Its readable via Google amp
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/d29b4cbe-0fa4-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae
Great news to throw in the Tories face this.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/d29b4cbe-0fa4-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae
Great news to throw in the Tories face this.
yes... its his second gaffe as well after saying troublesome tenants should be used as forced labour and live in tents...@sun_tzu this is the tool that’s going to win your constituency
Any more gaffes and the second favourite (a former liberal candidate now standing as an independent after the libs stood him down before over child sex offence allegations
If they both really really mess up then who knows we might get the labour candidate who had the police called on her after trying to steal leaflets off other campaigners and her mother was also in trouble with the police a week before for hitting a labour volunteer
Yeah quite frankly I was never blown away by Gloria De Piero but in comparison to the shambles up for election this time she looks like a political heavyweight
My vote on the liberal candidate might be wasted but i feel quite confident in saying shes the best of a pretty terrible bunch
The opinions of economists and lefty academics has little power to cut through to the average voter these days unfortunately. There was actually an article in the FT last week featuring a right leaning think tank that said the spending plans were possible.
Wow, I think you are on to something! There's only 300K, we could easily get rid of them, no one would notice, their votes don't make much difference anyway. While we're at it, we could also get rid of the 320K homeless people cluttering up the streets. I guess you must hate this kind of initiative, what a waste of time for so few people:
https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...ing-homeless-people-register-vote-12-december
I think he was making the objective point that a demographic of 320k isn’t likely to sway an election. Not entirely sure why you felt the need to make it sound like he was calling for an ethnic cleansing.
And I’m not entirely sure I see the parallels between Labour trying to enfranchise homeless people to vote and a Rabbi (who’s mates with Boris) encouraging people to vote for Boris’ party.
No, he said that their votes would not make much difference, indicating that which way the Jewish community in the UK votes is irrelevant to the Election. I made the point that it doesn't make any difference whether your vote is relevant or not, it is your democratic right to vote.
As I have posted on numerous occasions, as May is my MP, voting for any other candidate is almost irrelevant. Should i therefore not bother to vote as my vote isn't going to make any difference?
It's disgusting post and I can't believe how any right thinking person could support it.
Last edited:
Oh look, another BBC 'mistake' that 'could' be seen as beneficial to the Tories.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Except that’s not the insinuation that all. Stating that a demographic numbering 350k is unlikely to sway an election is not a bigoted statement, it’s an objective mathematical fact. Conversely if they numbered at 3.5million users then you can objectively claim that they do have a weighted effect of being able to sway an election.
If you made the argument that a small voting demographic would feel disenfranchised by the FPTP electoral system then I’d agree with you, but it’s an issue that affects several voting groups - Labour voters in Tory strongholds and vice versa, voters who’s preferred parties aren’t standing in their constituency, etc. To claim it’s a dog whistling attempt to demean the value of a particular ethnic/religious group is bizarre straw clutching at best.
Whatever.
Jesus Christ, the BBC sure has been accident-prone of late.
They've changed it to "will rise" now.
Can those voting Tory in this election give me some explanation of how you can vote for a party that only gives lip service to climate change efforts and where the leader has previously said climate change is a "primitive fear without foundation"?
I know the Daily Mail are basically deniers, are you all deniers too?
I know the Daily Mail are basically deniers, are you all deniers too?
Very good question my friend but don't expect to get an answer.
Get Brexit Done will solve all of our problems...
If I were to hazard a guess:
- The older Tories probably don’t care as they won’t be around long enough to experience the worst of a climate catastrophe
- You also have the nutters who buy into the ‘climate hoax’ conspiracy where they believe it’s all an elaborate ploy by the liberal elite to enforce globalisation
- Then you have those who probably do believe the sincerity of the dangers behind it, but believe that leaving the EU will shield them from the implications of a climate catastrophe where swathes of refugees would flood into the EU desperately seeking refuge from nature’s wrath.
- And finally you have those who arrogantly believe that their wealth would protect them from the worst of it.
