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 |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers...." I agree May didn't do well but I'd hardly call Corbyn's performance stellar. Where we watching the same thing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers...." Not watched any news since the election was called so not seen either prog, but you are a labour fan so not independant enough to judge | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers...." Do you really think so? I thought he really struggled. I just can't believe that this country is facing such monumental change with the most incompetent pair of Leaders of the two main Party's in my living memory. There was always at least one good choice - now both are dire. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Do you really think so? I thought he really struggled. I just can't believe that this country is facing such monumental change with the most incompetent pair of Leaders of the two main Party's in my living memory. There was always at least one good choice - now both are dire." He has got better. But he is not as could as he should be considering May has been a front bencher for a pretty long time. Im in half a mind that mrs may is trying to lose the election or shrink her win so she can pass the blame to labour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"May is very poor at campaigning,she is becoming a liability as she has no policies no ideas just wants us to trust her. The election will be closer than people think." Yup she shot herself and her party in the foot with 'the dementia tax' and winter fuel allowances. The fox hunting thing and weakening ivory trade legislation does not help PR image either. Either she has less brain cells than I though or she is deliberately harming the party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"May is very poor at campaigning,she is becoming a liability as she has no policies no ideas just wants us to trust her. The election will be closer than people think." Got s horrible feeling you may be correct  | |||
| 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 |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers...." Sorry to say this Fabio... But you really seem fail to understand the basics of British political commentary... Andrew (Ferguson) Neil, prior to becoming the BBC chief political interviewer and commentator was a Conservative Party Press Officer and formally a member of the 'Bullingdon Club'along with BoJo and CallMeDave... Funny thing is as soon as a general election is called all commentators are governed by the laws of electoral equity forcing pundits to be unbiased... And suddenly Labour policies don't seem so bad while tory policies look positively Dickensian... Wonder why?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Do you really think so? I thought he really struggled. I just can't believe that this country is facing such monumental change with the most incompetent pair of Leaders of the two main Party's in my living memory. There was always at least one good choice - now both are dire. He has got better. But he is not as could as he should be considering May has been a front bencher for a pretty long time. Im in half a mind that mrs may is trying to lose the election or shrink her win so she can pass the blame to labour." This  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Sorry to say this Fabio... But you really seem fail to understand the basics of British political commentary... Andrew (Ferguson) Neil, prior to becoming the BBC chief political interviewer and commentator was a Conservative Party Press Officer and formally a member of the 'Bullingdon Club'along with BoJo and CallMeDave... Funny thing is as soon as a general election is called all commentators are governed by the laws of electoral equity forcing pundits to be unbiased... And suddenly Labour policies don't seem so bad while tory policies look positively Dickensian... Wonder why? "Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! " Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts..." I'll think you'll find you're wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Sorry to say this Fabio... But you really seem fail to understand the basics of British political commentary... Andrew (Ferguson) Neil, prior to becoming the BBC chief political interviewer and commentator was a Conservative Party Press Officer and formally a member of the 'Bullingdon Club'along with BoJo and CallMeDave... Funny thing is as soon as a general election is called all commentators are governed by the laws of electoral equity forcing pundits to be unbiased... And suddenly Labour policies don't seem so bad while tory policies look positively Dickensian... Wonder why? "It is easy, tory stands for xenophobia and brexit have given the licence for it, even ukip say she have gone to far and hence why labours policies are more popular. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Sorry to say this Fabio... But you really seem fail to understand the basics of British political commentary... Andrew (Ferguson) Neil, prior to becoming the BBC chief political interviewer and commentator was a Conservative Party Press Officer and formally a member of the 'Bullingdon Club'along with BoJo and CallMeDave... Funny thing is as soon as a general election is called all commentators are governed by the laws of electoral equity forcing pundits to be unbiased... And suddenly Labour policies don't seem so bad while tory policies look positively Dickensian... Wonder why? It is easy, tory stands for xenophobia and brexit have given the licence for it, even ukip say she have gone to far and hence why labours policies are more popular."Tory stands for xenephoba? Would you care to elaborate? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts..." Prove it. Links or google suggestions please. And, before you tell me to do my own research, I have done so. