FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Will you vote Tory next time?
Will you vote Tory next time?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Rishi Sunak giving his speech now to put all their wrongs right..spouting the same old clap trap we’ve all heard a thousand times before..!!
Would NEVER vote for them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon" You never vote anyway so | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so "nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If so, why?" Boris convinced me not to lend my vote to the Tories at the next GE. I know he is no longer there and it's a bit unfair of me to dismiss Rishi's version of the party but so be it. All I need now is a new political home for a bit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them"What about if there was a party that you felt would help society in general, not just you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive." Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive. Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. " But Labour generally do like to cut tax and increase public spending if the gap is big enough the market's will do the same. No | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive. Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. But Labour generally do like to cut tax and increase public spending if the gap is big enough the market's will do the same. No " I'm unlikely to vote labour. There are lots of other options. But that they might be as shit as Tories, seems a poor reason to vote Tory. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive. Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. But Labour generally do like to cut tax and increase public spending if the gap is big enough the market's will do the same. No I'm unlikely to vote labour. There are lots of other options. But that they might be as shit as Tories, seems a poor reason to vote Tory." There are lots of options but it will be a 2 party race to the bottom I don't see Green or Lib winning with first past the post. So almost not worth voting for.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive. Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. But Labour generally do like to cut tax and increase public spending if the gap is big enough the market's will do the same. No I'm unlikely to vote labour. There are lots of other options. But that they might be as shit as Tories, seems a poor reason to vote Tory. There are lots of options but it will be a 2 party race to the bottom I don't see Green or Lib winning with first past the post. So almost not worth voting for.." Personally I'd not vote before voting Tory. Voting for the smaller parties does have an indirect impact. If you think the government should pander less to the oil companies, you could vote green. If you don't like foreigners you can vote ukip or whatever they're called now. The big parties shift to try to win back these voters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking "Perhaps they know something you don’t eh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
Perhaps they know something you don’t eh?"I doubt they know any more than the rest of us. As stated above I won't vote Tory either but I'd never rule anything out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking "Absolutely cannot see anything but more Tory rule for the foreseeable future. Sure maybe one or two voters may finally have had enough, but by and large people keep voting for them relentlessly, no matter how self serving they are. I can't see that changing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think many of those who voted tory last time because Reform didn’t field candidates, won’t have that problem because their leader said they will be fielding candidates in all constituencies. It will certainly split the vote. The tories will fear that more than Labour, as that will tear the coalition of right." So how big is Reform UK and do they have 650 candidates all willing to stake £500 on getting 5% of the vote or dose the party have £325,000 + | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think many of those who voted tory last time because Reform didn’t field candidates, won’t have that problem because their leader said they will be fielding candidates in all constituencies. It will certainly split the vote. The tories will fear that more than Labour, as that will tear the coalition of right. So how big is Reform UK and do they have 650 candidates all willing to stake £500 on getting 5% of the vote or dose the party have £325,000 + " Easily, they're extremely well funded. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think many of those who voted tory last time because Reform didn’t field candidates, won’t have that problem because their leader said they will be fielding candidates in all constituencies. It will certainly split the vote. The tories will fear that more than Labour, as that will tear the coalition of right. So how big is Reform UK and do they have 650 candidates all willing to stake £500 on getting 5% of the vote or dose the party have £325,000 + " I think they have the numbers and the funds tbh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think many of those who voted tory last time because Reform didn’t field candidates, won’t have that problem because their leader said they will be fielding candidates in all constituencies. It will certainly split the vote. The tories will fear that more than Labour, as that will tear the coalition of right. So how big is Reform UK and do they have 650 candidates all willing to stake £500 on getting 5% of the vote or dose the party have £325,000 + Easily, they're extremely well funded. " Oh well if they pay me I'll stand for them I'm cheep and lazy just right for politics. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I will be retiring around the time of the next election. Worked continuously since I left school at 16. About time I was looked after for once and don’t really care who wins the next election " I’ve spoken to a lot of retirees recently, most are returning to the workforce because the cost of living has meant they need to supplement their pensions. Also there are many complaining about the state of the NHS. So you may not care who wins the next election, but if the tories take the next GE, you are not going to get much peace in your retirement. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking "I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country. Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy."But do you think we will ever get close to a Liberal PM | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy."Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old argument of 'the economy being safe' or 'don't trust Labour with your money' has been blown out of the water we'd say at this point. " 100%. But enough voters don't pay attention, and still believe that Labour are the party that borrow and spend. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me."Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe. But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor."It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old argument of 'the economy being safe' or 'don't trust Labour with your money' has been blown out of the water we'd say at this point. 100%. But enough voters don't pay attention, and still believe that Labour are the party that borrow and spend." So Johnny would you bet on another split and hung parliament next time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old argument of 'the economy being safe' or 'don't trust Labour with your money' has been blown out of the water we'd say at this point. 100%. But enough voters don't pay attention, and still believe that Labour are the party that borrow and spend. So Johnny would you bet on another split and hung parliament next time." Personally, I would put my money on another Tory majority, or possibly back to something with the DUP like we've seen before. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor.
