UK - December 2019 General Election

[Giz]

Your majority is already in the grave. Soon the rest of you will be too.

You really hate a lot of your fellow citizens don’t you?

 

[Giz]

Ah here comes our resident alt-right numpty to say something.... wrong and irrelevant. What a surprise

As these stories have been reported in both the Times and the independent ... I think I trust them. You are free to post counter evidence... if it exists outside of your prejudices.

 

[Darat]

Police in the U.K. have plenty of resources, they have chosen not to focus them on violent crime or property crime:



“Nine people a day are being arrested for posting allegedly offensive messages online as police step up their campaign to combat social media hate speech.



More than 3,300 people were detained and questioned last year over so-called trolling on social media and other online forums, a rise of nearly 50 per cent in two years, according to figures obtained by The Times.”



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...e-a-day-in-fight-against-web-trolls-b8nkpgp2d

Yet the Tory leader and the Tory government claim the police need an additional 20,000 police officers and are campaigning on that. Given the cuts to the funding of the police force by that same government it would appear the Tories disagree with your analysis of where the problem is.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Yes. Lots of free unearned money and fewer brown people. The reality is rather different: the final run-down of the NHS, reduced social spending, job losses, economic depression, civil unrest at cetera.

And ironically more brown people, since we'll have to increase immigration from outside the EU. Of course the people who wanted to 'control immigration' weren't actually worried about people speaking Italian in the streets, 'Little Parises' springing up in our cities or certain shops and even councils putting up signs subtitled in the Greek alphabet. Still, the good thing about encouraging hate is that once you've riled people up they're normally not too discriminating about who they aim it at.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Yet the Tory leader and the Tory government claim the police need an additional 20,000 police officers and are campaigning on that. Given the cuts to the funding of the police force by that same government it would appear the Tories disagree with your analysis of where the problem is.

20,000 police officers. You know I have the oddest feeling I've heard a very, very similar figure in a slightly different context regarding the Conservatives. Now where would that have been......

 

[Information Analyst]

The Imperial Delusion.

I was at our local library this week for a talk by the historian David Olusoga. He likened the idea Brexit supports have that they can have Empire 2.0, and in particular that Commonwealth countries are desperate to fill the EU gap for us, is like looking longingly at your ex-girlfriends on Facebook...

 

[3point14]

Depressed enough to admit that Labor seems to have blown it in this election? It should have been a slam dunk for them.

No. The leader of the Labour party is the most smeared man in British politics.

The Tory press will only allow 'tory light' Labour administration.

If there was any journalistic integrity in the Tory press this would have been a slam dunk for Labour.


The fact that any of the blame for the entirely Tory driven cock up of the last nine years - nine years of Tory administration, a Tory poll on Europe, the Tories failing to deliver on that thereafter - is a triumph of the tax-exiled newspaper owners art.

 

[Vixen]

Police in the U.K. have plenty of resources, they have chosen not to focus them on violent crime or property crime:

“Nine people a day are being arrested for posting allegedly offensive messages online as police step up their campaign to combat social media hate speech.

More than 3,300 people were detained and questioned last year over so-called trolling on social media and other online forums, a rise of nearly 50 per cent in two years, according to figures obtained by The Times.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...e-a-day-in-fight-against-web-trolls-b8nkpgp2d

Then there are clearly plenty of vacancies for police recruits. There are lots of unemployed people who would love a job policing the internet.

Whoops! May slashed the police force by 20,000.

 

[Vixen]

I was at our local library this week for a talk by the historian David Olusoga. He likened the idea Brexit supports have that they can have Empire 2.0, and in particular that Commonwealth countries are desperate to fill the EU gap for us, is like looking longingly at your ex-girlfriends on Facebook...

David Olusoga is absolutely brilliant. I enjoyed his tv series, A House In Time.

I like his 'mad academic' personna: a kind of history's 'whispering Bob'.

 

[ceptimus]

Who is this 'we' you keep talking about?

That would be us, the UK voters, of which you are one.

I realize that the arrogance and privilege of remoaners leads them to think that they only belong to a group when it goes along with what THEY want. Thankfully, democracy doesn't work that way.

It's to be hoped that the election next week teaches remoaners a lesson in understanding democracy, and clears a lot of time-wasting MPs from the commons, so that the government can get back to governing.

 

[Vixen]

That would be us, the UK voters, of which you are one.

I realize that the arrogance and privilege of remoaners leads them to think that they only belong to a group when it goes along with what THEY want. Thankfully, democracy doesn't work that way.

It's to be hoped that the election next week teaches remoaners a lesson in understanding democracy, and clears a lot of time-wasting MPs from the commons, so that the government can get back to governing.

Sorry to break it to you but 'no deal' is now against the law.