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong." . Yeah he's just a climate denying aids denying Pro brexit secret Tory. David dimbleby on the other hand who hosts QT on the BBC before Neil's late politics is an ex bullingdon club | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong." According to Wikipedia he went to Glasgow uni.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong. According to Wikipedia he went to Glasgow uni.. " I said as much in my earlier post. I was trying to give him a clue. He obviously has no idea what the Bullingdon Club actually is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong. According to Wikipedia he went to Glasgow uni.. I said as much in my earlier post. I was trying to give him a clue. He obviously has no idea what the Bullingdon Club actually is." Maybe he's getting confused with the Dialectic Society, which Neil was a member of. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... Sorry to say this Fabio... But you really seem fail to understand the basics of British political commentary... Andrew (Ferguson) Neil, prior to becoming the BBC chief political interviewer and commentator was a Conservative Party Press Officer and formally a member of the 'Bullingdon Club'along with BoJo and CallMeDave... Funny thing is as soon as a general election is called all commentators are governed by the laws of electoral equity forcing pundits to be unbiased... And suddenly Labour policies don't seem so bad while tory policies look positively Dickensian... Wonder why? It is easy, tory stands for xenophobia and brexit have given the licence for it, even ukip say she have gone to far and hence why labours policies are more popular.
Tory stands for xenephoba? Would you care to elaborate?"Well, since brexit the anti immigrant attitude have increased. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden " Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong. According to Wikipedia he went to Glasgow uni.. I said as much in my earlier post. I was trying to give him a clue. He obviously has no idea what the Bullingdon Club actually is." Sorry, got the BBC 1 senior political presenter and former chairman of tory students and tory party press office (Andrew Niel) and life long tory bullingdon club member and BBC political commentator David Dimbleby mixed up. but then considering that we have 2 hosts of political programs and both have close ties to the tories and seem to continually push the tory agenda except when to do so would be a criminal offence that would get them jail time I think I am allowed a little wriggle room... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are you sure about the Bullingdon Club? Neil attended the University of Glasgow! Yep, it is one of his proud boasts... I'll think you'll find you're wrong. According to Wikipedia he went to Glasgow uni.. I said as much in my earlier post. I was trying to give him a clue. He obviously has no idea what the Bullingdon Club actually is. Sorry, got the BBC 1 senior political presenter and former chairman of tory students and tory party press office (Andrew Niel) and life long tory bullingdon club member and BBC political commentator David Dimbleby mixed up. but then considering that we have 2 hosts of political programs and both have close ties to the tories and seem to continually push the tory agenda except when to do so would be a criminal offence that would get them jail time I think I am allowed a little wriggle room..." Yeah, you're talking bollox again! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe." So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?" The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis." And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? " The difference is uk dont got the same problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem." Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? " So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk?" You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?" It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do." what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) " Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it?" Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit?" No, its been all good and you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit?No, its been all good and you?" It's been a few hundred years since my family were immigrants. So who are the immigrants that are being exposed to increased levels of xenophobia in the UK since Brexit if it's not you and I? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit?" Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit?No, its been all good and you? It's been a few hundred years since my family were immigrants. So who are the immigrants that are being exposed to increased levels of xenophobia in the UK since Brexit if it's not you and I?" That is good and I would say that mostly the polish have been targeted here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp" It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp" That is right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved," This can go on forever, so we have to agree to disagree. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3FampThat is right "So would that be from 1to 2, 2 to 4, 100 to 200, 10000 to 20000? Without the actual numbers involved the statistic is meaningless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved," You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof." No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic." And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. " I've read the article. Now you tell me the actual numbers involved and what the actual 'hate crimes' recorded we're pre and post Brexit. Then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. I've read the article. Now you tell me the actual numbers involved and what the actual 'hate crimes' recorded we're pre and post Brexit. Then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion." 14,295 for the 3 months following brexit, a 27% rise on the same period last year. You asked for facts, i gave you facts. Now give me facts that prove it hasn't changed or it went down otherwise you're just wasting everyones