General Erection - 12th December 2019

[Bycarsbill]

19 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

The problem we have is our first past the post system.  It means that at every general election we end up with a government that the majority of the electorate do not want.  It also means that in what is basically a two party system, elections become vicious and confrontational.  Time for a change??

You're correct--the first past the post system is far from perefect.  However, you may recall that there was in fact a referendum held 5/6 years ago about changing the system and failed to gain enough traction to alter first past the post--so we're stuck with it for the short term!

[Bycarsbill]

1 hour ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

Because he's lying? Because he's being disingenuous? I don't care what he said about Borrissey; why do you keep pointing out that I'm being one sided?

Because IMO on this one you are certainly being one-sided.  As someone else has pointed out, if, as you say, Nick Boles is lying then Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else whose integrity Boles supposedly impunes can easily resort to the laws of libel!  I'm happy to say publicly that I know Boris isn't always perfect and often a 'stranger to the truth', why can you not accept that neither is Corbyn perfect?  As long as you continue to wear those blinkers to his faults you will always see things as one-sided.

[mr.hobblesworth]

8 minutes ago, Bycarsbill said:

Because IMO on this one you are certainly being one-sided.  As someone else has pointed out, if, as you say, Nick Boles is lying then Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else whose integrity Boles supposedly impunes can easily resort to the laws of libel!  I'm happy to say publicly that I know Boris isn't always perfect and often a 'stranger to the truth', why can you not accept that neither is Corbyn perfect?  As long as you continue to wear those blinkers to his faults you will always see things as one-sided.

I don't think Corbyn is perfect and have never stated that I think he is. I am perfectly  aware of his flaws. However, admitting that he isn't perfect and has faults does not excuse the excrement that Boles has come out with. Corbyn isn't an anti-semite, Momentum aren't "stormtroopers", Ian Austin isn't a "lifelong Labour supporter". The bloke has spewed out a load of lies and right wing tropes and it's lapped up by centrists fawning over this idealised image of a "sensible politician".

[mr.hobblesworth]

And I will be one-sided. It's a <ovf censored> election, not an essay for a politics exam! I'm a socialist who wants Labour to win, why would I look for balance? I don't look for balance in match reports, I don't decry poor refereeing decisions that disadvantage the opposition, why would I do that when it comes to politics?

[Andyregs]

2 hours ago, For Us All said:

If the result had been accepted we wouldn't be having this election.

So, just to be clear, if all the tory mps had supported their leader and the brexit deal you didn’t support yourself (and so presumably didn’t want them to support) we wouldn’t need this election?

The mental gymnastics you need to do in order to be able to moan is getting more impressive each day. You can’t even bring yourself to say if you support the Boris deal. Anyone would think you don’t actually care. ‘Winning’ is most important. 

[For Us All]

1 hour ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I'm guessing that any victory, thanks to all the dirt being raked and slurs being thrown around, would be Pyrrhic.  

That paragraph by Boles though, 

"Momentum stormtroopers" lol. "Stood by when they tried to deselect one of Labour's leading lights in London" You mean someone who has consistently attempted to undermine the leader since day one? What a ducking prlck.

 

42 minutes ago, Bycarsbill said:

Because IMO on this one you are certainly being one-sided.  As someone else has pointed out, if, as you say, Nick Boles is lying then Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else whose integrity Boles supposedly impunes can easily resort to the laws of libel!  I'm happy to say publicly that I know Boris isn't always perfect and often a 'stranger to the truth', why can you not accept that neither is Corbyn perfect?  As long as you continue to wear those blinkers to his faults you will always see things as one-sided.

Correct,the truth hurts doesn't it Bill?

[For Us All]

2 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

So why did Boris pull the plug after the second reading vote in order to get an election?

It would never have happened if the losers had accepted defeat in 2016.

All this mess is down to that.

[For Us All]

2 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I'm guessing that any victory, thanks to all the dirt being raked and slurs being thrown around, would be Pyrrhic.  

That paragraph by Boles though, 

"Momentum stormtroopers" lol. "Stood by when they tried to deselect one of Labour's leading lights in London" You mean someone who has consistently attempted to undermine the leader since day one? What a ducking prlck.

