|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 3, 2024 22:31:56 GMT
I've no need to block anyone Ian, never have, it's just a message board, no harm possible. Mind you, if my references to the left hit a nerve, you could always block me................. Excellent, if it's just a harmless message board there's no need to not post then is there. Happy days........ Correct, it's entirely up to you
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jun 3, 2024 23:08:50 GMT
Working class people are let down by the system as a whole (including their own party and representatives), it's easy for people to blame the left whilst their politics drifts further to the right though I suppose. And you post plenty often on here John....... The " Left" have failed the working class. ( or those who think they are on the Left). Thank you very much.....many people don't post as much as they would like , because they get the same repetitive abuse. No more than the right wing have John. I'd argue we've not had a proper left wing prime minister in my life time. I didn't follow politics in the Blair era (I was a child) but the impression I've got is he was centre left at most, and to be fair, he did a much better job than these tories (not that that is a high bar).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2024 0:47:00 GMT
The " Left" have failed the working class. ( or those who think they are on the Left). Thank you very much.....many people don't post as much as they would like , because they get the same repetitive abuse. No more than the right wing have John. I'd argue we've not had a proper left wing prime minister in my life time. I didn't follow politics in the Blair era (I was a child) but the impression I've got is he was centre left at most, and to be fair, he did a much better job than these tories (not that that is a high bar). And since Blair, we’ve not had a right wing Govt either.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 4, 2024 6:39:56 GMT
The " Left" have failed the working class. ( or those who think they are on the Left). Thank you very much.....many people don't post as much as they would like , because they get the same repetitive abuse. No more than the right wing have John. I'd argue we've not had a proper left wing prime minister in my life time. I didn't follow politics in the Blair era (I was a child) but the impression I've got is he was centre left at most, and to be fair, he did a much better job than these tories (not that that is a high bar). Agreed , except the right wing don't pretend to represent the working class.... just every " man " for himself, achieve by your own efforts, reap what you sow....It is the Left who in various ways have let down those they should be representing ( in my opinion of course)....eg emphasising minority issues, important of course, but at the expense of the ordinary silent majority and moral preaching instead of perhaps listening for a change. I think Blair happened to come along at the right time( FOR HIM) in history, circumstances, post Thatcher and John Smith's death....plus he did show the importance of leadership and vision ( even if you didn't like where he was going)....He appeared positive, enthusiastic and gave the impression that he knew what he wanted. I don't think that we will ever get a true Socialist government in the UK( UNDERTHE PRESENT FPTP SYSTEM), something the Left need to get their head around... Electoral Reform, Abolition of the H OF L Could be made a bigger issue.....but itvis not in the self interest of the existing career politicians and parties. Some honesty in politics and less short termism/ electioneering could help.....we could learn alot from Germany
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jun 4, 2024 8:18:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jun 4, 2024 8:18:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 4, 2024 11:46:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jun 4, 2024 14:47:38 GMT
I didn’t realise the level of your shit stirring on here. It's not shit stirring, it's my honest opinion. I think you've behaved abysmally. And you're extremely fortunate that gawa has acted with such decorum. That’s rich coming from you. You demanded I provide quotes. I did. Then when I asked you to quote me for what you have accused me of, you failed to do so and told me off for even asking and became abusive. And why am i “extremely fortunate “? Is that some sort of veiled threat!? This is an internet forum! I stand by the points i have made that you and Gawa seem to strongly disagree with but won’t actually debate. I shouldn’t have been so hyperbolic and provocative in my comments to Gawa and I apologised for that.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 4, 2024 15:43:06 GMT
The most stupid thing from Labour's point of view, imo, she seems a very sincere, articulate asset to the party.... Obviously I've not looked at every minor aspect of her past, as seems necessary these days
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2024 15:51:20 GMT
