partner and change one buffoon for another every 18months or so. Yet present themselves as stable and prudent. They ran out of ideas a decade ago yet have retained their lack of any moral compass throughout " This is true. What this, and other threads highlight is that the general voting public will still largely vote Conservative because either. A. They're not paying attention. B. Have been conditioned to think that this is as good as it gets. C. Buy into the media and Tory PR machine blaming everything on Labour, immigrants, the EU, Corbyn, Ramainers etc etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should have the option of "None of the above". That would have been likely to be used next time if available." You can submit a spoiled vote, which gets read out at the count. If there are enough, it sends a message that people are deliberately not participating in the system designed to serve itself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should have the option of "None of the above". That would have been likely to be used next time if available. You can submit a spoiled vote, which gets read out at the count. If there are enough, it sends a message that people are deliberately not participating in the system designed to serve itself. " That is probably what I will do. Write "None of the above" across the paper. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in " Never gave Liz a chance?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in " Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry." Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science? "For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science? I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway. "You indicated reform was. The current manifesto is available. Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved."I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do. Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast. Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
"So you can't name it then. Cheers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
So you can't name it then.
Cheers"I can't answer that specific and off-base question no. But it doesn't have any bearing on them being a party focused on anti-science and bigotry. Assuming they're the same beast as ukip, which in fairness, I did ask you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
So you can't name it then.
Cheers
I can't answer that specific and off-base question no. But it doesn't have any bearing on them being a party focused on anti-science and bigotry. Assuming they're the same beast as ukip, which in fairness, I did ask you. "" they're anti science and bigoted" "Name 1 example" " I can't answer that. But they are"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
So you can't name it then.
Cheers
I can't answer that specific and off-base question no. But it doesn't have any bearing on them being a party focused on anti-science and bigotry. Assuming they're the same beast as ukip, which in fairness, I did ask you.
" they're anti science and bigoted"
"Name 1 example"
" I can't answer that. But they are" "I can see why you're attracted to such far right populist parties. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
So you can't name it then.
Cheers
I can't answer that specific and off-base question no. But it doesn't have any bearing on them being a party focused on anti-science and bigotry. Assuming they're the same beast as ukip, which in fairness, I did ask you.
" they're anti science and bigoted"
"Name 1 example"
" I can't answer that. But they are"
I can see why you're attracted to such far right populist parties. "Asked for 1 simple example and all you can scream is bigot and far right , and admit you have never investigated the policies. Sadly for many on the left of centre of the political spectrum peoplenlike you are why they struggle to gain votes. Instead of discussion, investigation and convincing. You'd rather remake grandiose unsubstantiared claims and name call. It's a shame for left of centre parties they're backed by many like yourself | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science? "It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case ) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
For which party are you implying isn't bigoted and anti-science?
I don't think any of them have manifestos out when there's no election anyway.
You indicated reform was.
The current manifesto is available.
Intrigued as to your thoughts on tbe bigotry involved.
I'm going to assume their manifesto is thinly veiled bigotry, such as Daily Mail, Express do.
Are they much different to UKIP? I'm assuming they're the same beast.
Plus we can judge them on the things they say and what they stand for.
So you can't name it then.
Cheers
I can't answer that specific and off-base question no. But it doesn't have any bearing on them being a party focused on anti-science and bigotry. Assuming they're the same beast as ukip, which in fairness, I did ask you.
" they're anti science and bigoted"
"Name 1 example"
" I can't answer that. But they are"
I can see why you're attracted to such far right populist parties.
Asked for 1 simple example and all you can scream is bigot and far right , and admit you have never investigated the policies. Sadly for many on the left of centre of the political spectrum peoplenlike you are why they struggle to gain votes. Instead of discussion, investigation and convincing. You'd rather remake grandiose unsubstantiared claims and name call.
It's a shame for left of centre parties they're backed by many like yourself
"Hold on one sec. Are you suggesting that Reform aren't focused on anti-science, bigotry and aren't a far right party? Let's be honest, if you're considering voting reform, you're unlikely to be persuaded by some random fella that it's worth considering switching to the Greens. So not sure why you're turning this into a personal attack about my inability to get you to change your vote. But here we are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case ) "Just look at who they have. Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier. Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case )
Just look at who they have.
Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier
Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier
George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier
Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier.
Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same.
"So when you say science denier...you mean that they don't conform to the climate crisis narrative? When you say the Rwanda plan is bigoted.. then you just want any 1 to be given citizenship who arrives I t he uk illegally and no deportation? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case )
Just look at who they have.
Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier
Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier
George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier
Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier.
Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same.
So when you say science denier...you mean that they don't conform to the climate crisis narrative?
When you say the Rwanda plan is bigoted.. then you just want any 1 to be given citizenship who arrives I t he uk illegally and no deportation?"Yep. Exactly the kind of thing someone who votes Reform would say. Climate science is extremely well understood and is pretty easy for anyone to understand. So they're either denying it to perpetuate the billions in profit the fossil fuels industry make (and receive on global subsidiaries each year), or they're willfully ignorant. Neither of which are positive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game?" If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case )
Just look at who they have.
Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier
Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier
George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier
Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier.
Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same.
So when you say science denier...you mean that they don't conform to the climate crisis narrative?
When you say the Rwanda plan is bigoted.. then you just want any 1 to be given citizenship who arrives I t he uk illegally and no deportation?"No, I want anyone arriving here to be treated fairly and within the law , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour"." Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case )
Just look at who they have.
Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier
Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier
George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier
Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier.
Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same.
So when you say science denier...you mean that they don't conform to the climate crisis narrative?
When you say the Rwanda plan is bigoted.. then you just want any 1 to be given citizenship who arrives I t he uk illegally and no deportation?
No, I want anyone arriving here to be treated fairly and within the law , "And they are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I won't be voting Tory. They never gave Liz a chance having ousted Boris who received the same cake Rishi did. I won't be voting Labour because of a multitude of reasons. E.g dianne abbot blaming the uk for a kid being ra*ped by an asylum seeker. I dont know their policy on e.u or future trade deals. Rachel reeves has get every single numerical discussion horribly wrong as shadow chancellor. I will probably either spoil my ballot or vote for a reform candidate. I imagine many tories will likely go for reform. Quite frankly I'm sick to death of the sex woth minors scandals, acid attacks etc in this cohort. We still dpnt know why the whip was removed fro. 1 labour mp. Ideally both major parties should have a head to toe clear out and decide what they stand for both labour and Conservatives have half their politicians standing on manifestos they don't believe in Sadly I agree. Lots of people don't think the Tories are hateful enough and are moving to parties like BNP or reform for some good old fashioned anti-science and bigotry. Which of tbe policies in the current manifesto are bigoted and anti science?
It isn’t in their manifesto but the Rwanda scheme is bigoted and was introduced despite expert advice stating it was illegal , very expensive and wouldn’t work (which has proven to be the case )
Just look at who they have.
Ann Widdecombe. Homophobe and climate science denier
Claire Fox. Openly bigoted, climate science denier
George Farmer. Thinks Trump is great, climate science denier
Nathan Gill. Absolutely bonkers climate science denier.
Etc etc etc. Pick pretty much any of them and you'll find the same.
So when you say science denier...you mean that they don't conform to the climate crisis narrative?
When you say the Rwanda plan is bigoted.. then you just want any 1 to be given citizenship who arrives I t he uk illegally and no deportation?
No, I want anyone arriving here to be treated fairly and within the law ,
And they are. "Yep, that is why they haven’t been sent to Rwanda, it is illegal | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made." I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ." He is voting Tory because Diane Abbot wears her shoes on the wrong feet, apparently | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ." Your idea was that a part was anti science and bigoted because pf people who support it I am merely using tbe same logic as your argument. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ. Your idea was that a part was anti science and bigoted because pf people who support it I am merely using tbe same logic as your argument." So you agree. A party filled with anti-science bigots, is likely to be anti-science and bigoted? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ. Your idea was that a part was anti science and bigoted because pf people who support it I am merely using tbe same logic as your argument. So you agree. A party filled with anti-science bigots, is likely to be anti-science and bigoted?" Nope. I still am unaware of what was said that was anti science and bigoted. No examples given. Just claims. I am merely using the same argument.vif that's your bleif if people of certain beliefs follow your party or represent it.cypu must accept that labour using the same logic is anti semitic and encourages grooming gangs etc etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And applying tbe same criteria then. No 1 should vote for labour because. They have a shadow chancellor who when calculating energy support forgot to take into account for winter. They have a Dianne Abbot who can't put on a paid of shoes and blames the use of the term invasion for a child being ra ped You have mps who have been found to have encouraged anti jew rhetoric. Is that how you play the game? If you like. "You have"... I am not labour, am not a member of Labour. Not everyone who understands climate change and doesn't blame immigrants for everything is a member of Labour. Good to remember that if you're trying to defend these far right nut jobs with "what about Labour". Nope I was simply highlighting the ineffective argument you made. I didn't make any arguments. You started talking about Labour instead of trying to defend those far right nut jobs over at former UKIP HQ. Your idea was that a part was anti science and bigoted because pf people who support it I am merely using tbe same logic as your argument. So you agree. A party filled with anti-science bigots, is likely to be anti-science and bigoted? Nope. I still am unaware of what was said that was anti science and bigoted. No examples given. Just claims. I am merely using the same argument.vif that's your bleif if people of certain beliefs follow your party or represent it.cypu must accept that labour using the same logic is anti semitic and encourages grooming gangs etc etc." I'm comfortable with you having any opinion of Labour you want. Based in reality or not. Reform are packed to the rafters with bigots and anti-science types. They're unlikely to be progressive and caring!