General Election 2024

Who got your vote?

  • Labour

    Votes: 147 54.2%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 5 1.8%
  • Lib Dem

    Votes: 25 9.2%
  • Green

    Votes: 48 17.7%
  • Reform

    Votes: 11 4.1%
  • SNP

    Votes: 5 1.8%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Independent

    Votes: 8 3.0%
  • UK resident but not voting

    Votes: 18 6.6%
  • Spoiled my ballot

    Votes: 3 1.1%

  • Total voters
    271
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.


How can anyone vote for this man? he is a power grabbing opportunistic donkey, sold most of his principles just to be PM. where is the vomiting emoji when you need it?
 
Last edited:
18 June 2024
Starmer: Blair is right that a woman has a vagina and a man has a penis

Stammer barks like a dog for whatever his war criminal master say. He copy his idol Blair all the time, he probably want to be a war criminal like him.
 


How can anyone vote for this man? he is a power grabbing opportunistic donkey, sold most of his principles just to be PM. where is the vomiting emoji when you need it?

I really liked his interview with Neville he did the other day.

This is just utterly awful though!
 
We don't have a constitution so we are reliant on either our courts or the house of lords(!) to stop a government doing something like removing really basic protections like ECHR. Weirdly because the Lords are mainly still old-school conservative for now, they did a decent job at the more ludicrous bills over the last few years. There needs to be something formal in place as you're saying to stop the obvious shifts they're going for.
We do have a constitution, we’re a *constitutional* monarchy, but it’s uncodified, and much of it is based on precedent and custom rather than clearly defined rules. Over the last eight years this ramshackle arrangement has been pushed beyond breaking point by an executive that thinks it should have unlimited power. That’s why we need clearer limits on what a government can do in future.
 
We do have a constitution, we’re a *constitutional* monarchy, but it’s uncodified, and much of it is based on precedent and custom rather than clearly defined rules. Over the last eight years this ramshackle arrangement has been pushed beyond breaking point by an executive that thinks it should have unlimited power. That’s why we need clearer limits on what a government can do in future.
100% and at times we have seen the separation of powers doing their job, but then of course it gets seen as unfair/against the will of the people or whatever bollocks they come out with.
 
We do have a constitution, we’re a *constitutional* monarchy, but it’s uncodified, and much of it is based on precedent and custom rather than clearly defined rules. Over the last eight years this ramshackle arrangement has been pushed beyond breaking point by an executive that thinks it should have unlimited power. That’s why we need clearer limits on what a government can do in future.

That's fair that it's just uncodified, and there are advantages to using precedent as it is kept updated unlike some countries reliant on rules from 100 odd years ago. Agree with everything you say as the last few years have shown how dangerous our system could be in the wrong hands.
 

Constituents do have every right to question their MPs, but shouting aggressively in their faces while filming is not going to elicit a favourable response.



How can anyone vote for this man? he is a power grabbing opportunistic donkey, sold most of his principles just to be PM. where is the vomiting emoji when you need it?

I don't see this as the gotcha it's being painted out to be. It's classic politician ignoring, reframing and deflecting a question, which you see a million times over.
Sure it's uninspiring, annoying and makes him sound untrustworthy, but it's hardly unique.
 
I wrote the word **** (c u l t). Think that was starred out automatically, not sure I have seen that before.

Edit: it was, so typed it out with spaces to bypass it now! Assume it's because something thinks I am trying to get around the censor for cnut.

That word is also censored at the moment as it was being used ludicrously often to avoid actual discussion in the ETH thread.
 
Stammer barks like a dog for whatever his war criminal master say. He copy his idol Blair all the time, he probably want to be a war criminal like him.

Assume by this response you have not bothered to listen to his full answer. This is a very cherry picked quote to illicit this exact response from people like you.
 
It didn't lurch to the far right in 2010. There wasn't that much difference between Blair/Brown and Cameron.
2010 was only 2 years after the 2008 crash.

There has been much more decline since then by almost every metric. We needed investment but got austerity. People are frustrated and significantly poorer. It would take someone worth ambitious policies at least 2 terms to have any positive impact.