The most stupid thing from Labour's point of view, imo, she seems a very sincere, articulate asset to the party.... Obviously I've not looked at every minor aspect of her past, as seems necessary these days I think it highlights the weakness of today’s populace (and those that control us) that we have to agree with EVERY element of a person’s character. Trolling through tweets made 10 years ago is kind of sad. Politics, first and foremost, should be about compromise. No one can get everything that they want. People should be allowed to have controversial opinions and still be electable because not one of us doesn’t have some sort of controversial opinion (I’m all for a one-child policy, for example). People should look at the sum of an individuals character rather than stressing about a few tweets made at a different stage of their life.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 4, 2024 16:17:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jun 5, 2024 15:36:28 GMT
That's a very good post wannabee and a lot of my friends who I speak with, have exactly the same opinion. Essentially, anybody to get the Tories out. Now you might (maybe even correctly) call this viewpoint nothing more than idealistic but I can't vote for a party, who kicks out a poltician for liking a tweet that suggests that there is an Israel Lobby influencing our politics, whilst on the very same day, they also parachute in a self proclaimed Israel lobbyist into one of their safest seats. This (well to me anyway) is sinister shit and I'm genuinely concerned at how much influence a foreign nation is now appearing to have (and being allowed to have) on the party. Shaheen was one of only six Labour MP's to increase the Labour vote at the last election. She is massively popular in her constituency and by any metric, she would be a huge asset for Labour at the next election but something rather sinister has trumped all of that and it absolutely scares the shit out of me. How can absolute titans of the Labour Party like Diane Abbot be treated with such utter contempt, whilst people like Natalie Elphicke are welcomed in with open arms? It absolutely stinks. I want to at least be able to trust the new guys a little bit more than I trusted the old guys running the show and if I'm honest, I'm not sure that I wouldn't rather that the Tories remained in power. I really can't vote for something that I know is fundamentally rotten at it's core, where could I possibly expect it to ultimately lead to? If its any consolation to you I won't be voting Labour at the GE, Shaheen was my prospective MP! I live in Woodford Green and have had to put up with IDS for the last 27 years. Shaheen came within 1300 votes of ousting him in 2019. Can you imagine how I feel Tangentially I felt she came across very poorly on Newsnight, she was obviously in shock and should never have taken the interview. She was too defensive of her "like" and invoking her baby was pathetic. I'm fast approaching 70 and I no longer feel I can change the world as I may have 50 years ago. My post is a reflection of that. I may be surprised or appalled at what Labour do in the next 5 years. It won't prevent me from supporting on Financial Policies as you and I have discussed nor will it stop me from heckling on other Policies like Gaza which i have criticised. This parachuting in of unsavoury characters is no different than occurred under Blair, on the whole that Administration made some improvements with one ginormous Fuck Up. It's like the original bag of Revels, you never knew what you were going to get until you bit in. Easy vote for you now wannabee
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 5, 2024 15:57:39 GMT
If its any consolation to you I won't be voting Labour at the GE, Shaheen was my prospective MP! I live in Woodford Green and have had to put up with IDS for the last 27 years. Shaheen came within 1300 votes of ousting him in 2019. Can you imagine how I feel Tangentially I felt she came across very poorly on Newsnight, she was obviously in shock and should never have taken the interview. She was too defensive of her "like" and invoking her baby was pathetic. I'm fast approaching 70 and I no longer feel I can change the world as I may have 50 years ago. My post is a reflection of that. I may be surprised or appalled at what Labour do in the next 5 years. It won't prevent me from supporting on Financial Policies as you and I have discussed nor will it stop me from heckling on other Policies like Gaza which i have criticised. This parachuting in of unsavoury characters is no different than occurred under Blair, on the whole that Administration made some improvements with one ginormous Fuck Up. It's like the original bag of Revels, you never knew what you were going to get until you bit in. Easy vote for you now wannabee Already signed up Mate
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 5, 2024 15:57:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 6, 2024 9:56:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 6, 2024 13:56:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 9, 2024 21:06:23 GMT
Not checked it out, but according to the Telegraph, Starmer has a history of being Far left...