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. " In a general election how does it work? Am I voting for Boris/ Jeremy/ Piers as top man or will it be the names of the local councillors? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. Yes. Without mentioning Labour, explain why you will be voting for the Tories That's a bit like saying that my choice for dinner is between mouldy cheese and a dog turd, but I can't mention the dog turd when explaining why I am eating mouldy cheese. I see, so the Tories are shit but not as shit as labour? Your voting Tory by default and not because you believe in their policies? " Pretty sure it’s called tactical voting.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. In a general election how does it work? Am I voting for Boris/ Jeremy/ Piers as top man or will it be the names of the local councillors?" At local council election level it can be a tricky decision sometimes, as it is perfectly possible to get a local person who has acted brilliantly for the local area regardless of their political party. At a general election though, my vote would tend to consider the performance and actions of the party as a whole, as represented by the leader of that party, due to the whipping system used in the House of Commons. Except in a few limited situations, the MPs are forced to vote in the direction dictated by their party leader and not allowed to act upon their own conscience or for the good of their own constituency. Hence regardless of the names of the candidates on the voting slip, what you are actually voting for is the political programmes of the party leaders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will any Fab Tory supporters that voted for them at the last GE vote for them again at the next GE? Lets see who owns up and why. In a general election how does it work? Am I voting for Boris/ Jeremy/ Piers as top man or will it be the names of the local councillors? At local council election level it can be a tricky decision sometimes, as it is perfectly possible to get a local person who has acted brilliantly for the local area regardless of their political party. At a general election though, my vote would tend to consider the performance and actions of the party as a whole, as represented by the leader of that party, due to the whipping system used in the House of Commons. Except in a few limited situations, the MPs are forced to vote in the direction dictated by their party leader and not allowed to act upon their own conscience or for the good of their own constituency. Hence regardless of the names of the candidates on the voting slip, what you are actually voting for is the political programmes of the party leaders. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The temporary turbulent Truss tenure has thankfully ended and the damage has nearly repaired. Labour are still hopeless with robotic Reeves still bizarrely arguing today that tax rises announced earlier are down to the temporary turbulent Truss tenure and nothing to do with the monumental amount of covid money borrowed! A monster raving looney lie "Yes all eyes should be on Labour. Don't worry about what the government are doing. Look at Starmer/childish name/Reeves etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation." We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate." Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The temporary turbulent Truss tenure has thankfully ended and the damage has nearly repaired. Labour are still hopeless with robotic Reeves still bizarrely arguing today that tax rises announced earlier are down to the temporary turbulent Truss tenure and nothing to do with the monumental amount of covid money borrowed! A monster raving looney lie "She uses to work for the bofe too which is quite frankly amazing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation." Is there a specific issue that has made you change from the last time you voted Conservative? Or is it more general. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward." Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The temporary turbulent Truss tenure has thankfully ended and the damage has nearly repaired. Labour are still hopeless with robotic Reeves still bizarrely arguing today that tax rises announced earlier are down to the temporary turbulent Truss tenure and nothing to do with the monumental amount of covid money borrowed! A monster raving looney lie "In 2019 the Tories had it all, 80 seat majority, Brexit Bojo at the helm, labour finished, whatever happened | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect" according to FullFact: "80 seats is plausible, based on UKIP’s vote in 2015, although it depends on the voting system" Which is completely different to your claim that they WOULD have had 80 seats or more.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The temporary turbulent Truss tenure has thankfully ended and the damage has nearly repaired. Labour are still hopeless with robotic Reeves still bizarrely arguing today that tax rises announced earlier are down to the temporary turbulent Truss tenure and nothing to do with the monumental amount of covid money borrowed! A monster raving looney lie
