Digby Jones isn't a Tory, he's a crossbench peer who was a Minister of State in the last Labour government.
Fuck off.Digby Jones isn't a Tory, he's a crossbench peer who was a Minister of State in the last Labour government.
I forget who it was who suggested that it should be like jury service, where those called up sit for a set period, and aren't required to have party allegiance. That would at least be more representative.I'm in favour of a second chamber, but find it hard to see how you put people there.
Shapps is probably wondering why he always gets sent home to have fish fingers and cream soda on his own.Back to the thread topic, Grant Shapps claimed this morning that he hadn't seen the story about the Tory donors club, whereby if you donate enough money to the party you can wine and dine with Johnson and Sunak, and obviously NOT influence policy in any way, shape or form.
Rules are for little people and never mind the contradiction inherent in all that travel prior to a climate change conference:
The greatest disappointment is that he returned from his trip to the incinerator
Think I'll use that oneThe greatest disappointment is that he returned from his trip to the incinerator
He's also thick as pigshitHe's all but a Tory.
With the above in mind I found bits of this amusing:
I think she is great, however I agree, and I dont know how to let her knowYeah, but she has a real problem understanding Labour.
I think social media is the preferred method for pointing out how women are wrong about things, no?I think she is great, however I agree, and I dont know how to let her know
Well yes, but I think you mean pointing out anyone who is wrong, rather than just singling out women...I think social media is the preferred method for pointing out how women are wrong about things, no?
I was being sarcastic about the toxicity of twitter.Well yes, but I think you mean pointing out anyone who is wrong, rather than just singling out women...
and what makes you think labour are the lesser of these two evils?I agree that, in practical terms, we must always vote for the lesser of evils. I just wish it were different.
I see no reason to believe Labour would be worse or even as bad. In the case of the latter it would send a message to the dominant culture in the British ruling class that the Tories aren't welcome. They were in disarray in the early 2000's such that they ended up with IDS as leader and were only able to marshall a coalition after a banking crisis (caused by the same class). In that case, all things being equal, I would cheerfully kick the Tories out even if in terms of policy nothing would change.and what makes you think labour are the lesser of these two evils?
say what you like about the tories but they didn't invade iraq or afghanistan. they didn't introduce tuition fees for higher education. they didn't double the basic rate of income tax.I see no reason to believe Labour would be worse or even as bad. In the case of the latter it would send a message to the dominant culture in the British ruling class that the Tories aren't welcome. They were in disarray in the early 2000's such that they ended up with IDS as leader and were only able to marshall a coalition after a banking crisis (caused by the same class). In that case, all things being equal, I would cheerfully kick the Tories out even if in terms of policy nothing would change.
I don't imagine much would under Starmer either, but there's a much better chance some things might get a little better for the working class and that is better than allowing this particular government of brexit enabled covid cranks and throughly corrupt scum to continue.
I'm not convinced that, for all their faults, Labour as they stand (or would in the next election) would be as bad or as vicious as this government who have managed to make Cameron and Osborne seem reasonable in comparison, and they were bad enough. Starmer is nothing like Johnson
You're ignoring the point to focus on individual policy issues that I don't contest and similar claims could be made regarding the Tories who haven't rectified those wrongs, supported foreign wars (including arming Suadi slaughter of Yemen), and made things worse. You're also not comparing the two parties as they stand right now. That's the proposition facing us at the next election.say what you like about the tories but they didn't invade iraq or afghanistan. they didn't introduce tuition fees for higher education. they didn't double the basic rate of income tax.
you'll be having a fucking long wait for the labour party to do anything for the working class, as can be seen by the actions of labour councils in demolishing estates and replacing them with yuppie flats.
all starmer has is the demand that the current administration should be more efficient and organised. hardly a credible platform for election, the other chaps should have been better at their jobs.
oh don't talk such arrant bollocks.You're ignoring the point to focus on individual policy issues that I don't contest and similar claims could be made regarding the Tories who haven't rectified those wrongs, supported foreign wars (including arming Suadi slaughter of Yemen), and made things worse. You're also not comparing the two parties as they stand right now. That's the proposition facing us at the next election.
I see no evidence that Starmer is anywhere on the same level as Johnson. At the very least Johnson presides over a culture of racism and bigotry he and his party have unleashed. Starmer is certainly no revolutionary, mores the pity, but if you're argument is to sit at home on election day and grumble then you'll be achieving worse than nothing.