....
Starmer’s history of Left-wing views revealed Labour leader questioned the role of the police and suggested immigration policy is racist in his younger years
Gordon Rayner, ASSOCIATE EDITOR 9 June 2024 • 2:00pm Sir Keir Starmer Sir Keir Starmer, like Sir Tony Blair before him, has done his best to detoxify the Labour brand and convince voters there is nothing to fear in voting for him.
But where Sir Tony was a lifelong centrist, Sir Keir started his political life on the extreme left, and questions remain over the extent to which he has abandoned his Trotskyist beliefs.
When he was in his mid-20s, in the year he became a barrister, he wrote an article in a socialist fringe magazine musing on whether the police should have any role in civil society.
At a similar age he is reported to have said he did not believe in imprisonment “for anything, ever”. A Labour spokesman said there was “no proof” that Sir Keir said this, while stopping short of denying outright that he ever said it.
Just seven years ago he praised Jeremy Corbyn’s astonishingly Left-wing election manifesto as a “foundational document” for Labour, and when he was running for leadership in 2020 he promised to close immigration detention centres, having previously said there was a “racist” undercurrent to all immigration law.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Jun 9, 2024 21:39:03 GMT
The most stupid thing from Labour's point of view, imo, she seems a very sincere, articulate asset to the party.... Obviously I've not looked at every minor aspect of her past, as seems necessary these days I think it highlights the weakness of today’s populace (and those that control us) that we have to agree with EVERY element of a person’s character. Trolling through tweets made 10 years ago is kind of sad. Politics, first and foremost, should be about compromise. No one can get everything that they want. People should be allowed to have controversial opinions and still be electable because not one of us doesn’t have some sort of controversial opinion (I’m all for a one-child policy, for example). People should look at the sum of an individuals character rather than stressing about a few tweets made at a different stage of their life. A one child policy which would give rise to abusive partners who force their partners to have abortions because they want a boy and not a girl? A one child policy which means more boys are born than girls so it reduces the birth rate quite a lot meaning there will be a lot less people putting money in the pot to cover social care for the elderly? There seems to be some serious problems with that but each to their own I guess. It's not for me unless you mean something different
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 10, 2024 6:46:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 10, 2024 15:22:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jun 10, 2024 15:42:23 GMT
He does a cracking campaign video though….
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2024 16:31:38 GMT
I think it highlights the weakness of today’s populace (and those that control us) that we have to agree with EVERY element of a person’s character. Trolling through tweets made 10 years ago is kind of sad. Politics, first and foremost, should be about compromise. No one can get everything that they want. People should be allowed to have controversial opinions and still be electable because not one of us doesn’t have some sort of controversial opinion (I’m all for a one-child policy, for example). People should look at the sum of an individuals character rather than stressing about a few tweets made at a different stage of their life. A one child policy which would give rise to abusive partners who force their partners to have abortions because they want a boy and not a girl? A one child policy which means more boys are born than girls so it reduces the birth rate quite a lot meaning there will be a lot less people putting money in the pot to cover social care for the elderly? There seems to be some serious problems with that but each to their own I guess. It's not for me unless you mean something different It’s possible that it could lead to an increase in abusive partners. I’m not sure if that could be proven one way or the other. I’d like to hope that severe regulations could be put in place to prevent as much of that as possible, though perhaps some rise would happen. I don’t believe that the English culture is so patriarchal that people would weight a male life over a female. It’s not China. A generation could get crushed, if it was implemented rapidly. Though, if robotics and AI do come in and replace jobs, maybe the economic output will increase without workers? On the other side of it, there isn’t a huge amount of space for every growing populations. The more people on the planet, the more shit in rivers, plastics in the sea and pollution in the air. At some point, I expect that such pressures will drive change to the World as we know it far more than a one-child policy could. I think that less damage could be done if we could avoid that rather than simply passing the issue down the line and hoping to be dead before it becomes a major problem.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Jun 10, 2024 19:42:28 GMT