time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers...." He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". " douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth" Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. " his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house???" His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. I've read the article. Now you tell me the actual numbers involved and what the actual 'hate crimes' recorded we're pre and post Brexit. Then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion. 14,295 for the 3 months following brexit, a 27% rise on the same period last year. You asked for facts, i gave you facts. Now give me facts that prove it hasn't changed or it went down otherwise you're just wasting everyones time. " I'm not wasting anyone's time. You decided to join into the discussion I was having with Shag. Feel free to butt out but if you actually read my posts properly you will see that I have never claimed that hate crimes have fallen since Brexit. I asked Shag to elaborate on his statement that Tories mean xenaphobia. However, Since you have started bandying figures about, is it 27% or 100%? Either way, these figures are meaningless without a deeper analysis of what has actually been recorded as hate crimes and whether there is any correlation between any increase and Brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. " its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. " Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? " so £1.7 trillion is perfectly ok then... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? so £1.7 trillion is perfectly ok then... " Typical non-answer. No labour supporter has given any vaguely sensible explanation of how Corbyn's manifesto can be funded. Distracting the debate to the Tories is a poor attempt to cover up the fact you can't address the issue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? so £1.7 trillion is perfectly ok then... Typical non-answer. No labour supporter has given any vaguely sensible explanation of how Corbyn's manifesto can be funded. Distracting the debate to the Tories is a poor attempt to cover up the fact you can't address the issue. " no. you address the issue, is £1.7 mill debt perfectly ok as long as its the tories? but cant fund £8 bill? the manifesto has been costed. it will be investing in renationalisation. where do you expect further savings to come from? notice that lib dems are going to stop arm sales to saudi arabia, they see something you dont see. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? so £1.7 trillion is perfectly ok then... Typical non-answer. No labour supporter has given any vaguely sensible explanation of how Corbyn's manifesto can be funded. Distracting the debate to the Tories is a poor attempt to cover up the fact you can't address the issue. no. you address the issue, is £1.7 mill debt perfectly ok as long as its the tories? but cant fund £8 bill? the manifesto has been costed. it will be investing in renationalisation. where do you expect further savings to come from? notice that lib dems are going to stop arm sales to saudi arabia, they see something you dont see. " Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i thought i would never say this.... but 2 down so far... Corbyn came out of his a lot better than May did in hers.... have to say he has gotten a lot better at this..... In a way i can't get over how rattled May was in hers.... He was calm in the way you never saw Tony Blair sweat under questions about Iraq. But anyone who felt that this was a good interview for Corbyn is not being objective. He doesn't know what a bond is, his IRA history haunts him, his sums don't add up, he's compromised his principles on trident. Offering 'hope' is really not what a country with over a trillion pounds of debt needs, it needs a plan! He waffles immensely, his composure was good. He is allegric to the words "yes" or "no". douglas hurd was meeting the IRA well before Jeremy. Bojo meeting martin mcguinness giving him the thumbs up. seems some people are quite selective on tbe truth Did you watch the interview? In terms of the questions he was asked and the answers he gave, i sincerely doubt the average reasonably intelligent viewer will have a favourable view. his answers were very honest and gave no spin. neil was fishing for any dirt. corbyn had a lot of irish constituents so had probably a lot more hair raising accounts of what was happening over in NI. When you hear some eye witness accounts from your constituents you want to raise the matters though talks. wasnt gerry adams invited to buck house??? His answers were largely waffle. It's very difficult for any unbiased person to understand what he's actually saying. He's certain not alone in that trait but one of the reasons trump was popular is that he can actually answer a question using a single sentence. its not im a celebrity get me out of here election. clegg was a muppet, boris is a buffoon, may is a puppet on a broken string saying strong and stable, farron cant even think. start talking about integrity. Ok where's the integrity of borrowing more money when we already have unsustainable debt levels? If interest rates rise to 3% we'll spend more on debt interest than the NHS and that's without anymore more borrowing. The IFS says Corbyn will add "at least" £9bn to the debt, anyone that can do simple maths can see he will add debt. What is so noble about plunging a nation further into debt? so £1.7 trillion is perfectly ok then... Typical non-answer. No labour supporter has given any vaguely sensible explanation of how Corbyn's manifesto can be funded. Distracting the debate to the Tories is a poor attempt to cover up the fact you can't address the issue. no. you address the issue, is £1.7 mill debt perfectly ok as long as its the tories? but cant fund £8 bill? the manifesto has been costed. it will be investing in renationalisation. where do you expect further savings to come from? notice that lib dems are going to stop arm sales to saudi arabia, they see something you dont see. Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. " not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion " Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed " Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt" The IFS say there's a gap. Labours manifesto is all predicated on the idea "the rich" will pay huge tax hikes and the tax to GDP ratio will go to the highest rate ever. This from the same party who have been complaining about tax evasion since 1997. In simple terms, they won't collect the taxes to fund what they want so they will borrow to fund the difference and when interest rates rise to their historic average then the country will either default on its debt or impose cuts to public spending that will make austerity look like a summer holiday. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt The IFS say there's a gap. Labours manifesto is all predicated on the idea "the rich" will pay huge tax hikes and the tax to GDP ratio will go to the highest rate ever. This from the same party who have been complaining about tax evasion since 1997. In simple terms, they won't collect the taxes to fund what they want so they will borrow to fund the difference and when interest rates rise to their historic average then the country will either default on its debt or impose cuts to public spending that will make austerity look like a summer holiday. " I saw a quote from someone today that said something it doesn't matter which party wins this election, there isn't going to be an economy to manage after Brexit. I can understand the sentiment. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt The IFS say there's a gap. Labours manifesto is all predicated on the idea "the rich" will pay huge tax hikes and the tax to GDP ratio will go to the highest rate ever. This from the same party who have been complaining about tax evasion since 1997. In simple terms, they won't collect the taxes to fund what they want so they will borrow to fund the difference and when interest rates rise to their historic average then the country will either default on its debt or impose cuts to public spending that will make austerity look like a summer holiday. I saw a quote from someone today that said something it doesn't matter which party wins this election, there isn't going to be an economy to manage after Brexit. I can understand the sentiment. -Matt" In the long run, brexit will be a relatively minor event in our economic history. Especially if you compare it to the 2008 banking crisis. In my opinion. 2008 could be the event that set in chain a sequence of events that costs America its position at the worlds #1 global economy. Make no mistake, a new #1 involves new rules, new organisations, new structure. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt" They have claimed a cost to it but its has already been shown to be bollocks. If collecting tax due is so easy why doesnt any government in the world seem to be able to do it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed " . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt They have claimed a cost to it but its has already been shown to be bollocks. If collecting tax due is so easy why doesnt any government in the world seem to be able to do it" . Coz they've been bribed not to collect the tax from the very people who should be paying tax. China do it very successfully?, pay up or fuck off | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt They have claimed a cost to it but its has already been shown to be bollocks. If collecting tax due is so easy why doesnt any government in the world seem to be able to do it. Coz they've been bribed not to collect the tax from the very people who should be paying tax. China do it very successfully?, pay up or fuck off" think they call it tea money. amazing how many officials can be bribed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed Labour have costed their plan. Do you take exception to a specific part of it, or are you just pretending the numbers are just not there? -Matt They have claimed a cost to it but its has already been shown to be bollocks. If collecting tax due is so easy why doesnt any government in the world seem to be able to do it. Coz they've been bribed not to collect the tax from the very people who should be paying tax. China do it very successfully?, pay up or fuck off" Except it was in the 97 labour manifesto too so by your logic, both parties have already been bribed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen?" GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. I've read the article. Now you tell me the actual numbers involved and what the actual 'hate crimes' recorded we're pre and post Brexit. Then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion. 14,295 for the 3 months following brexit, a 27% rise on the same period last year. You asked for facts, i gave you facts. Now give me facts that prove it hasn't changed or it went down otherwise you're just wasting everyones time. " You wrote this yesterday in the hate crimes thread "Beyond ridiculous. A hate crime is just a regular crime where some pretends to know the motivation. The motivation, even if you could know it is irrelevant. A hate incident isn't a crime and therefore there's nothing the police can do. A waste of time and resources" Two pointless categories created for the sake of the central message: 'report crimes to the police'." It's clear to see who's wasting everyone's time! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shag you seem quite happy for UK immigration , but against it for Sweden Well, sweden is a good example how wrong it can get if you get the wrong kind of immigrants in and they have received the largest amount of whole of europe. So which immigrants are the right sort as opposed to the wrong sort?The normal ones would be those that want to work and be friendly, sweden have mostly problems with the somalis. And you accuse the Tories of xenophobia? The difference is uk dont got the same problem. Sorry Shag but it still appears to me that you're the one with xenophobic views. Maybe the people you accuse of xenophobia since Brexit don't want the UK to end up in the same position you claim Sweden to be in? So what you are saying since brexit there is no xenophobia in the uk? You're the one that says it has increased since Brexit, I have not personally seen any difference. It would appear that you're in favour of immigration, as long as the immigrants meet with your approval. I'm merely suggesting that others may have the same outlook yet you accuse them of xenophobia. A tad hypocritical don't you think?It have increased and some do deny the reports of it. As I said earlier. I like the good immigrants, like anyone would do. what proof is there that it's increased and if it has increased, maybe it's to the non 'good' immigrants? ( using your words) Its been all over the news and social media, have you missed it? Ah, social media, so it must be true. Have you encountered any personal hostility since Brexit? Completely irrelevant whether he has personally experienced it, there was 100% increase in hate crimes right after brexit: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html%3Famp It's not irrelevant to me at all and we all know about statistics. The point I'm making is that Shag seems to think that it's ok for him to be critical about immigrants in his own country but then accuses people of being xenophobic for having similar views in this country. Unfortunately I'm having to labour the point as he seems totally oblivious to the hypocrisy involved, You wanted proof xenophobic incidents had increased after brexit. I gave you proof. No, you've provided a meaningless statistic. And a source, go read the source and tell me what part of it is wrong and disproves that xenophonic incidents increased after brexit. I've read the article. Now you tell me the actual numbers involved and what the actual 'hate crimes' recorded we're pre and post Brexit. Then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion. 14,295 for the 3 months following brexit, a 27% rise on the same period last year. You asked for facts, i gave you facts. Now give me facts that prove it hasn't changed or it went down otherwise you're just wasting everyones time. You wrote this yesterday in the hate crimes thread "Beyond ridiculous. A hate crime is just a regular crime where some pretends to know the motivation. The motivation, even if you could know it is irrelevant. A hate incident isn't a crime and therefore there's nothing the police can do. A waste of time and resources" Two pointless categories created for the sake of the central message: 'report crimes to the police'." It's clear to see who's wasting everyone's time! " It's OK, I'll leave it as it is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You'd do well to delete that post while you still can. It sort of parades low IQ if you think that's a contradiction." It's OK, I'll leave it as it is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. " . What truth, I pay a nurse 20 k a year she/he spends it all living, I get tax back and the rest causes economic growth, it is zero sum economics. Now if you wanna talk about how much actual labour you tie up looking after older people to young people that's different, maybe there's a question for people to do the their own general labour looking after their own old people, do the NHS have to do the menial jobs, probably not. The fact remains we spend far far less on health care in this country than everybody else and that's why the NHS is struggling. Sure we could be healthier and less waist band size would be brilliant but that's the private sector driving that issue not the state or the NHS. Who promotes smoking, drinking, eating, salt, sugar, watching TV, sitting on your arse, takeaways.. The private sector, the profit crew there all promoted for profit!. When was the last kebab ad you saw that said don't eat me, I'll kill you within ten years from bowel cancer? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£147 of licence payers money wasted Andrew Neil asks Nicola Sturgeon on devolved yes devolved issues in a UK election this is how fucking bad the British media is. If you count them 7 out of 34 questions were on devolved matters in a fucking UK election People were entitled to know what SNP MPs would do at Westminster if elected but no the BBC are too fucking shite at their job" Andres Neil is an poor interviewer. He couldn't have given Theresa May an easier ride if he tried. Mind you, that she managed to cone across as both terrified of answering his questions and ignorant of her own economic policies when he was letting her off the hook as often as possible is really quite something. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. . What truth, I pay a nurse 20 k a year she/he spends it all living, I get tax back and the rest causes economic growth, it is zero sum economics. Now if you wanna talk about how much actual labour you tie up looking after older people to young people that's different, maybe there's a question for people to do the their own general labour looking after their own old people, do the NHS have to do the menial jobs, probably not. The fact remains we spend far far less on health care in this country than everybody else and that's why the NHS is struggling. Sure we could be healthier and less waist band size would be brilliant but that's the private sector driving that issue not the state or the NHS. Who promotes smoking, drinking, eating, salt, sugar, watching TV, sitting on your arse, takeaways.. The private sector, the profit crew there all promoted for profit!. When was the last kebab ad you saw that said don't eat me, I'll kill you within ten years from bowel cancer?" When you say "i pay a nurse 20k" you actually mean "we pay a nurse 20k" because its tax payers money. You're indirectly referring to the multiplier effect. There's no advantage in economic growth compared to us not bring taxed that money in the first place and spending it down the local whorehouse. Assuming of course it's a reputable establishment that declares all income. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. . What truth, I pay a nurse 20 k a year she/he spends it all living, I get tax back and the rest causes economic growth, it is zero sum economics. Now if you wanna talk about how much actual labour you tie up looking after older people to young people that's different, maybe there's a question for people to do the their own general labour looking after their own old people, do the NHS have to do the menial jobs, probably not. The fact remains we spend far far less on health care in this country than everybody else and that's why the NHS is struggling. Sure we could be healthier and less waist band size would be brilliant but that's the private sector driving that issue not the state or the NHS. Who promotes smoking, drinking, eating, salt, sugar, watching TV, sitting on your arse, takeaways.. The private sector, the profit crew there all promoted for profit!. When was the last kebab ad you saw that said don't eat me, I'll kill you within ten years from bowel cancer? When you say "i pay a nurse 20k" you actually mean "we pay a nurse 20k" because its tax payers money. You're indirectly referring to the multiplier effect. There's no advantage in economic growth compared to us not bring taxed that money in the first place and spending it down the local whorehouse. Assuming of course it's a reputable establishment that declares all income. " Yes that's true...if you completely ignore that paying to employ a nurse contributes to the net health and wellbeing of society, and so the money that pays their wages contributes to an undeniable social and economic good. Boy, this stuff really is complicated, isn't it?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. . What truth, I pay a nurse 20 k a year she/he spends it all living, I get tax back and the rest causes economic growth, it is zero sum economics. Now if you wanna talk about how much actual labour you tie up looking after older people to young people that's different, maybe there's a question for people to do the their own general labour looking after their own old people, do the NHS have to do the menial jobs, probably not. The fact remains we spend far far less on health care in this country than everybody else and that's why the NHS is struggling. Sure we could be healthier and less waist band size would be brilliant but that's the private sector driving that issue not the state or the NHS. Who promotes smoking, drinking, eating, salt, sugar, watching TV, sitting on your arse, takeaways.. The private sector, the profit crew there all promoted for profit!. When was the last kebab ad you saw that said don't eat me, I'll kill you within ten years from bowel cancer? When you say "i pay a nurse 20k" you actually mean "we pay a nurse 20k" because its tax payers money. You're indirectly referring to the multiplier effect. There's no advantage in economic growth compared to us not bring taxed that money in the first place and spending it down the local whorehouse. Assuming of course it's a reputable establishment that declares all income. Yes that's true...if you completely ignore that paying to employ a nurse contributes to the net health and wellbeing of society, and so the money that pays their wages contributes to an undeniable social and economic good. Boy, this stuff really is complicated, isn't it? "Where in GDP is the net health and wellbeing of society accounted for? It does help if you read all the thread and then you'll get the context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Any reasonably intelligent reader can see the strawman arguement here and that's the point i can't be arsed to debate past. not really because thats all the tories and lub dems have talked about for the last 17 years, debt caused by labour etc etc, although was a huge world wide bank sponsorered depression. all you did was repeat repeat blaming labour for the financial crisis. every interview lib dems tories had, had to include this, but they havent managed anything they have tripled debt.... £1.7 billion Deficit and debt are vastly different, we simply cant go on spending more than we earn our economy has grown faster than any other eu country since 2010 and yet we are still spending 48 billion more than we get in, I am sure you will say tax the rich, well what do you call rich ? Labour tried that years ago and it failed . Hello theres a clue for you there in your writing. We spend we grow. Reverse that what do think will happen? GDP is a measure of transactions and only a very poor proxy of the general well being, as you have already acknowledged. So yes,you spend and the transaction gets registered as GDP. Whether or not anyone is better off totally depends on what you spent the money on. The NHS is not a good destination for more spending since people just take more liberties with their own health. As evidenced by the bareback gangbangs with strangers on here that would never take place if people funded their own damn treatment afterwards and the average waist line in this country. Truth hurts. . What truth, I pay a nurse 20 k a year she/he spends it all living, I get tax back and the rest causes economic growth, it is zero sum economics. Now if you wanna talk about how much actual labour you tie up looking after older people to young people that's different, maybe there's a question for people to do the their own general labour looking after their own old people, do the NHS have to do the menial jobs, probably not. The fact remains we spend far far less on health care in this country than everybody else and that's why the NHS is struggling. Sure we could be healthier and less waist band size would be brilliant but that's the private sector driving that issue not the state or the NHS. Who promotes smoking, drinking, eating, salt, sugar, watching TV, sitting on your arse, takeaways.. The private sector, the profit crew there all promoted for profit!. When was the last kebab ad you saw that said don't eat me, I'll kill you within ten years from bowel cancer? When you say "i pay a nurse 20k" you actually mean "we pay a nurse 20k" because its tax payers money. You're indirectly referring to the multiplier effect. There's no advantage in economic growth compared to us not bring taxed that