news & politics:discussion

[Gilgamesh69]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

you're still lying.

You edited your own post, and then made a lying post to claim I'd edited the post you'd edited. And you've now edited that.

Yes, i edited both posts but the one I was referring to is the one you responded to. When I realised I was /wrong/, i changed it. I'll admit I was wrong, but I'm not a liar.  You're just chatting shit.

 

If someone says something they believed to be true, then that isn't lying. Use your head mate

Edited February 24, 2021 by Gilgamesh69

[squirrelarmy]

3 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Keir has lost this one. Poor performance today.

Spaffer is better at being a performing monkey with the soundbites that can be used in the media. He completely failed to answer any of the questions he was given. 

[Haan]

49 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Maybe the electorate isn't ready to be convinced?

I've been hoping they would be for 40years but I'm not noticing much change over all that time.

A successful leader takes on the battles they can win and puts aside those they can't for another day.

I wonder why no one got back to me with my comment about civil partnerships? It's not just starmer who runs away from the awkward.

And people will continue to die of drug overdoses and prisons will continue to be unnecessarily filled. 

And yes it's not just Starmer- Corbyn was bad on the drug issue too, but again, if we don't try to control the conversation how we will we ever move forward? Starmer could've said something like "I want serious drug usage to go down in this country. It's clear that in 10 years of Tory rule, they have done little to address this issue. When I get to power I will look to commission an evidence based drug report, to help tackle this issue" or something. The report can look into how Portugal solved it's heroin problem and boom drug reform.

 

 

[Guest]

Starmer had a slightly different approach today, which wasn’t necessarily bad. It’s a difficult week as the roadmap is needed for the country and the budget isn’t till next week. 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

Yes, i edited both posts but the one I was referring to is the one you responded to. When I realised I was /wrong/, i changed it. I'll admit I was wrong, but I'm not a liar.  You're just chatting shit.

 

If someone says something they believed to be true, then that isn't lying. Use your head mate

Lol, because you believed a post you edited was edited by me?

The only shit is your own.

[Homer]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Nice slogan, could work well for them.

Right up there with the classic 'why don't you just fuck off and join the tories'.

[Gilgamesh69]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Lol, because you believed a post you edited was edited by me?

The only shit is your own.

I made a post. Which I thought you had edited, so I made a second post making that claim. But very soon after I realised I was mistaken, so I quickly deleted the claim that you had edited my post. What part are you struggling with here? I was mistaken, i've already admitted that. But i wasn't lying. I had already edited my second post before you had even responded to it.

 

Just admit you're wrong mate. I dunno who pissed in your cornflakes this morning,  but doesn't mean you should start throwing a tantrum and taking it out on the forum

[squirrelarmy]

Bojo is clearly setting up massive tax rises and cuts to services next week. 
 

It’s not going to be a popular budget. 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Haan said:

And people will continue to die of drug overdoses and prisons will continue to be unnecessarily filled. 

And yes it's not just Starmer- Corbyn was bad on the drug issue too, but again, if we don't try to control the conversation how we will we ever move forward? Starmer could've said something like "I want serious drug usage to go down in this country. It's clear that in 10 years of Tory rule, they have done little to address this issue. When I get to power I will look to commission an evidence based drug report, to help tackle this issue" or something. The report can look into how Portugal solved it's heroin problem and boom drug reform.

Starmer could have, but that wouldn't move him towards electability, it would give ammo to be used against him while winning him no extra votes.

Have you ever noticed how the tories don't scare the electorate by making a thing of their more-controvercial ideas?

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Bojo is clearly setting up massive tax rises and cuts to services next week. 
 

It’s not going to be a popular budget. 

Do you think? I didn’t get that from him today. 

[Haan]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Starmer could have, but that wouldn't move him towards electability, it would give ammo to be used against him while winning him no extra votes.

This is not true at all, he only angered those in his electorate who cared about this issue, nowhere did I see him applauded for bragging about locking up cannabis users.

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Have you ever noticed how the tories don't scare the electorate by making a thing of their more-controvercial ideas?

Could you not argue that we should be the one's pointing out the Tories scary controversial ideas then? If Rashford could flip the conversation from "it's not my responsibility to feed the poor kids, what are the parents doing?" to a bunch of Tory U-Turns and an apology, why can't Starmer do the same for countless other issues?

[squirrelarmy]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Do you think? I didn’t get that from him today. 