Speaking to a few older members of my family and friends, the most common answer I get is along the lines of '...we were all told this 40 years ago and we are still here.' Along with cries of scaremongering etc.
That would fall under the ‘climate hoax’ category.
Id urge you to politely remind those family members that the scientific data and consensus has consistently dignified that fear at an exponential rate with each passing year.
But again I’ve pretty much given up trying to convince my family members who laugh it off with the usual “We could do with some global warming now!” as they attempt to defrost their SUVs in the morning.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
BBC can never claim impartiality.
I expect them to crank this attack line up as election date nears. Can picture the Sun headlines now...BBC can never claim impartiality.
For some balance people might want to check this out
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/statement/rebuttals/
Hung parliament. Swinson sees a chance at "power", gets promised a second referendum, and throws herself into a coalition with Johnson before Christmas. Corbyn resigns. The second referendum never happens. Britain leaves the EU on January 31st with a shit deal. Labour replace Corbyn with a spineless, malleable centre-right PLP member and politics goes back to how it was between 2010 and 2015, only with Britain out of the EU.
Slight hope for a hung parliament and second referendum then. The more Boris is seen the less he's liked and the reverse for Corbyn.
C4 have said they'll empty chair Boris in Thursday's climate change and environment debate. Might cost him if he doesn't show.
Christ, talk about generalisations. Do you think none of us have kids?
It's on the front page of their manifesto.
https://vote.conservatives.com/our-plan
I don't think this is any longer an area where there is disagreement.
It is a question of what each party thinks needs to be done, how quickly and how realistic are the chances of achieving it.
More spoilers. Brilliant.
If Swinson get's the Lib Dems into bed with the Tories again on nothing more than a promise then she/the rest of the country deserve everything that's coming to them. She called him a 'serial liar' the other day so I'd like to think she has a bit more nous than that.
Apart from that it sounds depressingly prophetic.
How's that unbalanced? They're reporting what he said.BBC can never claim impartiality.
Lip service, that's not policy or investment it's a slogan promise for 2050. Its no different to the likes of the Paris agreement, a target is not action in itself.
I agree to an extent, but it won't be a case of it being just a promise. If they are in a coalition, the Tories won't have a majority so it's not like they will be able to just charge ahead with Brexit without obstruction from Parliament.
2050 is laughably unambitious for that target and they're not actually outlining how they'll do it besides vague platitudes.
Swinson will probably trade off a hard Brexit to cut badger culling by 5% in exchange or something.
Swinson is an arsehole.
Their whole manifesto is cut-back because they want to avoid a repeat of the last election with the dementia tax etc. But they have been making changes. Company cars for a start. Most firms are moving to hybrid or electrical cars for their fleets because (rightly or wrongly) diesel was declared the fuel of the devil and the tax on diesel company cars has gone through the roof. It's not lip service, its action that is causing change. Now I'm not claiming the Tories are the saviours of the planet but the are not standing idly by either.
You reckon it can be done by 2030?
Almost a fairly moderate Tory candidate at this rate considering they've got another guy endorsing forced labour camps.
I just came on here to say the same - staggering difference in prominence between the two stories.BBC can never claim impartiality.
I'm unsure if the Tory one was the main story at any point but it's worth noting the Chief Rabbi one's only 10 minutes old in that screenshot - naturally newer stories are going to be featured more, and increasingly older stories will fall down the ladder.
A 2050 target pretty much dignifies it as lip service at best, especially when the scientific consensus stresses that there needs to be immediate and drastic action to have any chance of tempering the effects of climate change. If people genuinely believed in the dangers then they’d be concerned with these token throwaway policies.
Equally context is important as well
One party is under a formal ehrc investigation for anti-Semitism
This means the ehrc have seen enough evidence that criminal activity has probably taken place and that they believe a prosecution will probably be in the public interest.
If the conservatives were under a formal ehrc investigation then I suspect the other comments would also have got more traction
Plus it's come on the day that labour has chosen to make equality a campaign issue... And in their policy is to make the ehrc who are independent and have started a formal investigation "truly independent"... Which frankly sounds dodgy as feck
Last edited:
- Status