It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left'"This is why I said above I would vote Tory, if they looked like they'd do a good job for British people. But that's splitting hairs with "never". It's possible, but extremely unlikely anytime soon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'd rather shit in my hands and clap." If I saw my local (tory) MP coming up the road knocking on doors I'd prepare a right-hander for him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor.
It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left'"I follow my values. That's where they lead. I vote with my values, not the impression I've left with someone on the internet who seems to think my political label is a pejorative  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor.
It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left'"Surely being far left is by definition as narrow minded as being far right? I wonder if the problem nowadays is that there are a lot of people who in the past would have been called left or right of centre who are now being called communists or fascists for no good reason other than it’s an easy insult? This isn’t a personal attack btw  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor.
It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left'
Surely being far left is by definition as narrow minded as being far right? I wonder if the problem nowadays is that there are a lot of people who in the past would have been called left or right of centre who are now being called communists or fascists for no good reason other than it’s an easy insult? This isn’t a personal attack btw "You're right actually, describing yourself as 'far anything' isn't open minded at all. My bad. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like Labour are definitely winning the next GE. Interesting though are the people that state they will NEVER vote Tory. That's not exactly a Liberal way of thinking
I vote according to my values. The Tories are as far away from my values as you can be while still being mainstream in this country.
Liberal doesn't mean wishy washy.
Of course you vote according to your values, there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't understand the NEVER. I mean to rule something out, EVER, just doesn't seem very open minded to me.
Ok, I suppose if the Tories became something totally unrecognisable to what they are, or I completely became something unrecognisable to what I am, then maybe.
But it's a bit like saying maybe I'll be hit by a meteor.
It's not really but I see your point. I guess it's my fault for maybe expecting a little more open mindedness from somewhere who describes themselves as 'Far-Left'
Surely being far left is by definition as narrow minded as being far right? I wonder if the problem nowadays is that there are a lot of people who in the past would have been called left or right of centre who are now being called communists or fascists for no good reason other than it’s an easy insult? This isn’t a personal attack btw
You're right actually, describing yourself as 'far anything' isn't open minded at all.
My bad."There's a difference between describing yourself as "far..." Than someone else. I've been called on here (amongst much worse things) extreme far left and lunatic left, for questioning government nepotism or discussing the impact of brexit. Both things which you would imagine are left/right agnostic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I describe myself as far left because of the political views I see, I fall to the far left when I compare my own. It says nothing about my open mindedness. Just, if political views are 1-100, the best description of me is under 10. (Numbers meaning only to imply reading left to right, nothing more)" I think you might be in need of a swing-o-meter! (Boom boom!!!) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I describe myself as far left because of the political views I see, I fall to the far left when I compare my own. It says nothing about my open mindedness. Just, if political views are 1-100, the best description of me is under 10. (Numbers meaning only to imply reading left to right, nothing more) I think you might be in need of a swing-o-meter! (Boom boom!!!)" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. " This is the funniest trolling I've read in ages. Pat has competition. Bravo. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. This is the funniest trolling I've read in ages. Pat has competition. Bravo." Or is it one of Pat’s many alter egos? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. This is the funniest trolling I've read in ages. Pat has competition. Bravo. Or is it one of Pat’s many alter egos?" I don't think so, he was calling out Pat's "thinly disguised racism" there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. This is the funniest trolling I've read in ages. Pat has competition. Bravo. Or is it one of Pat’s many alter egos? I don't think so, he was calling out Pat's "thinly disguised racism" there." No….it’s definitely another alter ego of Pat | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably one of the most pathetic things I’ve ever read. " Your comment belittles and insults those millions of Tory voters, casting them as pathetic, which shows a very low opinion of vast numbers of this country purely because they hold a different political view than you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. " Comedy gold | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. Comedy gold "Strange you should regard a dangerous new infection and a dangerous old dictator, both of which have badly impacted all countries, as a source of amusement. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I doubt I will vote for phlegmy-voiced Starmer. I learned after previously voting Labour that they soon run out of money, even after selling off the gold and savaging private pensions. Impressed with Sunak's fresh approach on halving inflation etc and his promise to stop the boats. The FTSE has today surged to a 4 year high. I can't see the merit in putting the existing and forthcoming improvements at risk. Labour wanted communist-style longer lockdowns and would've made us wait longer for the vaccines with an EU type sclerosis. I don't see him standing up to Putin and supporting Ukraine as much as the Tories have. He says he won't reverse Brexit, but given how he tried to thwart it for years, in alliance with Bercow, I'm not sure I would trust him. The temporary Truss turbulence was indeed unfortunate but is now repaired and any damage it did is nothing to the economic carnage Labour would unleash. Comedy gold