Starmer with his unambitious policies having little impact on people's lives, and his deceptive nature will frustrate further and allows the far right in.
 
2010 was only 2 years on from the financial crash... since then we have had what seems like managed decline ever since. Also, in 4 or 5 years we are much more likely to see an opposition that is populist far right. That would be the first time in my adult life. I don't think we should underestimate what might happen under these circumstances where lots of people are increasingly angry and frustrated.
Wow, I read this after my almost identical post!
 


How can anyone vote for this man? he is a power grabbing opportunistic donkey, sold most of his principles just to be PM. where is the vomiting emoji when you need it?


You don't understand politics.

If Labour had any leader other than Jeremy Corby we would have got rid of the Tories at the 2017 election.
 
Constituents do have every right to question their MPs, but shouting aggressively in their faces while filming is not going to elicit a favourable response.


I don't see this as the gotcha it's being painted out to be. It's classic politician ignoring, reframing and deflecting a question, which you see a million times over.
Sure it's uninspiring, annoying and makes him sound untrustworthy, but it's hardly unique.

Yes I thought that too.
 
I don't see this as the gotcha it's being painted out to be. It's classic politician ignoring, reframing and deflecting a question, which you see a million times over.
Sure it's uninspiring, annoying and makes him sound untrustworthy, but it's hardly unique.

It’s so ridiculously defensive though. He doesn’t need to avoid that question by refusing to acknowledge it, he surely could have said “we will look into the details of the (particular barge) when we’re in power blah blah root and branch review blah blah blah” and chuck in the words “humane” and “respect” for good measure.

Whenever he’s asked “what are Labour going to do” he rambles for ages about how the Tory’s have broken everything. It’s why he looked a bit of a mug in that first debate with Sunak, he’ starts every answer with a huge amount of unnecessary context, trying to filibuster his way out of anything remotely difficult.

He is the Southgate of Labour leaders and it’s infuriating.
 
I don't see this as the gotcha it's being painted out to be. It's classic politician ignoring, reframing and deflecting a question, which you see a million times over.
Sure it's uninspiring, annoying and makes him sound untrustworthy, but it's hardly unique.

Politicians of course deflect but he's like it with every question.

Have read his numerous versions of his missions, have read his manifesto and listened to what he's said.

Apart from fantasy thinking as he did with Brexit, I still have absolutely no idea how he's going to grow the economy, what he's going to do about anything, from making non-existent doctors and nurses working weekends and evenings, to force about a million people to train as doctors, nurses, policemen, builders, electricians, plumbers, to introduce a national energy supplier that isn't, and the lists goes on and on. He doesn't seem to be able to answer one straight question.
 
It’s so ridiculously defensive though. He doesn’t need to avoid that question by refusing to acknowledge it, he surely could have said “we will look into the details of the (particular barge) when we’re in power blah blah root and branch review blah blah blah” and chuck in the words “humane” and “respect” for good measure.

Whenever he’s asked “what are Labour going to do” he rambles for ages about how the Tory’s have broken everything. It’s why he looked a bit of a mug in that first debate with Sunak, he’ starts every answer with a huge amount of unnecessary context, trying to filibuster his way out of anything remotely difficult.

He is the Southgate of Labour leaders and it’s infuriating.

Agree with all of this. But equally, in his eyes he probably doesnt need to do anything beyond this - since they are on track to wind a landslide.

Reform are surging in the polls (ugh...) taking even more votes away from the Tories. All Starmer has to do is try to avoid completely alienating anyone. It is massively frustrating to watch, and once he is in power the dynamic will need to change completely.

That said, my constituency is always between the Tories and Lib Dems, so I dont really have to care about "holding my nose and voting Labour" (would still vote for them 100% of times over the Tories). The fact that the Lib Dems manifesto is one I largely agree with is an added bonus and means my vote isnt purely tactical.
 
Tactical voting

Nope. Ellie has actually bothered to turn up and talk to people on a regular basis. Lib Dems keep sending us South Shropshire leaflets through the door so they dont even know where I live. Labours candidate is terrible and made no effort while Bill Wiggins thinks he doesnt have to do anything to get re elected. What you're seeing in one party actually reaching out to the local population and engaging with people, it works. Greens also did well in some areas during the Local elections.

