The UK Political Landscape

pawras said:
Hhmmm so changing the voting system and reversing the biggest democratic vote in UK history without any national vote on the matter, and you think that'll wash? LOL
Click to expand...

I dont think they will ask for Brexit to be revoked. I do think that a second referendum would be a key policy position for Lib Dems. I do think they will relinquish that for Electoral Change (without a referendum) as an agreement for support of a Labour led government. I dont think Labour will get enough to lead a government with the SNP, who obviously will demand an Independence Referendum.

The Tory's best bet would be to allow Labour get a majority with a poor leader who has absolutely no idea to correct the path the UK is going down. Of course, DUP support will vanish even further in the North as well.

Best of luck with the rest of your nonsense.
 
HawkWing said:
I dont think they will ask for Brexit to be revoked. I do think that a second referendum would be a key policy position for Lib Dems. I do think they will relinquish that for Electoral Change (without a referendum) as an agreement for support of a Labour led government. I dont think Labour will get enough to lead a government with the SNP, who obviously will demand an Independence Referendum.

The Tory's best bet would be to allow Labour get a majority with a poor leader who has absolutely no idea to correct the path the UK is going down. Of course, DUP support will vanish even further in the North as well.

Best of luck with the rest of your nonsense.
Click to expand...


I think attempting change the voting system we've had since ever for PR without a referendum would cause some 'issues'
 
Yeah, but what you going to do. Shut down parliament if you don't like the debate? Once they have the mandate....
 
Last edited:
HawkWing said:
Yeah, but what you going to do. Shut down parliament if you don't like the debate? Once they have the mandate....
Click to expand...


I wouldn't like to say how that one would play out because unless moving to PR was front and centre as their no1 policy during an election campaign I doubt people would view them as having the mandate to change something so fundamental within the UK without a referendum.
 
Last edited:
Guess you aren't going to find what the lib dems want on GB News/Guido Fawkes. I'd suggest for your own party's sake you get acquainted. The stronger Labour are, the safer Tories are.
 
pawras said:
I wouldn't like to say how that one would play out because unless moving to PR was front and centre as their no1 policy during an election campaign I doubt people would view them as having the mandate to change something so fundamental within the UK without a referendum.
Click to expand...

Political party chooses not to apply manifesto policy, and does something else instead.

Hold the front page.

FFS.
 
Grasshopper said:
Political party chooses not to apply manifesto policy, and does something else instead.

Hold the front page.

FFS.
Click to expand...


you couldn't hack it when the government took us out of the eu with a ref result to back it up, but it's ok fine and dandy to change something fundamental without a ref if it suits your purposes eh, says it all really.....
 
Pawras, I respect your view (lots of big words in there that I'm not really sure I understand), I think but how many of the electorate do you feel agree with you. Your party have been in power for some time now and the country doesn't seem to be in the best of health. I acknowledge that the pandemic has been an experience that any country or political party would have found extremely difficult to deal with and I have no great belief that the Labour Party, with whoever in charge would have done a great deal better.

It is the stench of corruption, the odour of snouts in troughs and the downright lies that are so difficult to take.

There has to be some accountability at the end of the day. It is not enough to say "sorry and I take full responsibility" and then carry on doing the same f*cking thing.

Politicians with principles appear to be creatures of a bygone age. All we have are career politicians who would stand for any party that would get them elected, preferably to a 'safe seat'.

I feel we are poles apart in our view of " The UK Political Landscape" and nothing either of us say will narrow that gap.

So be it.
 
Last edited:
Colin said:
................
Politicians with principles appear to be creatures of a bygone age. All we have are career politicians who would stand for any party that would get them elected, preferably to a 'safe seat'.
..................
.
Click to expand...

There may be a 'gap' between us on ideology but I agree with much of what you said there, especially that bit as all sides are suffering with that one.
Being in politics is not something that has ever had much appeal to me and I think those who want to go into politics at an early age and have never really worked in any other area are perhaps not those who should be getting the reins of power.
 
pawras said:
you couldn't hack it when the government took us out of the eu with a ref result to back it up, but it's ok fine and dandy to change something fundamental without a ref if it suits your purposes eh, says it all really.....
Click to expand...

Stop it with this false equivalence.

The EU Referendum result is what it is, but it has proven to be manifestly bad for the country; both in terms of its negative economic impact (always obvious to all but the most wilfully-blind ardent Brexiter), and its damage to the UK's reputation. When it's this obvious that it's turning out to be just as bad as predicted, it's completely legitimate to say we made an error, and should seek to change things. The alternative, is to be a half-wit and stick with the result no matter what the negative consequences.

My point (which you again fail to interpret - no surprise) is that Governments will generally do whatever the fu*ck they want, once they're in charge. Manifesto commitments can go out the window, and Governments will claim an 'imperative' that allows them to ignore them. Will Labour introduce PR? Probably not, because they're ultimately the other cheek of the same arse as the Tories i.e. power hungry. But if it's a condition of a coalition with the LDs, then they may well choose to do it - citing a political imperative. This is how politics works - it's fu*ck all to do with referendums.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the resignation letter is currently beng constructed.

I anticipate it will contain a litany of [fictional] "achievement", that he's sacrificing himself for the country, going out at the top, etc, etc.

Edit - Mrs O is urging me to put some bubbly in the freezer to chill for an hour but I'm not in a celebratory mood. It's a bit like a sinking ship running on to a sandbank. Hardly a cause for popping a cork.
 
Last edited:
A brief moment to celebrate the removal of singularly the most corrupt PM this country has ever had, is a legit tactic, DO.

Unfortunately, the replacement - whoever it is - is going to be utterly fu*cking useless.
 
Grasshopper said:
Stop it with this false equivalence.