A one child policy which would give rise to abusive partners who force their partners to have abortions because they want a boy and not a girl? A one child policy which means more boys are born than girls so it reduces the birth rate quite a lot meaning there will be a lot less people putting money in the pot to cover social care for the elderly? There seems to be some serious problems with that but each to their own I guess. It's not for me unless you mean something different It’s possible that it could lead to an increase in abusive partners. I’m not sure if that could be proven one way or the other. I’d like to hope that severe regulations could be put in place to prevent as much of that as possible, though perhaps some rise would happen. I don’t believe that the English culture is so patriarchal that people would weight a male life over a female. It’s not China. A generation could get crushed, if it was implemented rapidly. Though, if robotics and AI do come in and replace jobs, maybe the economic output will increase without workers? On the other side of it, there isn’t a huge amount of space for every growing populations. The more people on the planet, the more shit in rivers, plastics in the sea and pollution in the air. At some point, I expect that such pressures will drive change to the World as we know it far more than a one-child policy could. I think that less damage could be done if we could avoid that rather than simply passing the issue down the line and hoping to be dead before it becomes a major problem. I think you would be surprised what the choice of only being able to have a boy or girl would do to some people. It would be like an image thing for some people like there is with having dangerous dogs. Then what would happen when people get multiple women pregnant, the man has 2 kids but each woman has 1. It's a bit of a minefield
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2024 20:20:14 GMT
It’s possible that it could lead to an increase in abusive partners. I’m not sure if that could be proven one way or the other. I’d like to hope that severe regulations could be put in place to prevent as much of that as possible, though perhaps some rise would happen. I don’t believe that the English culture is so patriarchal that people would weight a male life over a female. It’s not China. A generation could get crushed, if it was implemented rapidly. Though, if robotics and AI do come in and replace jobs, maybe the economic output will increase without workers? On the other side of it, there isn’t a huge amount of space for every growing populations. The more people on the planet, the more shit in rivers, plastics in the sea and pollution in the air. At some point, I expect that such pressures will drive change to the World as we know it far more than a one-child policy could. I think that less damage could be done if we could avoid that rather than simply passing the issue down the line and hoping to be dead before it becomes a major problem. I think you would be surprised what the choice of only being able to have a boy or girl would do to some people. It would be like an image thing for some people like there is with having dangerous dogs. Then what would happen when people get multiple women pregnant, the man has 2 kids but each woman has 1. It's a bit of a minefield Like I said, we all have controversial opinions and I just don’t see constant population growth leading anywhere but an all-out war for ever-diminishing resources.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Jun 10, 2024 21:05:02 GMT
It's not shit stirring, it's my honest opinion. I think you've behaved abysmally. And you're extremely fortunate that gawa has acted with such decorum. That’s rich coming from you. You demanded I provide quotes. I did. Then when I asked you to quote me for what you have accused me of, you failed to do so and told me off for even asking and became abusive. And why am i “extremely fortunate “? Is that some sort of veiled threat!? This is an internet forum! I stand by the points i have made that you and Gawa seem to strongly disagree with but won’t actually debate. I shouldn’t have been so hyperbolic and provocative in my comments to Gawa and I apologised for that. Hyper Bollock - that's Badger's wrestling name right there.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Jun 12, 2024 15:37:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 12, 2024 15:57:46 GMT
You appear to be putting quite some effort into this Phil, you do know you're wasting your time? 😄
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 19, 2024 16:58:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jun 19, 2024 17:14:37 GMT
Bbc not reporting it? Surprise surprise. If they do it will be posted up near midnight in a corner of the website where nobody sees it.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jun 19, 2024 17:31:38 GMT
Bbc not reporting it? Surprise surprise. If they do it will be posted up near midnight in a corner of the website where nobody sees it. Turns out the anti-racists were the bad guys. I’m shocked…..
|
|