Strange you should regard a dangerous new infection and a dangerous old dictator, both of which have badly impacted all countries, as a source of amusement. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why does Pat bother? Back to the original topic?" I don't think it's Pat. Different tone and he called out Pay for being casually racist against Sunak. On the OP. Plenty of people will say they're not voting Tory anymore, but on election day they will. It looks like the biggest reason for voting Tory seems to be "what about Starmer". Which is just bizarre. Like saying youre going to eat a shit sandwich instead of a sandwich which you don't know the contents of, or not eating a sandwich at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I previously voted New Labour in 1997 and 2001. I stopped voting Labour when Blair invaded Iraq and Brown sold off the gold and ran out of money - both actions crippled us. I think the next General Election will be held at the latest possible point - so in the month of January 2025. So we have a maximum of about 24 months to go. A lot can happen. I will see what's on offer as 2024 draws to an end and what has happened in the meantime but the signs are increasingly good. The turbulent Truss tenure has thankfully ended and the damage repaired. Sunak offers a 5 point plan in the face terrible exogenous events like covid and Ukraine. Just sad to see such thinly disguised racism against him, whereas most people are delighted we have a British Asian as PM for the first time. "A little video to give you a factual response to your claims . https://youtu.be/TbzBBywUbZs Pretty much shows the facts undermine what you read in the Mail, express or the rubbish spouted by Conservative MPs. I particularly liked the growth comparison and the debt between labour and Tory governments never mind the Brexit carnage sone to British exporters. Enjoy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If so, why?" There wasn't even a last time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them
What about if there was a party that you felt would help society in general, not just you?"dont know how many times over the last few years ive told you i dont give a flying one about wider society, only people im intrested in is freinds and family, random strangers who im never gona have any contact with are of no concern to me, and i dont expect random strangers tto be concerned about me either | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them
What about if there was a party that you felt would help society in general, not just you?dont know how many times over the last few years ive told you i dont give a flying one about wider society, only people im intrested in is freinds and family, random strangers who im never gona have any contact with are of no concern to me, and i dont expect random strangers tto be concerned about me either"That's interesting, sorry, I genuinely don't remember asking you that question before. An interesting American kind of mindset. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them
What about if there was a party that you felt would help society in general, not just you?dont know how many times over the last few years ive told you i dont give a flying one about wider society, only people im intrested in is freinds and family, random strangers who im never gona have any contact with are of no concern to me, and i dont expect random strangers tto be concerned about me either
That's interesting, sorry, I genuinely don't remember asking you that question before.
An interesting American kind of mindset. "why american mindset? Thats just growing up on an estate where no one had fuck all and it was everyone for themselves, freinds and family u looked after anyone else never entered into our heads. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Only way I'd ever vote tory, is if they introduced capital punishment." Did you mean for murder? They already have for being poor. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wont vote for any party until one comes along and offers something that appeals to me and seems i been waiting for 20 odd years i not gona be voting any time soon You never vote anyway so nope not for the last cpl of decades loke i said if one of the partys offerd something that would help me out personaly then id vote for them wether they were tory or labour but seems as neither of them offer me anything why would i bother voting for either of them
What about if there was a party that you felt would help society in general, not just you?dont know how many times over the last few years ive told you i dont give a flying one about wider society, only people im intrested in is freinds and family, random strangers who im never gona have any contact with are of no concern to me, and i dont expect random strangers tto be concerned about me either
That's interesting, sorry, I genuinely don't remember asking you that question before.
An interesting American kind of mindset. why american mindset? Thats just growing up on an estate where no one had fuck all and it was everyone for themselves, freinds and family u looked after anyone else never entered into our heads. "Yeah, just like that, same way a lot of Americans think about society, our US friend was explaining in one of the other threads. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Still seeing v v v few people saying they're gonna vote Tory at the next election. Oh well. What a terrible shame for the Tories." That's my impression to and not just on here but also in the real world. I think they have to have a GE by Jan 2025 then they are consigned to the dustbin. Just hope Labour are up to the job | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum" This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. " I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time..." I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. " I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. " I doubt it this time. I think we've gone way past the tipping point. So many scandals. So many lies. So much corruption. So much incompetence. So much public anger. We'll see, as I said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from?" I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I doubt it this time. I think we've gone way past the tipping point. So many scandals. So many lies. So much corruption. So much incompetence. So much public anger. We'll see, as I said." I hope so. But feels like people said the same many times before. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...."" Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time" Bet you they'll run on some variation of make Britain great. (Ignoring the fact they've been fucking this country over for 13 years at this point.) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time Bet you they'll run on some variation of make Britain great. (Ignoring the fact they've been fucking this country over for 13 years at this point.)" Maybe they will but I don't believe that's a 'reason' like they've had the last couple of times. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time Bet you they'll run on some variation of make Britain great. (Ignoring the fact they've been fucking this country over for 13 years at this point.) Maybe they will but I don't believe that's a 'reason' like they've had the last couple of times." Stopping mall boats? That might be the biggest concern for their base. It certainly gets them frothing at the mouth. Actually, thinking about it, I bet a big reason they'll claim will be: we have to fix the NHS. (Ignoring the fact they have fucked the NHS to the brink. And, of course, fixing the NHS will be code for privatising the lot.) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time" I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. " I think Partygate was the tipping point for many voters. Everything about it was disgusting. Setting that aside, though, I think 13 years in power is a major issue too. After so long of any government - even a less toxic & awful gov than this 1 - people long for change. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At the moment better the devil you know then the one you don't. Labour could do a Truss to the economy. But if a party promised a referendum on proportional representation I would vote for it as I think that would be a better system in this country now. And more inclusive. Labour could do a Truss. Tories did do a Truss. But Labour generally do like to cut tax and increase public spending if the gap is big enough the market's will do the same. No " Labour like to cut tax..? First time I've heard this argument. Usually they have always been accused of wanting to increase taxes and scare our entrepreneurs and big businesses away. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. I think Partygate was the tipping point for many voters. Everything about it was disgusting. Setting that aside, though, I think 13 years in power is a major issue too. After so long of any government - even a less toxic & awful gov than this 1 - people long for change." I obviously think so too. I hope I'm wrong. Best case scenario is that Labour become so close to the Tories that they offer no real change, get some support from the right wing press and get voted in. No real improvement. However, I think the Conservative PR machine is finely tuned and will do its job. Lots of blaming foriegners, EU, etc, lots of meaningless slogans, and lots of smearing everyone else. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. I think Partygate was the tipping point for many voters. Everything about it was disgusting. Setting that aside, though, I think 13 years in power is a major issue too. After so long of any government - even a less toxic & awful gov than this 1 - people long for change. I obviously think so too. I hope I'm wrong. Best case scenario is that Labour become so close to the Tories that they offer no real change, get some support from the right wing press and get voted in. No real improvement. However, I think the Conservative PR machine is finely tuned and will do its job. Lots of blaming foriegners, EU, etc, lots of meaningless slogans, and lots of smearing everyone else." The Tory press will do exactly as you say. But I really doubt that will be enough when the election comes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe they will but I don't believe that's a 'reason' like they've had the last couple of times." I see what you mean, but that also means that Labour don't have a 'reason' to pull in votes. If Sunak manages to get through the next 2 years without making any massive cock-ups, and without any more sleaze stories emerging, he'll be able to say that he's turned the party round. Things are likely to improve over the next couple of years, and it will look like Sunak's policies have achieved that. Without a 'reason' to vote Labour, they might have a difficult time convincing the public that it's worth the switch in 2 years time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time" My expectation is as mentioned in the above post, they will hope inflation, steadies and reduces in time for the next GE. If that falls into place, project fear 2.1 will kick in and they will push people to think if Labour come into power we will slide quickly back into recession. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. " We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe they will but I don't believe that's a 'reason' like they've had the last couple of times. I see what you mean, but that also means that Labour don't have a 'reason' to pull in votes. If Sunak manages to get through the next 2 years without making any massive cock-ups, and without any more sleaze stories emerging, he'll be able to say that he's turned the party round. Things are likely to improve over the next couple of years, and it will look like Sunak's policies have achieved that. Without a 'reason' to vote Labour, they might have a difficult time convincing the public that it's worth the switch in 2 years time." That's exactly what Rishi will be hoping for but I just don't think it'll be enough. I personally think the 'right' vote will be split and Reform will 'steal' a eecent amount of Tory voters, Labour don't even really need to try. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making." Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe they will but I don't believe that's a 'reason' like they've had the last couple of times. I see what you mean, but that also means that Labour don't have a 'reason' to pull in votes. If Sunak manages to get through the next 2 years without making any massive cock-ups, and without any more sleaze stories emerging, he'll be able to say that he's turned the party round. Things are likely to improve over the next couple of years, and it will look like Sunak's policies have achieved that. Without a 'reason' to vote Labour, they might have a difficult time convincing the public that it's worth the switch in 2 years time." Maybe. Labour also don't have anywhere near the resources and funding that the Tories do. They put a lot of that £££ into their PR and campaigning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. " 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times." I'll be honest, I don't understand the question or the point you're making with it. My opinion is that the Tory PR machine, supported by the overwhelmingly right wing Tory supporting press is enough to persuade people to vote for the Conservatives regardless of how they act. And that I don't see any difference to how they act now, to at any other point during their reign. Ergo, I think they will be reelected. I understand that people may have voted for the Tories because they thought it would "get brexit done". But to me, that reinforces my opinion, the electorate largely votes as per the £ (both the majority of the funding and the people who benefit from a Tory government IE the same). Which means, Brexit, Tories etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times. I'll be honest, I don't understand the question or the point you're making with it. My opinion is that the Tory PR machine, supported by the overwhelmingly right wing Tory supporting press is enough to persuade people to vote for the Conservatives regardless of how they act. And that I don't see any difference to how they act now, to at any other point during their reign. Ergo, I think they will be reelected. I understand that people may have voted for the Tories because they thought it would "get brexit done". But to me, that reinforces my opinion, the electorate largely votes as per the £ (both the majority of the funding and the people who benefit from a Tory government IE the same). Which means, Brexit, Tories etc. " The question is directly relating to your statement. Are you genuinely trying to tell us that the Tories were just as bad with corruption, sleaze and disdain prior to 2019? If that is what you're saying, I'm asking for examples. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times. I'll be honest, I don't understand the question or the point you're making with it. My opinion is that the Tory PR machine, supported by the overwhelmingly right wing Tory supporting press is enough to persuade people to vote for the Conservatives regardless of how they act. And that I don't see any difference to how they act now, to at any other point during their reign. Ergo, I think they will be reelected. I understand that people may have voted for the Tories because they thought it would "get brexit done". But to me, that reinforces my opinion, the electorate largely votes as per the £ (both the majority of the funding and the people who benefit from a Tory government IE the same). Which means, Brexit, Tories etc. The question is directly relating to your statement. Are you genuinely trying to tell us that the Tories were just as bad with corruption, sleaze and disdain prior to 2019? If that is what you're saying, I'm asking for examples." Cameron's government selling weapons to Saudi Arabia to drop on schools, weddings and funerals in the Yemen. As an example. The news broke about the rituals he went through at Uni (Think it was at uni, anyway, can't be put in the forum as it breaks multiple rules). I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. Bowed to pressure from oil companies to pull back his election pledges for solar energy generation. May sucking up to Trump. Stabbing eachother in the back as the ERG pushed for the most brutal damaging version of brexit possible. Just random things that popped into my head. Also, I am saying this is my opinion. I don't know what will happen. And maybe they have got worse since 2019. But the seem a self serving as ever to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times. I'll be honest, I don't understand the question or the point you're making with it. My opinion is that the Tory PR machine, supported by the overwhelmingly right wing Tory supporting press is enough to persuade people to vote for the Conservatives regardless of how they act. And that I don't see any difference to how they act now, to at any other point during their reign. Ergo, I think they will be reelected. I understand that people may have voted for the Tories because they thought it would "get brexit done". But to me, that reinforces my opinion, the electorate largely votes as per the £ (both the majority of the funding and the people who benefit from a Tory government IE the same). Which means, Brexit, Tories etc. The question is directly relating to your statement. Are you genuinely trying to tell us that the Tories were just as bad with corruption, sleaze and disdain prior to 2019? If that is what you're saying, I'm asking for examples. Cameron's government selling weapons to Saudi Arabia to drop on schools, weddings and funerals in the Yemen. As an example. The news broke about the rituals he went through at Uni (Think it was at uni, anyway, can't be put in the forum as it breaks multiple rules). I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. Bowed to pressure from oil companies to pull back his election pledges for solar energy generation. May sucking up to Trump. Stabbing eachother in the back as the ERG pushed for the most brutal damaging version of brexit possible. Just random things that popped into my head. Also, I am saying this is my opinion. I don't know what will happen. And maybe they have got worse since 2019. But the seem a self serving as ever to me. " None of which amounts to corruption or disdain. Sleazy maybe. They have been a lot worse since 2019. I cannot see them winning, in any way | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Never have, never will." I always tell anyone who says this, you stil need to go, don't leave your mark against anyone, spoil your ballot, it still counts! If politicians & the media are seeing that the numbers are there that don't select any of them, they'll start to pick up that something needs to change. In most cases the percentage that most elected mps isn't that high. Turn up, spoil your ballot! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Never have, never will. I always tell anyone who says this, you stil need to go, don't leave your mark against anyone, spoil your ballot, it still counts! If politicians & the media are seeing that the numbers are there that don't select any of them, they'll start to pick up that something needs to change. In most cases the percentage that most elected mps isn't that high. Turn up, spoil your ballot! " I don't think they care how many spoiled ballots there are, as long as they win. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Never have, never will. I always tell anyone who says this, you stil need to go, don't leave your mark against anyone, spoil your ballot, it still counts! If politicians & the media are seeing that the numbers are there that don't select any of them, they'll start to pick up that something needs to change. In most cases the percentage that most elected mps isn't that high. Turn up, spoil your ballot! I don't think they care how many spoiled ballots there are, as long as they win." What might speak volumes about the electoral system would be an analysis of all the spoilt papers. Voters spoil them in many ways and for many reasons. On the simplest level, just by getting something wrong like a tick instead of a cross or by placing too many crosses. Most, I would imagine, put comments such as 'None of the above' or 'End the gravy train NOW!' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Never have, never will. I always tell anyone who says this, you stil need to go, don't leave your mark against anyone, spoil your ballot, it still counts! If politicians & the media are seeing that the numbers are there that don't select any of them, they'll start to pick up that something needs to change. In most cases the percentage that most elected mps isn't that high. Turn up, spoil your ballot! I don't think they care how many spoiled ballots there are, as long as they win. What might speak volumes about the electoral system would be an analysis of all the spoilt papers. Voters spoil them in many ways and for many reasons. On the simplest level, just by getting something wrong like a tick instead of a cross or by placing too many crosses. Most, I would imagine, put comments such as 'None of the above' or 'End the gravy train NOW!'" Time to rewatch Brewster's Millions lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It appears I’ve landed on a labour supporters forum This is why there is no hope for the next GE. The odd voter might defect, but the vast majority will continue regardless. I don't think so. The impression I get is that the vast majority are thorougly sick of the Tories. Both on here & in real life. We'll see in time... I hope you're right. But we've seen it time and time again. 1. Sleaze, scandal, nepotism, incompetence. 2. GE approaches 3. Tory PR machine kicks in, media instructs people to vote for the Conservativs. 