If it was tactical voting then we'd all be voting Lib Dems or Labour as they are the parties that got the 2nd most votes in the last two elections.
 
It’s so ridiculously defensive though. He doesn’t need to avoid that question by refusing to acknowledge it, he surely could have said “we will look into the details of the (particular barge) when we’re in power blah blah root and branch review blah blah blah” and chuck in the words “humane” and “respect” for good measure.

Whenever he’s asked “what are Labour going to do” he rambles for ages about how the Tory’s have broken everything. It’s why he looked a bit of a mug in that first debate with Sunak, he’ starts every answer with a huge amount of unnecessary context, trying to filibuster his way out of anything remotely difficult.

He is the Southgate of Labour leaders and it’s infuriating.

Honestly would that be any more vacuous than the answer he gave? It feels like a slight step up but also similarly nothing much of significance
 
Last edited:
Honestly would that be any more vacuous than the answer he gave? It feels like a slight step up but nothing of much significance
"My heart goes out to those people. They've come to the UK seeking asylum and have been treated worse than criminals. I will prioritise their cases, get them off the barge as soon as possible, and shut down this barbaric process that demeans our standing within the international community. We used to lead the world in fairness and justice but the Tories, under 5 prime ministers, have tainted our image on the world stage. And I'm determined to right the many wrongs that consecutive tory governments have unleashed on this country."

Something like that would paint the Tories as the monsters they are.
 
It’s so ridiculously defensive though. He doesn’t need to avoid that question by refusing to acknowledge it, he surely could have said “we will look into the details of the (particular barge) when we’re in power blah blah root and branch review blah blah blah” and chuck in the words “humane” and “respect” for good measure.

Whenever he’s asked “what are Labour going to do” he rambles for ages about how the Tory’s have broken everything. It’s why he looked a bit of a mug in that first debate with Sunak, he’ starts every answer with a huge amount of unnecessary context, trying to filibuster his way out of anything remotely difficult.

He is the Southgate of Labour leaders and it’s infuriating.
Yeah I agree completely and like I said, he's very uninspiring. The extent of his inability to respond on the spot is surprising. You can evade and sound more authoritative.
 
Nope. Ellie has actually bothered to turn up and talk to people on a regular basis. Lib Dems keep sending us South Shropshire leaflets through the door so they dont even know where I live. Labours candidate is terrible and made no effort while Bill Wiggins thinks he doesnt have to do anything to get re elected. What you're seeing in one party actually reaching out to the local population and engaging with people, it works. Greens also did well in some areas during the Local elections.

If it was tactical voting then we'd all be voting Lib Dems or Labour as they are the parties that got the 2nd most votes in the last two elections.
Look on the website.
 
You don't understand politics.

If Labour had any leader other than Jeremy Corby we would have got rid of the Tories at the 2017 election.
Labours share of the vote in 2017 was 40%, Labours share of the vote currently on the Poll of Polls is 41%. Labour's support base hasn't changed it's just that the Tories has disappeared. I truly believe that the referendum pledge cost Labour in 2019. You can see that by it being red wall seat that turned against them.
 
Last edited:
GQqMNOjXYAEF7RD
 
Labours share of the vote in 2017 was 40%, Labours share of the vote currently on the Poll of Polls is 41%. Labour's support base hasn't changed it's just that the Tories has disappeared. I truly believe that the referendum pledge cost Labour in 2019. You can see that by it being red wall seat that turned against them.

Absofeckingloutely this is why some things are best left unsaid.


I dont care about politics, I care about humanity.

You can't benefit humanity without power.
 
I'm still yet to hear in this thread and from people in general why Tony Blair was bad for Britain.

He created growth artificially by deliberately inflating asset prices, and then relaxed the buy to let lending rules.

The result?

In 1996, you could be a 3 bed end of terrace hous ein Wolverhampton for £26,500, when the average wage in the city was circa 15K a year.

In 2010, that same house cost £110,000, and the average wage was £18K a year.

We'll be paying for that idiocy for the next 50 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.