In 2019 the Tories had it all, 80 seat majority, Brexit Bojo at the helm, labour finished, whatever happened "They (he) lied? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. Is there a specific issue that has made you change from the last time you voted Conservative? Or is it more general." To meany mistakes not just by the PM but buy the party. Also in the system we have the swing back and forth red blue red blue gives a middle balance. I'd have liked to see councils be able to put council tax up by the rate of inflation. Council have just been given a budget cut in real money. Not good for service. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect" But UKIP still got what they wanted Brexit or did I get that wrong. So even if UKIP had more say it would have been the same outcome. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. Is there a specific issue that has made you change from the last time you voted Conservative? Or is it more general. To meany mistakes not just by the PM but buy the party. Also in the system we have the swing back and forth red blue red blue gives a middle balance. I'd have liked to see councils be able to put council tax up by the rate of inflation. Council have just been given a budget cut in real money. Not good for service." Interesting. Thank you for explaining. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect according to FullFact: "80 seats is plausible, based on UKIP’s vote in 2015, although it depends on the voting system" Which is completely different to your claim that they WOULD have had 80 seats or more.... " Proportional representation( particularly the one flouted for uk) is usually done by splitting the anount of MPs by the ratio of votes received by votes cast 650 mps Ukip received 12.6% of the vote. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect according to FullFact: "80 seats is plausible, based on UKIP’s vote in 2015, although it depends on the voting system" Which is completely different to your claim that they WOULD have had 80 seats or more.... Proportional representation( particularly the one flouted for uk) is usually done by splitting the anount of MPs by the ratio of votes received by votes cast 650 mps Ukip received 12.6% of the vote." But that is democracy at work. If 12.6% of the people who bothered voting wanted UKIP then they should have got UKIP. I might not like what UKIP stood for but 12.6% of voters did. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect according to FullFact: "80 seats is plausible, based on UKIP’s vote in 2015, although it depends on the voting system" Which is completely different to your claim that they WOULD have had 80 seats or more.... Proportional representation( particularly the one flouted for uk) is usually done by splitting the anount of MPs by the ratio of votes received by votes cast 650 mps Ukip received 12.6% of the vote. But that is democracy at work. If 12.6% of the people who bothered voting wanted UKIP then they should have got UKIP. I might not like what UKIP stood for but 12.6% of voters did." I agree, it would also mean that this current Tory government wouldn’t have a majority in Parliament | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I did but I will not be. But then I won't vote Labber so that leaves me with lib and is it worth the vote. Said it before and I'll say it again time for proportional representation. We had a referendum on an alternative voting system in 2011 and it was overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate. Very few people understood AV. PR is far more straightforward. Be careful what you wish for. If prnexisted in 2015. Ukip would have got 80 seats or more. With tories at 240. Infsct I'd say fptp hindered ukip significantly in that aspect But UKIP still got what they wanted Brexit or did I get that wrong. So even if UKIP had more say it would have been the same outcome." They did in the end by basically spooking Cameron into the referendum promise. If we had PR it would likely have happened sooner and with 80 seats ukip would possibly had more influence on the leaving process. I personally like PR but as its a truer reflection it does give results that can be less palatable sometimes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But would it not make a difference to how we vote at the moment if you are thinking of voting Green would you even bother in a strong labber or Conservative area or see it as a wasted vote?" Not how the current system works no. But I was addressing the PR issue mentioned | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But would it not make a difference to how we vote at the moment if you are thinking of voting Green would you even bother in a strong labber or Conservative area or see it as a wasted vote? Not how the current system works no. But I was addressing the PR issue mentioned" Wass agreeing with you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But would it not make a difference to how we vote at the moment if you are thinking of voting Green would you even bother in a strong labber or Conservative area or see it as a wasted vote?" The reason people vote for the small parties is for the effect they have on Labour and Conservatives. Labour produce more green polices to try to win back green voters, and the Tories promised the brexit referendum to win back Ukip voters. Thus small parties try to achieve some of their aims that way. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But would it not make a difference to how we vote at the moment if you are thinking of voting Green would you even bother in a strong labber or Conservative area or see it as a wasted vote? The reason people vote for the small parties is for the effect they have on Labour and Conservatives. Labour produce more green polices to try to win back green voters, and the Tories promised the brexit referendum to win back Ukip voters. Thus small parties try to achieve some of their aims that way. " I agree to a large extent | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But would it not make a difference to how we vote at the moment if you are thinking of voting Green would you even bother in a strong labber or Conservative area or see it as a wasted vote? Not how the current system works no. But I was addressing the PR issue mentioned Wass agreeing with you" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There are two kinds of Tory voters millionaires, and fucking idiots.. Check your bank balance to see which one you are.." Cant you be both | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