4. Five more years of Tory rule. I'm almost positive Labour will take the next GE, and by quite a margin. Just a point though, you're 46 years old which means pretty much half of your adult life has been under Labour governemnt, where is all this we've seen it time and time again come from? I lived in other EU countries, so didn't live here under Labour governments. However you're correct. I should have said. "Since 2010...." Fair enough but the 'time and time again' question still stands. Cameron won and then his second was on the promise of referendum. Boris won on 'get brexit done'. They don't have anything this next time I mean, time and time again people talk about the latest Tory scandal/sleaze/corruption/self-service/ etc and predict voters will have 'had enough and things will be different at the next GE'. I don't see this time being any different. Honestly can't see they've done anything worse recently than usual. Just Tory BAU. We haven't had a 'next GE'. That's the point I'm making. Fair enough, but there was sleaze, corruption, distain for British people etc for the past 12 years, during which time we've had three elections. And you pointed out a reason was presented to people to vote Tory. There will be another one. 2015 - Referendum 2017 - Brexit 2019 - Brexit Can you tell me the sleaze, corruption and disdain for for Britiah people prior to 2019. Plenty will argue that those 3 elections above were about following the will of the people. Howbdo you think they got the votes? This place really is hard work at times. I'll be honest, I don't understand the question or the point you're making with it. My opinion is that the Tory PR machine, supported by the overwhelmingly right wing Tory supporting press is enough to persuade people to vote for the Conservatives regardless of how they act. And that I don't see any difference to how they act now, to at any other point during their reign. Ergo, I think they will be reelected. I understand that people may have voted for the Tories because they thought it would "get brexit done". But to me, that reinforces my opinion, the electorate largely votes as per the £ (both the majority of the funding and the people who benefit from a Tory government IE the same). Which means, Brexit, Tories etc. The question is directly relating to your statement. Are you genuinely trying to tell us that the Tories were just as bad with corruption, sleaze and disdain prior to 2019? If that is what you're saying, I'm asking for examples. Cameron's government selling weapons to Saudi Arabia to drop on schools, weddings and funerals in the Yemen. As an example. The news broke about the rituals he went through at Uni (Think it was at uni, anyway, can't be put in the forum as it breaks multiple rules). I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. Bowed to pressure from oil companies to pull back his election pledges for solar energy generation. May sucking up to Trump. Stabbing eachother in the back as the ERG pushed for the most brutal damaging version of brexit possible. Just random things that popped into my head. Also, I am saying this is my opinion. I don't know what will happen. And maybe they have got worse since 2019. But the seem a self serving as ever to me. None of which amounts to corruption or disdain. Sleazy maybe. They have been a lot worse since 2019. I cannot see them winning, in any way" I'm comfortable disagreeing on the description of their behaviour. I'm not really sure what catch all word to use. I do hope you're right though. We will see. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Never have, never will." This | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a chance, whether I will vote for anyone else remains to be seen." But also, and more importantly, this. Dreadful choices all round | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong." This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions." I'm not complaining. Merely commenting that he made a mess, then fucked off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong." "This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions." "I'm not complaining. Merely commenting that he made a mess, then fucked off. " Would you rather he made a mess, then stayed in place to make more mess? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions. I'm not complaining. Merely commenting that he made a mess, then fucked off. Would you rather he made a mess, then stayed in place to make more mess?" I don’t think that is what people mean. It is more a comment on Cameron’s character. A lot of blame for the state of the UK lies with him. Of course he is ok and insulated from the shitstorm thanks to his wife’s wealth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions. I'm not complaining. Merely commenting that he made a mess, then fucked off. Would you rather he made a mess, then stayed in place to make more mess?" In order of preference I'd rather: A. He didn't make a mess. B. He cleared up the mess he made. C. He didn't clear up the mess but then no additional mess. D. He didn't clear up the mess and made additional mess D. (Joint D) He created a mess then fucked off. Hope this helps.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also put a large portion of the blame for brexit on him, taking a huge gamble with the wellbeing of the nation by promising a brexit referendum if he won the election. Simply to appease the further right wing elements. Fucking off when it went wrong. This always confuses me. People complain that Cameron was incompetent for allowing a vote on Brexit, then they claim that he should have stayed around to make further important decisions. I'm not complaining. Merely commenting that he made a mess, then fucked off. Would you rather he made a mess, then stayed in place to make more mess? In order of preference I'd rather: A. He didn't make a mess. B. He cleared up the mess he made. C. He didn't clear up the mess but then no additional mess. D. He didn't clear up the mess and made additional mess D. (Joint D) He created a mess then fucked off. Hope this helps. "Seems fair | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him?" Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him." Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think?" The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. " You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though" What question did I miss? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss?" is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think?" Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine." Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question." A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion." You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game." That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolutely not. The way they have handled the nation over the last 12 years is nothing short of disgusting. Making profits for themselves and their mates whilst the rest suffer. Biggest con was getting working people to vote for them, the Tories are the party of the skiving wealthy. " You mean the red wall voters didn’t want anything to do with Corbyn or the Labour Party | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolutely not. The way they have handled the nation over the last 12 years is nothing short of disgusting. Making profits for themselves and their mates whilst the rest suffer. Biggest con was getting working people to vote for them, the Tories are the party of the skiving wealthy. You mean the red wall voters didn’t want anything to do with Corbyn or the Labour Party " What's Labour/Corbyn got to do with it? A lot of people seem to think that the opposite of voting Tory, is voting Labour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji." Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For me, the problem with Cameron’s decision to allow a referendum on Brexit was the naivety that he showed in not realising that it would bring all the UKIP and Faragist loons out of the gutters and also to not foresee that external groups would use the opportunity to both damage the EU and to allow a feeding frenzy on UK businesses and institutions. It’s very easy to make oneself sound like a conspiracist but if you just look at the opportunities it gave to what I would say are our commercial and political enemies then it adds up. There is also the question of how much dirty money flows through London which the EU were proposing to make laws against and whether that was a contributing factor? Cameron is on the face of it a nice man but perhaps he was a bit too well meaning to realise what he was opening the country up to?" There are many tories who are on the face of it nice and well-meaning. Cameron may have been naive in where he was taking the country but don't confuse that with well-meaning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. " Again, as with my reply to Johnny. I'm more the the opinion that those who succeeded Cameron put us in this mess. I don't disagree with your points, just with who 'fucked the end result' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For me, the problem with Cameron’s decision to allow a referendum on Brexit was the naivety that he showed in not realising that it would bring all the UKIP and Faragist loons out of the gutters and also to not foresee that external groups would use the opportunity to both damage the EU and to allow a feeding frenzy on UK businesses and institutions. It’s very easy to make oneself sound like a conspiracist but if you just look at the opportunities it gave to what I would say are our commercial and political enemies then it adds up. There is also the question of how much dirty money flows through London which the EU were proposing to make laws against and whether that was a contributing factor? Cameron is on the face of it a nice man but perhaps he was a bit too well meaning to realise what he was opening the country up to? There are many tories who are on the face of it nice and well-meaning. Cameron may have been naive in where he was taking the country but don't confuse that with well-meaning." That sounds very much like you think NO Tories are nice and well meaning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. " And that ladies and gentlemen is a party political broadcast on behalf of the labour party!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. Again, as with my reply to Johnny. I'm more the the opinion that those who succeeded Cameron put us in this mess. I don't disagree with your points, just with who 'fucked the end result'" I see your point but cannot agree. You can’t polish a turd. As per my points, Cameron created an environment and then took an approach that ensured the sh1tshow that followed. May had a chance (but was too weak) to ensure we had a second referendum on how to enact Leave and what type of future relationship we would have, but Cameron could have put that in place from the start. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. And that ladies and gentlemen is a party political broadcast on behalf of the labour party!!!" What's Labour got to do with it. The opposite of voting Tory, is not voting Labour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government "
This is my point that I've been making for the last while. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. " Austerity was one I forgot above. Fully agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government " From 1997-2010? Was it worse than it is now?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For me, the problem with Cameron’s decision to allow a referendum on Brexit was the naivety that he showed in not realising that it would bring all the UKIP and Faragist loons out of the gutters and also to not foresee that external groups would use the opportunity to both damage the EU and to allow a feeding frenzy on UK businesses and institutions. It’s very easy to make oneself sound like a conspiracist but if you just look at the opportunities it gave to what I would say are our commercial and political enemies then it adds up. There is also the question of how much dirty money flows through London which the EU were proposing to make laws against and whether that was a contributing factor? Cameron is on the face of it a nice man but perhaps he was a bit too well meaning to realise what he was opening the country up to? There are many tories who are on the face of it nice and well-meaning. Cameron may have been naive in where he was taking the country but don't confuse that with well-meaning. That sounds very much like you think NO Tories are nice and well meaning." Nowadays I assume that's the case until they prove otherwise. It must be something to do with their track record, I guess. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To all of the people saying Cameron created 'the brexit mess', did he? David Cameron as PM asked his citizens (the people who he's supposed to work for) whether they'd like to leave the EU or not. David Cameron as PM campaigned to stay in the EU. David Cameron decided he 'lost and didn't feel like he could negotiate a deal he didn't want' and resigned. Surely this mess was created by those came after him? Those that came after him definitely exacerbated the situation. Cameron created it with an election promise to win back votes from UKIP. For me personally, some of the blame lies with him. Obviously that referendum definitely shouldn't gave been binary but is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? The proof is in the pudding here really. Other countries use referendums as they have to in order to, for example, change their constitution. (This is why Ireland had to have a referendum on same sex marriage). We didn't, it was purely a vote winning exercise for Cameron's government. An incredibly complex question was asked to an electorate that were bombarded with illegally funded misinformation, and given a "yes", "no" option. Now we are where we are. You are right, we didn't have to. Be nice if you answered the question though What question did I miss? is it really that wrong for a government to ask its citizens what they might think? Asking it's citizens what they might think is fine. Isn't that just what he did? He didn't enact the result of that question. A referendum, even an advisory referendum, is more than asking people what they think. In this instance, it was a complex issue, with illegally funded campaigns of misinformation, and a yes/no answer. The conservative government pledged to go with the result of the referendum. So they did. I still put a lot of this blame on Cameron. I'm not saying everyone should. Just my opinion. You're entitled to your opinion, I don't necessarily disagree with it. And definitely not the yes/no answer part. I just don't personally blame Cameron as such. Personally I think if 'Remain' had won then we'd be seeing 'Thank fuck for Cameron, hes finally shut UKIP up'. That's where I struggle with the blame game. That's fine to disagree. Cameron did what he did to gain votes. I think if remain had won, there would be a high sigh of collective relief, but I don't think it would or should shut up UKIP or the further right of British politics. I think they would have carried on campaigning. But what do I know. There should be a shrug emoji. Keeping the chain going but actually replying to Feisty... I think the blame on Cameron doesn’t start or end with the referendum. It is more complex than that. However, simplistically: 1. He supported the operating/regulatory environment that the financial services sector was operating in through 2007-8 that led to the global financial crash. 