 

[Lothian]

I realize that the arrogance and privilege of remoaners leads them to think that they only belong to a group when it goes along with what THEY want. Thankfully, democracy doesn't work that way.

Thankfully it wasn't remainers calling judges "enemies of the people" for upholding UK law. Neither was it remainers attacking MPs for talking part in the parliamentary democratic system we have in the UK. If you want me to quote all your posts attacking parliament and our democratic system for not going along with what YOU wanted, let me know.

 

[ceptimus]

Thankfully it wasn't remainers calling judges "enemies of the people" for upholding UK law. Neither was it remainers attacking MPs for talking part in the parliamentary democratic system we have in the UK. If you want me to quote all your posts attacking parliament and our democratic system for not going along with what YOU wanted, let me know.

It's not what I wanted - it's what WE voted for. That's democracy for you, although you and many remoaner MPs still don't seem to have grasped the concept. Judges got just one vote each in the referendum - the same as the rest of us, so when their rulings go against the majority vote, they are indeed enemies of the people - and enemies of democracy too. Privilege gives people like Gina Miller and Alastair Campbell much more influence than ordinary voters, but they still only get one vote each, thankfully.

 

[ceptimus]

Sorry to break it to you but 'no deal' is now against the law.

If the Tories win a good working majority, then 'no deal' needn't be against the law for much longer.

 

[Information Analyst]

And, frankly, I see a bunch of "The Party I support can do no wrong" on this forum.

Plenty of people here have qualified why they may vote Labour this week. I haven't noticed anyone giving the party the sort of unequivocal support you claim. Maybe you'd like to say who they are?

 

[The Don]

It's not what I wanted - it's what WE voted for.

There was a narrow majority in favour of leaving the EU.

There was no clear definition of what "afterwards" would look like - though specific things were repeatedly mentioned by the leave campaign such as remaining in the EEA.

A "No Deal" Brexit was specifically excluded as an option on a number of occasions both before and after the referendum result.

Claiming that the British electorate voted for a No Deal Brexit is a lie.

 

[Information Analyst]

Judges got just one vote each in the referendum - the same as the rest of us, so when their rulings go against the majority vote, they are indeed enemies of the people - and enemies of democracy too.

People's opinions don't trump the fact of the law.

 

[The Don]

Disagree. You have to bear in mind May negotiated a secret Brexit deal which she refused to share with anyone until it was 'agreed' and signed off with the EU negotiators (Barnier). She then presented it as a fait a compli to parliament but only because three High Court judges ruled that she must (who were promptly labelled 'traitors by the DM). She had to gear it to the ERG as being a minority government she needed their backing. The DUP unsurprisingly stiffed her, together with the ERG who wanted 'no deal'.

Jeremy Corbyn wants a deal that keeps the UK in the Customs Union and continues with EU workers rights. A massive, massive difference.

The Labour manifesto offers negotiating such a deal and then having a referendum with the stark choice: the Customs Union/Workers Rights Brexit or Remain.

Seems fair to me.

I think you're quite wrong.

A Corbyn Brexit would be around 85% as damaging as a no-deal Brexit if economic modellers and forecasters are to be believed. Of course a Corbyn Brexit is impossible (the UK cannot be in a customs union and have its own trade deals) so it will be almost identical to a Conservative Brexit.

You may feel that the workers' rights make a big difference but given that any government could immediately reverse that position then IMO the key thing is that both parties want to leave the EU - something which will significantly and permanently damage UK society.

The Labour Party claims to want to protect workers but official policy will be to take a step which will do the most damage to workers and the least well off in British history - Brexit.

I'll still hold my nose and vote Labour but only to try to prevent a Conservative victory.

 

[Darat]

If the Tories win a good working majority, then 'no deal' needn't be against the law for much longer.

They had a majority, they blew it, they then had a working majority. But of course that working majority assumed that the likes of Mogg and Johnson wouldn't vote against their own government and as we know that didn't happen. They voted to stay in the EU.

The term "remoaner' should be applied to those that stopped the democratic will of the people being carried out, MPs such as Johnson, Davies and Mogg.

 

[3point14]

I think you're quite wrong.

A Corbyn Brexit would be around 85% as damaging as a no-deal Brexit if economic modellers and forecasters are to be believed. Of course a Corbyn Brexit is impossible (the UK cannot be in a customs union and have its own trade deals) so it will be almost identical to a Conservative Brexit.

You may feel that the workers' rights make a big difference but given that any government could immediately reverse that position then IMO the key thing is that both parties want to leave the EU - something which will significantly and permanently damage UK society.

The Labour Party claims to want to protect workers but official policy will be to take a step which will do the most damage to workers and the least well off in British history - Brexit.

I'll still hold my nose and vote Labour but only to try to prevent a Conservative victory.

I think, in the event of a Labour majority (hahaha) Brexit will likely be called off after the promised referendum falls that way.