Lots of talk about how they haven’t raised taxes so far and wanting to make economic changes to improve people’s lives. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Haan said:

This is not true at all, he only angered those in his electorate who cared about this issue, nowhere did I see him applauded for bragging about locking up cannabis users.

The amount of the electorate who care positively about drug user policy is tiny. The number who think druggies should locked up is big, as well as being a vote changer for these.

You're essentially demanding that starmer take positions contrary to public opinion and then expecting voters to vote for him. 

Which is exactly what made Corbyn totally unsuitable as leader. He had too many ideas contrary to public opinion, and where any one of those things were likely to be a deal-breaker in the public's eyes; for example, whatever the rights and wrongs in NI the UK public did not want an IRA victory.

 

1 minute ago, Haan said:

Could you not argue that we should be the one's pointing out the Tories scary controversial ideas then? If Rashford could flip the conversation from "it's not my responsibility to feed the poor kids, what are the parents doing?" to a bunch of Tory U-Turns and an apology, why can't Starmer do the same for countless other issues?

Some hills are worth dying for, some aren't. There's no votes in drug policy unless it's hard.

I'm guessing that along the line when politics is more normal (post budget, I'm guessing for the may elections) starmer will pick a few flagship policies to hammer home that align with the public's mood, and to the direct benefit of the majority - the working class who Labour are meant to represent. That will never be drugs policy.

 

[mattiloy]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

The amount of the electorate who care positively about drug user policy is tiny. The number who think druggies should locked up is big, as well as being a vote changer for these.

You're essentially demanding that starmer take positions contrary to public opinion and then expecting voters to vote for him. 

Which is exactly what made Corbyn totally unsuitable as leader. He had too many ideas contrary to public opinion, and where any one of those things were likely to be a deal-breaker in the public's eyes; for example, whatever the rights and wrongs in NI the UK public did not want an IRA victory.

 

Some hills are worth dying for, some aren't. There's no votes in drug policy unless it's hard.

I'm guessing that along the line when politics is more normal (post budget, I'm guessing for the may elections) starmer will pick a few flagship policies to hammer home that align with the public's mood, and to the direct benefit of the majority - the working class who Labour are meant to represent. That will never be drugs policy.

 

Not so, your argument serves to demonstrate how effective the establishment is at gaslighting the public that progressive politics is unpopular and unattainable and how deeply ingrained this belief is.

How many polls do I need to refer to that show the opposite?

And what evidence is there for the belief that people don’t want progressive politics? Because kuenssberg says it? Because the Mail says it? Because piers Morgan says it? Because the guardian says it? Because wes streeting says it?

If you refer to the election results you miss the point - the arguments are not presented fairly and personality has a lot to do with the outcome of the vote, more than the policies.

And if you say otherwise and that instead the general election accurately represents the public’s feeling on policy then you must also believe that everybody was well informed in the EU referendum and voted based on a rational assessment of the outcome and its effects.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Lots of talk about how they haven’t raised taxes so far and wanting to make economic changes to improve people’s lives. 

To be honest I’m not against tax rises, I generally favour higher taxation and increased public spending. But my concern would be where they use that money and the Tory manifesto did say no tax rises too. 

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

To be honest I’m not against tax rises, I generally favour higher taxation and increased public spending. But my concern would be where they use that money and the Tory manifesto did say no tax rises too. 

The Tory manifesto didn’t include Covid either so that will be his reason for going back on the manifesto. 
 

You’re right though about being cautious about how that money is being spent. 
 

[Haan]

14 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You're essentially demanding that starmer take positions contrary to public opinion and then expecting voters to vote for him. 

 

No I'm not, I am criticising him for not being able to steer the conversation in the right direction, refusing to try even. 

 

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm guessing that along the line when politics is more normal (post budget, I'm guessing for the may elections) starmer will pick a few flagship policies to hammer home that align with the public's mood, and to the direct benefit of the majority - the working class who Labour are meant to represent. That will never be drugs policy.

 

I will wait and see, I honestly do want him to do well and win. And the working class are those who will benefit the most from an evidence based drug policy lol; I never hear of Canary Wharf cocaine users being locked up and stopped and searched based on their profile...

[Homer]

14 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Not so, your argument serves to demonstrate how effective the establishment is at gaslighting the public that progressive politics is unpopular and unattainable and how deeply ingrained this belief is.

How many polls do I need to refer to that show the opposite?

And what evidence is there for the belief that people don’t want progressive politics? Because kuenssberg says it? Because the Mail says it? Because piers Morgan says it? Because the guardian says it? Because wes streeting says it?