money in the first place and spending it down the local whorehouse. Assuming of course it's a reputable establishment that declares all income. " . What you mean like Hong Kong investment in our infrastructure? Yeah your right, there a bunch of whores, ever needy of the next buck to spend on the next yacht. Of course anybody who wants to have a health care system you pay for yourself or zero workers rights or minimal taxation that goes with all this bollocks can just emigrate to south Africa where all this already exists, you don't need to turn the UK into south Africa just go, off you toddle and let us smucks worry about paying for shit like health care and pensions, its a free world, nobody is holding anybody here, everybody is free to fuck off to these countries that already exist exactly how they want them!!!. Unless of course it's not really about what's good or bad for the nhs but merely about extracting wealth from the UK to your own private bank account! You can own a very nice house in south Africa for 200k , the weather's lovely, of course there murder rate isn't that good, everybody has hiv and they do anything to get the money to pay for the drugs to stay alive, cars have flame throwers to stop car jackings and your 200k house needs 24 HR surveillance and barbed wire on every wall, sure we could turn the UK into south Africa and have incredibly low taxs but do I want too? | |||
| 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 |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far" Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. " i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... " Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. " No MP's but remember ukip won the last European MEP election here in the UK. Ukip have more MEP's than any other party in the UK. I watched the programme and I thought Nuttall did quite well. Agreed with many of the points he made. Not enough to convince me to vote ukip though I'm still voting Conservative. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. No MP's but remember ukip won the last European MEP election here in the UK. Ukip have more MEP's than any other party in the UK. I watched the programme and I thought Nuttall did quite well. Agreed with many of the points he made. Not enough to convince me to vote ukip though I'm still voting Conservative. " Those elections where less than half the voters turn out and the average person doesn't know who won? The same elections the BNP managed to win seats in? Come on even the fecking Green party have an MP. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. " Ukip did have more MP's than the Greens, Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless. Who have the Greens had other than Caroline Lucas? Ukip also have more MEP's than the Greens, and any other party in the UK for that matter. Ukip also have 7 members elected to the Welsh assembly and 2 members elected to the London assembly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. Ukip did have more MP's than the Greens, Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless. Who have the Greens had other than Caroline Lucas? Ukip also have more MEP's than the Greens, and any other party in the UK for that matter. Ukip also have 7 members elected to the Welsh assembly and 2 members elected to the London assembly. " Oops yes you are right 
Read that post again on May 9th and it will be correct though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. " . That's the problem though, politics plays to the extremes. I'd rather base all my policies on the average, the vast majority of people, the extremes can just get buy on their own. Alas our tax system is skewed to the extremes and punishers the average | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. . That's the problem though, politics plays to the extremes. I'd rather base all my policies on the average, the vast majority of people, the extremes can just get buy on their own. Alas our tax system is skewed to the extremes and punishers the average" I'll reply to that on May 9th | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. . That's the problem though, politics plays to the extremes. I'd rather base all my policies on the average, the vast majority of people, the extremes can just get buy on their own. Alas our tax system is skewed to the extremes and punishers the average I'll reply to that on May 9th "May 9th has been and gone so can you give your answer now?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"watching this now.... i didn't realise that ukip policy to treat grooming cases between those of different races dealt differently.. people like to bring other rotherham... but they think there is a difference between that and what the cathloic church did.... interesting watch so far Really? It's a lot of dedication to watch a interview with the leader of a party that doesn't have any MPs. Hard to think of a more irrelevant person on a politics show. i think it was the actually policy position that took me aback.... just the fact they want grooming cases treated more harshly because of race.... Does it really surprise you that in a country of ~65m people, we can find a few people to represent the fringes of society? When they have more seats than the greens then i'll pay attention. . That's the problem though, politics plays to the extremes. I'd rather base all my policies on the average, the vast majority of people, the extremes can just get buy on their own. Alas our tax system is skewed to the extremes and punishers the average I'll reply to that on May 9th "you going back in time or you got May in your head? | |||
| 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 |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will be a different deal than we have now, what it entails I don't know but business will find a way because they have to. Even if the UK has to pay for access it wich it does now anyways " Yes and with higher tariffs, also the fate of the brits in europe as they wait to see what may will do to those here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
