The Government care about you...

i'm not sure a new party/movement is needed - but definitely a change of electoral system. until then a spoilt paper is absolutely a legitimate choice to register your opinion.

many (most?) constituencies are "the land of the wasted vote" as the incumbent is guaranteed re-election. half the electorate is wasting their time.
but a change of electoral system, making every vote count, would allow the smaller parties to have a voice, and therefore the disenfranchised voters a voice.

i'm no supporter of UKIP, but them having no elected MPs in the early 2010s was a disgrace given their electoral popularity.
 
Not having that Mistryman.

A terrorist supporting racist and hard line socialist would have been worse, I was being polite when I said 'may well have been worse'.

In a bi-partizan vote, that is a legitimate position to take.
Ladies and Gentlemen... I give you the reason why this country to fucked
 
Not having that Mistryman.

A terrorist supporting racist and hard line socialist would have been worse, I was being polite when I said 'may well have been worse'.

In a bi-partizan vote, that is a legitimate position to take.
Whereas the Tory party actively arm them.
 
Not having that Mistryman.

A terrorist supporting racist and hard line socialist would have been worse, I was being polite when I said 'may well have been worse'.

In a bi-partizan vote, that is a legitimate position to take.
Given your perception, & considering the other option was Johnson, you really would have been better off spoiling your paper last time.
 
Whereas the Tory party actively arm them.
Some truth in that SF, though I was primarily thinking of the IRA
Given your perception, & considering the other option was Johnson, you really would have been better off spoiling your paper last time.
Agreed, though In my defence I did rather vote in optimism rather than expectation.
A nice Daily Mail line from the man who says he makes his own mind up about things from what he sees.
He was an IRA supporter and an anti-semite. What would you call him?
They probably fought the NF together in the seventies.
To be fair, both in Southall and Brixton there were a fair number of socialist activists present. I was lining up against the NF not for the SWP.
 
i'm not sure a new party/movement is needed - but definitely a change of electoral system. until then a spoilt paper is absolutely a legitimate choice to register your opinion.

many (most?) constituencies are "the land of the wasted vote" as the incumbent is guaranteed re-election. half the electorate is wasting their time.
but a change of electoral system, making every vote count, would allow the smaller parties to have a voice, and therefore the disenfranchised voters a voice.

i'm no supporter of UKIP, but them having no elected MPs in the early 2010s was a disgrace given their electoral popularity.
Very fair comment though I think that a more representative system would break up the LibLabCon anyway.

As I said earlier, one system that would fit in with our current ways but make a big difference would be big, multi seat constituencies.

Say around 50 odd constituencies returning 10 mps each selected on something like the d'Hondt system.
 
He was an IRA supporter and an anti-semite. What would you call him?
Quoting the Mail again? Wrong on both counts. Supporting a free Palestine doesn't make you an anti-semite. The IRA stuff was exaggerated to smear him and all the Mail/Sun readers bought it. He was prepared to negotiate with them to bring about peace. Thatcher said she would never negotiate with terrorists in public yet did it in private.
 
Quoting the Mail again? Wrong on both counts. Supporting a free Palestine doesn't make you an anti-semite. The IRA stuff was exaggerated to smear him and all the Mail/Sun readers bought it. He was prepared to negotiate with them to bring about peace. Thatcher said she would never negotiate with terrorists in public yet did it in private.
Club Book, I do not believe that I have ever read the Daily Mail in my life. (Football results excepted)

Corbyn gave succour and support to terrorist groups in public, that is my view gathered over the years.

I do not, generally order my views on party lines, you perhaps will not believe that but I do trust my experience and my judgement.
 
Quoting the Mail again? Wrong on both counts. Supporting a free Palestine doesn't make you an anti-semite. The IRA stuff was exaggerated to smear him and all the Mail/Sun readers bought it. He was prepared to negotiate with them to bring about peace. Thatcher said she would never negotiate with terrorists in public yet did it in private.
Bigots will be bigots. No other word for it. It’s common knowledge now it was a smear campaign by the establishment. We’re at the point now that either.
1. You accept that you were lied to by the establishment or
2. You’re a bigot
No middle ground on this one.
 
Bigots will be bigots. No other word for it. It’s common knowledge now it was a smear campaign by the establishment. We’re at the point now that either.
1. You accept that you were lied to by the establishment or
2. You’re a bigot
No middle ground on this one.
There are dozens of occasions that Corbyn is on the record supporting terrorists. Goes back to the Brighton bombing at least.
 
There are dozens of occasions that Corbyn is on the record supporting terrorists. Goes back to the Brighton bombing at least.
And there are more occasions of Tories arming them. Goes back a lot further.
 
Very fair comment though I think that a more representative system would break up the LibLabCon anyway.

As I said earlier, one system that would fit in with our current ways but make a big difference would be big, multi seat constituencies.