2. He then perpetuated the “Labour spent all the money there is none left” nonsense ignoring (or at least failing to acknowledge) the exogenous conditions that requires the government to take action to prevent financial armageddon. 3. He used that to support the argument for austerity that severely impacted many of the poorer in society creating an environment that became increasingly open to finding scapegoats for the situation (weaponised by UKIP et al as being uncontrolled immigration from EU). 5. As per above points, he then got nervous about the threat of UKIP and the ERG in own party and caved in to a referendum as a vote winner. 6. His arrogance saw him ignore strongly worded recommendations from the Civil Service for the referendum to NOT be a binary decision and them campaigned to remain failing to recognise the threat from protest votes against austerity (ergo the establishment) 7. He did not agree to put in place the process to have a 2nd referendum on the future relationship with the EU should the vote be NO (ie leave). Again, in his arrogance he didn’t consider that would be a requirement despite being advised by the Civil Service to do so. And that ladies and gentlemen is a party political broadcast on behalf of the labour party!!!" It absolutely wasn’t. It was a specific commentary on Cameron. Feel free to come back on each point and tell me where I have that wrong? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For me, the problem with Cameron’s decision to allow a referendum on Brexit was the naivety that he showed in not realising that it would bring all the UKIP and Faragist loons out of the gutters and also to not foresee that external groups would use the opportunity to both damage the EU and to allow a feeding frenzy on UK businesses and institutions. It’s very easy to make oneself sound like a conspiracist but if you just look at the opportunities it gave to what I would say are our commercial and political enemies then it adds up. There is also the question of how much dirty money flows through London which the EU were proposing to make laws against and whether that was a contributing factor? Cameron is on the face of it a nice man but perhaps he was a bit too well meaning to realise what he was opening the country up to? There are many tories who are on the face of it nice and well-meaning. Cameron may have been naive in where he was taking the country but don't confuse that with well-meaning. That sounds very much like you think NO Tories are nice and well meaning. Nowadays I assume that's the case until they prove otherwise. It must be something to do with their track record, I guess." Apologies, I thought you meant 'tories'(people who vote for thek) as opposed to Tory Ministers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government
This is my point that I've been making for the last while."In the modern era there have been 28 general elections and labour have won just 8 of them thank god! The next one will be close but hopefully Starmer doesn’t get the keys to No10 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government " I remember something very different under Blair/Brown | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government
This is my point that I've been making for the last while.
In the modern era there have been 28 general elections and labour have won just 8 of them thank god!
The next one will be close but hopefully Starmer doesn’t get the keys to No10"What has improved since 2010? IMO the tories are going to get destroyed at the next GE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government From 1997-2010? Was it worse than it is now?? " As bad I’d say | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I no longer have a vote in the UK I won't be voting for anyone. However if I did I would still vote Conservative, albeit through gritted teeth with the current lot. I never have and never will vote Labour. I would always vote for the party with the best chance of keeping them out of power." Completely agree! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government From 1997-2010? Was it worse than it is now?? As bad I’d say " How? The tories are finished, you better start getting used to it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government I remember something very different under Blair/Brown" I am sure you do! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government
This is my point that I've been making for the last while.
In the modern era there have been 28 general elections and labour have won just 8 of them thank god!
The next one will be close but hopefully Starmer doesn’t get the keys to No10
What has improved since 2010? IMO the tories are going to get destroyed at the next GE "I wouldn’t put the labour bunting up just yet | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government From 1997-2010? Was it worse than it is now?? As bad I’d say How? The tories are finished, you better start getting used to it "You don’t seem to be able to ever win an election so we will see | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government From 1997-2010? Was it worse than it is now?? As bad I’d say How? The tories are finished, you better start getting used to it
You don’t seem to be able to ever win an election so we will see "They are done, a combination of a labour improvement and Reform party is going to wipe you out like in 1997 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government
This is my point that I've been making for the last while.
In the modern era there have been 28 general elections and labour have won just 8 of them thank god!
The next one will be close but hopefully Starmer doesn’t get the keys to No10
What has improved since 2010? IMO the tories are going to get destroyed at the next GE
I wouldn’t put the labour bunting up just yet"The reform party is going to be your main problem | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"100 % Vote Conservative..... I remember how bad things got under a labour government I remember something very different under Blair/Brown I am sure you do! " Would you like to give some examples of just how bad it got? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