The EU Referendum result is what it is, but it has proven to be manifestly bad for the country; both in terms of its negative economic impact (always obvious to all but the most wilfully-blind ardent Brexiter), and its damage to the UK's reputation. When it's this obvious that it's turning out to be just as bad as predicted, it's completely legitimate to say we made an error, and should seek to change things. The alternative, is to be a half-wit and stick with the result no matter what the negative consequences.

My point (which you again fail to interpret - no surprise) is that Governments will generally do whatever the fu*ck they want, once they're in charge. Manifesto commitments can go out the window, and Governments will claim an 'imperative' that allows them to ignore them. Will Labour introduce PR? Probably not, because they're ultimately the other cheek of the same arse as the Tories i.e. power hungry. But if it's a condition of a coalition with the LDs, then they may well choose to do it - citing a political imperative. This is how politics works - it's fu*ck all to do with referendums.
Click to expand...


HHmm all of which I disagree with as always, as it is purely your opinion, which thankfully counts for fk all seen as you seem think Starmer etal are too 'right wing'.

Anyway prime minister carrie is off and we'll get someone else, hopefully a full fat eurosceptic tory but we'll have to see. (which is the one I'll vote for obv)

None of this changes the fact the tories are in power for another 2 to 2.5 years with a large majority, ergo what the rest say carries little weight until the next GE.

As such I'll leave you to continue reading such as "The Canary" (I enjoy that one but not the way it's intended unless it's really a p&ss take), and thinking you live in V for Vendetta Britain :lol:
 
Last edited:
Another thing going through my mind now is the view of the ordinary person, the type the media interview in the street and who regurgitate the shite spoon-fed to them by the Sun and Mail (and to a lesser extent by the BBC).

Their utterances tend to mirror the Johnson litany of achievement I mentioned earlier and/or how nobody else could have done it better or differently, because that's the kind of thing those outlets reiterate ad nauseam.

Even a number of these tory twats being interviewed are spouting the same shite.

Are the people in the street now going to say, "Oh, he should have gone long ago?" I suspect they will.

And that's pretty much what's wrong with this country: people voting based on agenda-driven media shite, turkeys voting for Christmas, call it what you will.

I genuinely don't believe this is fixable by anyone and that so-called modern civilisation is doomed. Putin, Trump, Johnson, etc; all spawns from the same cesspit.
 
And now the BBC are repeating their interview with Steve Baker who is delivering the exact same mantra we've been force fed for the last few years.

He's also bumming up his PM credentials while using the word "humility".

Gettaefuckfurfuxake.
 
Last edited:
Apparently, Sam Allardyce has been seen loitering in Downing Street.

It's ironic that the party that tells us we can only have one referendum on Brexit or Scotch Eggsit, has got rid of its leader by changing the rules on No Confidence votes because it suits them.
 
Well, pawras, let’s hope it is a couple of years (unless the new leader asks the Queen to dissolve) of decent government. You are obviously a strong brexiteer and I hope you still feel that way in ten years time. I’ll probably be long gone, but I fear for my grandchildren as they struggle to catch even a fleeting glimpse of the brexit promised land.

For their sake I hope desperately that I’m wrong, but all my experience tells me that we have not so much shot ourselves in the foot as aimed the gun to our head. It wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t a load of lies and half truths that persuaded people to pull the trigger.
 
archie said:
Apparently, Sam Allardyce has been seen loitering in Downing Street.

It's ironic that the party that tells us we can only have one referendum on Brexit or Scotch Eggsit, has got rid of its leader by changing the rules on No Confidence votes because it suits them.
Click to expand...

What's ironic about it? Their whole raisin detre is that written agreements with them aren't worth the paper they are written on and they can do what they want when they want. Rules are for others to follow in good faith (suckers). What's funny was that approach in the Owen Patterson was what started all this.
 
And now it looks like we're looking at BJ continuing as PM for the foreseeable??

This is totally depressing.
 
I think it's a million for him to get to Conference season in October.

Those left in Cabinet know he has zero authority, and will be too busy running their Leadership campaigns to pay any attention to him. I figure someone will fu*ck him over asap, in order to position themselves as the 'decisive' candidate for PM.

The fact Johnson is attempting to hang on (appointing a Cabinet is just about as farcical as it gets), will only damage the country further. He knows this, but doesn't give a shi*t........because he is a fu*cking psychopath.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
The fact Johnson is attempting to hang on (appointing a Cabinet is just about as farcical as it gets), will only damage the country further. He knows this, but doesn't give a shi*t........because he is a fu*cking psychopath.
Click to expand...

Totally.

There was one comment from a tory insider reported earlier today which has not been repeated [on the BBC]: that he was mentally unstable, or words to that effect.

The BBC interviewed a psychologist shortly after he was elected who said the same thing back then.
 
How can anyone let alone a personality like Boris Johnson remain totally 'stable' doing a job with the pressure like that?

There's posters who have left this forum because they couldn't handle stuff!

I can critisise Boris for a liteny of things but one thing I wouldn't doubt is the pressure he has been under and the pressure that job entails.

He's going going gone now anyway.

I don't think we need to raise the subject of his mental health to be honest.
 
Last edited:
The problem is, Marb, that he wasn't fit for office in the first place.

His head teacher was writing to his parents informing them of his issues. His ego and obliviousness to any rules being applicable to him have been evident since he was a kid.

And he isn't "going, going, gone". He's still there and will be until the autumn unless something changes abruptly. He has three more months in which to wreak more of his own havoc on the country.

If a vandal breaks into a house and starts trashing it, the police don't say, "OK, we'll give you a week to stop what you're doing..."

He's being allowed to call in his accomplices before he goes.

It's an utter scandal what's unfolding.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top