If you refer to the election results you miss the point - the arguments are not presented fairly and personality has a lot to do with the outcome of the vote, more than the policies.

And if you say otherwise and that instead the general election accurately represents the public’s feeling on policy then you must also believe that everybody was well informed in the EU referendum and voted based on a rational assessment of the outcome and its effects.

Talk us through this country's election history, detailing how this country is bang up for electing a socialist government.

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Not so, your argument serves to demonstrate how effective the establishment is at gaslighting the public that progressive politics is unpopular and unattainable and how deeply ingrained this belief is.

How many polls do I need to refer to that show the opposite?

Polls that say someone who wouldn't otherwise vote labour will vote druggie-Labour?

The polls you refer to don't say that, and new voters for Labour is what Starmer is aiming for.

 

6 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

And what evidence is there for the belief that people don’t want progressive politics? Because kuenssberg says it? Because the Mail says it? Because piers Morgan says it? Because the guardian says it? Because wes streeting says it?

Just because someone might want 'progressive' for one thing doesn't mean they want progressive for everything. Another 'progressive' policy might turn them off more than a first turns them on.

If the polling you refer to is so spot on, how come Corbyn lost? There must be other parts you're not seeing.

 

6 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

If you refer to the election results you miss the point - the arguments are not presented fairly and personality has a lot to do with the outcome of the vote, more than the policies.

And if you say otherwise and that instead the general election accurately represents the public’s feeling on policy then you must also believe that everybody was well informed in the EU referendum and voted based on a rational assessment of the outcome and its effects.

 

The election results are the only point for a politician who wants to make positive change.

Screaming 'its not fair' is not a winning look.

The election result (within the limits of fptp) more accurately represents the public's views on a collection of policies than the loser does. Along with/combined with trust in the abilities of those politicians to deliver.

Winning elections isn't about who is well informed. its about collecting votes.

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, Haan said:

No I'm not, I am criticising him for not being able to steer the conversation in the right direction, refusing to try even. 

Your idea of the right direction, you mean.

(Quite possibly mine too, to be clear)

Just because he won't take on every battle you think he should in the way you think he should doesn't make him right wing, it makes him a politician working a strategy he hopes will bring him victory.

In that he stands more chance than Corbyn ever did.

 

8 minutes ago, Haan said:

 

I will wait and see, I honestly do want him to do well and win. And the working class are those who will benefit the most from an evidence based drug policy lol; I never hear of Canary Wharf cocaine users being locked up and stopped and searched based on their profile...

'the working class' do not as a class give a shit about drugs. Or gender. Or sexuality. Or skin colour.

They want good jobs, good pay, good conditions.

And their current lifestyle at-least maintained as the very minimum. Risk that and lose.

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

The Tory manifesto didn’t include Covid either so that will be his reason for going back on the manifesto. 
 

You’re right though about being cautious about how that money is being spent. 
 

The big one will be the triple lock on pensions, they have to keep that otherwise they’ll be uproar. 

[Haan]

45 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Your idea of the right direction, you mean.

(Quite possibly mine too, to be clear)

Just because he won't take on every battle you think he should in the way you think he should doesn't make him right wing, it makes him a politician working a strategy he hopes will bring him victory.

Well obviously my idea, I don't need to preface every statement I make with "in my view" do I? 

I don't think he's right wing, I just think so far he seems to be veering to the right on more and more issues.

47 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

'the working class' do not as a class give a shit about drugs. Or gender. Or sexuality. Or skin colour.

I have no idea what you mean by this, working class areas are the most effected by the war on drugs; glasgow has a big heroin problem and London and it's surrounding areas have the "country lines" problem and I can guarantee that they give a shit about solving this issue.

 

Anyway, I think it's important for us to continue to make noise about left wing issues like this because like I said before, we need to swing the conversation in our favour somehow. Farage managed it and he's an idiot so why can't we?

[Crazyfool01]

 

[squirrelarmy]

10 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

 

Hate to be the pedantic one but European isn’t a national identity as it’s not a nation. 
 

If anything else is allowed then I’ll be putting Yorkie. I believe the Cornish also want independence from the cesspit that is this country.  

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, squirrelarmy said:

Hate to be the pedantic one but European isn’t a national identity as it’s not a nation. 
 

If anything else is allowed then I’ll be putting Yorkie. I believe the Cornish also want independence from the cesspit that is this country.  

I doubt it will be refused on that basis .. 🙂