Say around 50 odd constituencies returning 10 mps each selected on something like the d'Hondt system.
Agreed something like this would help in some respects although I think 50 might mean that constituencies were too large for people to feel that the principle of MPs being connected to a specific community could be retained (assuming that was considered important). But there must be an optimum size in which you don't get excessive distortions arising from the calculations. Personally I would probably go for fewer than 500 MPs too.
 
And there are more occasions of Tories arming them. Goes back a lot further.
Tories arming the IRA, do tell.
Interesting, can you point me to some please
Two known IRA men invited to HOC just 2 weeks after the Brighton bomb.
Asked 5 times by Sky News interviewer to condemn IRA bombings, refused each time May 2017.
Asked twice on BBC Question Time to condemn IRA murders, refused. June 2017.
Attended wreath laying ceremony for known terrorist involved in the Munich Massacre. Lied about why he was there.
Signed Early Day Motion in HOC blaming the British 'occupation' of the 6 counties for the 'Poppy Day Massacre' November 1987.

Just a handful to get you started.
 
Tories arming the IRA, do tell.

Two known IRA men invited to HOC just 2 weeks after the Brighton bomb.
Asked 5 times by Sky News interviewer to condemn IRA bombings, refused each time May 2017.
Asked twice on BBC Question Time to condemn IRA murders, refused. June 2017.
Attended wreath laying ceremony for known terrorist involved in the Munich Massacre. Lied about why he was there.
Signed Early Day Motion in HOC blaming the British 'occupation' of the 6 counties for the 'Poppy Day Massacre' November 1987.

Just a handful to get you started.
Claire Fox. Actually in the IRA.
 
Asked 5 times by Sky News interviewer to condemn IRA bombings, refused each time May 2017.
This sounds familiar - is this the one where the reporter was asking specifically regarding the IRA to which Corbyn said something along the lines of "I'm condemning all bombing whether it was undertaken by the IRA or the Loyalists" (or words to that effect)?

On that point alone, what was wrong with what Corbyn said? But I'm guessing that because he didn't single out the IRA as the reporter was asking, the headlines were worded accordingly.

But hey, wonky glasses.
 
Agreed something like this would help in some respects although I think 50 might mean that constituencies were too large for people to feel that the principle of MPs being connected to a specific community could be retained (assuming that was considered important). But there must be an optimum size in which you don't get excessive distortions arising from the calculations. Personally I would probably go for fewer than 500 MPs too.
It's a balancing act I think. The constituencies need to be large and return sufficient MPs that minority groups get some representation, assuming they get the votes of course. At this point I am struggling to make a structure that seems workable, happy to be flexible on the numbers.
 
The most ironic part of this thread is someone who claims he fought against the NF back in the 70’s /80’s and wouldn’t vote for someone because (amongst other things) is a racist votes for an out and out racist. It’s like a monty python sketch.
 
Are you trying to claim Corbyn was in the IRA?
Why would you say that.

Corbyn is a hard left political animal. From his actions he supports acts the this country defines as criminal or terrorism. Not just once or twice but time after time after time after time.

The most ironic part of this thread is someone who claims he fought against the NF back in the 70’s /80’s and wouldn’t vote for someone because (amongst other things) is a racist votes for an out and out racist. It’s like a monty python sketch.
You are very big on calling racism Richard, a notorious lefty trait. I voted for what turns out to be a lying bastard, but two of the great offices of state given to ethnic Indians, hardly the act of a 'racist'.

To be honest some of your posts are getting rather personal, you are turning into something of a 'keyboard warrior'.

I enjoy a robust discussion but seriously, you are usually better than this.
 
Why would you say that.

Corbyn is a hard left political animal. From his actions he supports acts the this country defines as criminal or terrorism. Not just once or twice but time after time after time after time.


You are very big on calling racism Richard, a notorious lefty trait. I voted for what turns out to be a lying bastard, but two of the great offices of state given to ethnic Indians, hardly the act of a 'racist'.

To be honest some of your posts are getting rather personal, you are turning into something of a 'keyboard warrior'.

I enjoy a robust discussion but seriously, you are usually better than this.
Cuckoo
 
Why would you say that.

Corbyn is a hard left political animal. From his actions he supports acts the this country defines as criminal or terrorism. Not just once or twice but time after time after time after time.


You are very big on calling racism Richard, a notorious lefty trait. I voted for what turns out to be a lying bastard, but two of the great offices of state given to ethnic Indians, hardly the act of a 'racist'.

To be honest some of your posts are getting rather personal, you are turning into something of a 'keyboard warrior'.

I enjoy a robust discussion but seriously, you are usually better than this.
If the cap fits.
If you knew the first thing about Marxism is it’s fundamentally belief that removing opponents by foul means is unproductive. They believe that the only way is to change the system rather than the components of the system hence they oppose terrorism in any form. Hence Corbyns condemnation of ALL forms of terrorism not just condemning one side but you choose to ignore that fact.
 
Back
Top