Are you a stormtrooper Mr.H?

[Jacko51]

1 hour ago, Bycarsbill said:

You're correct--the first past the post system is far from perefect.  However, you may recall that there was in fact a referendum held 5/6 years ago about changing the system and failed to gain enough traction to alter first past the post--so we're stuck with it for the short term!

But the system which was offered on the ballot paper was the hugely unmanageable alternative vote system, not proportional representation.  We have never been offered the option of proportional representation.

[Jacko51]

15 minutes ago, For Us All said:

It would never have happened if the losers had accepted defeat in 2016.

All this mess is down to that.

Was Article 50 triggered?  Yes.  Did May get a deal?  Yes.  Did the Tories all support the deal?  No.  Did Johnson get a deal?  Yes.  Did the deal get through to a second reading in Parliament?  Yes.  Did Johnson proceed to the next stage?  No.  Looks to me like losers and winners have a role to play in this total mess.

[Jacko51]

55 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

And I will be one-sided. It's a <ovf censored> election, not an essay for a politics exam! I'm a socialist who wants Labour to win, why would I look for balance? I don't look for balance in match reports, I don't decry poor refereeing decisions that disadvantage the opposition, why would I do that when it comes to politics?

It is lack of balance and a determination for pig headed confrontation that has led us to this utter shambles we are currently enduring.  You may feel differently but Nick Boles as expressed exactly the opinion that is shared by a considerable number of votes ..... a plague on both their houses.

[For Us All]

16 minutes ago, Andyregs said:

So, just to be clear, if all the tory mps had supported their leader and the brexit deal you didn’t support yourself (and so presumably didn’t want them to support) we wouldn’t need this election?

The mental gymnastics you need to do in order to be able to moan is getting more impressive each day. You can’t even bring yourself to say if you support the Boris deal. Anyone would think you don’t actually care. ‘Winning’ is most important. 

Well,I dont go into any election or referendum voting to lose,do you?If I did manage to lose,which it did a couple of times in the 70's & 90's,I accepted defeat and tried to get on with my life.I didn't go round calling everybody names and demanding another vote.

We wouldn't need an election and we wouldn't have had three and a half years of dithering and delay if the losers had accepted defeat in 2016.This has never happened in my lifetime and says a lot about our politics and the times we live in.

Learn to accept defeat and move on,like we used to do.This is the only answer to avoid all this chaos.

You know it makes sense.

[mr.hobblesworth]

And a plague on his. Whilst Boles and whoever - the "politically homeless" - bleat, and their supporters merrily suck up the bull spread by those on the right, there's a party out there who want to address issues like the actual homeless (caused by Boles and Swinson' parties).

You talk about pigheaded confrontation; what do you call spreading lies about Corbyn and Labour campaigners, labelling them racists and stormtroopers? It's not exactly mollifying, is it? It may be a view shared by a "considerable number of votes", that doesn't make it any less senseless.

[Jacko51]

Just now, mr.hobblesworth said:

And a plague on his. Whilst Boles and whoever - the "politically homeless" - bleat, and their supporters merrily suck up the bull spread by those on the right, there's a party out there who want to address issues like the actual homeless (caused by Boles and Swinson' parties).

You talk about pigheaded confrontation; what do you call spreading lies about Corbyn and Labour campaigners, labelling them racists and stormtroopers? It's not exactly mollifying, is it? It may be a view shared by a "considerable number of votes", that doesn't make it any less senseless.

You miss my point, mate.  There are lies being spread by both sides and stupid, pig headed confrontation by both sides.  None of it is mollifying.  By your own admission you have a blinkered view of this so you cannot in all conscience accuse other people of being senseless when you are so one-eyed yourself.

[Bycarsbill]

46 minutes ago, For Us All said:

 

Correct,the truth hurts doesn't it Bill?

The reality is that in this election, as we are seeing so far, "truth" appears to be in very short supply on all sides of the arguments.  We're all going to need to use our own nous & instincts to sort the wheat from the chaff in what is shaping up to be one of the most aggressive & nasty election campaigns I can ever remember!