Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chaircat Meow

UK Politics: Spaffed up the wall while chuntering from a sedentary position

Recommended Posts

We can all hear the drum beats of doom. Future generations will ask what the UK did to incur the wrath of the Mighty One who reigns above. The impossibly grim choice is between the arch-charlatan Johnson, who has based his whole campaign on the pathetic lie he can 'get Brexit done,' and the terrorist sympathising anti-Semite enabling Corbyn, who is anti-British to his finger tips. The Tories and the Labourites have both abandoned all the noble aspects of their great traditions and descended into the gutter. Even Jo Swinson is being a bit silly with all this 'woke' stuff but we can forgive her this as she is the only one womanly* standing up for her country against this tide of witless deceit and stupidity. 

Please carry on. 

*I'm guessing this is the feminine counterpart of 'manfully.'

Edited by Chaircat Meow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just come back from my local Lib Dem meeting.

Our local candidate is very positive that this election will grow support in my area enough that in the next local elections in May we stand a very good chance of getting 2 Lib Dems on the council.  (right now we have 0 - but he won 36% of our ward in may this year, previous to that we had no lib dem to vote for)  after that the next General after this one we stand a chance of not being a safe Tory seat.

 

A lot of effort is being spent this time on Chelmsford who they think they could realistically flip Yellow.  we are a longer term target, but considered a worthwhile investment and flippable in the near future.

 

 

For those in my FB feed.  it was in the after meeting chats that I met the Geeky Lady telling me how awesome TitanCon is.  - I'm a bit worried as a potential canvaser she seemed to say Belfast counted as foreign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

I have just come back from my local Lib Dem meeting.

Our local candidate is very positive that this election will grow support in my area enough that in the next local elections in May we stand a very good chance of getting 2 Lib Dems on the council.  (right now we have 0 - but he won 36% of our ward in may this year, previous to that we had no lib dem to vote for)  after that the next General after this one we stand a chance of not being a safe Tory seat.

 

A lot of effort is being spent this time on Chelmsford who they think they could realistically flip Yellow.  we are a longer term target, but considered a worthwhile investment and flippable in the near future.

 

 

For those in my FB feed.  it was in the after meeting chats that I met the Geeky Lady telling me how awesome TitanCon is.  - I'm a bit worried as a potential canvaser she seemed to say Belfast counted as foreign.

That's great and everything but if Johnson is not deprived of a majority at this election we are fucked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

That's great and everything but if Johnson is not deprived of a majority at this election we are fucked. 

I agree,   However it makes sense to target mostly those seats you are more likely to win, that ones you don't stand much chance in due currently being what has normally been a safe Tory seat.    We are not a primary target for the Lib Dems,  but a secondary one.   Its recognised as possible, but unlikely this time.  We won't be getting extra people from outside our area this time.  We are not being ignored by the main party and will get some funds from them for our area.

 

 

One thing we are encouraged to do is to share the Lib Dem post when responding to Brexiter people on social media, (particularly the "Debate her") .  although this gets them fired up, they then tend to -re share the the posts, and spread the post further reaching more people and getting positive responses from people normally beyond our reach.

 

Edited by Pebble thats Stubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

One thing we are encouraged to do is to share the Lib Dem post when responding to Brexiter people on social media, (particularly the "Debate her") .  although this gets them fired up, they then tend to -re share the the posts, and spread the post further reaching more people and getting positive responses from people normally beyond our reach.

 

That's interesting. Sorry what 'post' is this and why does 'debate her' get Brexiters 'fired up'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

and the terrorist sympathising anti-Semite enabling Corbyn, who is anti-British to his finger tips.

Not bothered about the anti-British/unpatriotic bit. Patriotism has never been my cup of tea. However, WRT to the anti-semitism bit. It's not like Petty Pity Priti Patel is above anti-semitic dogwhistles, and she is not on the Labour frontbench, is she? So you are selling the Tories short on that front, same with Johnson. He is so much more than a mere charlatan. He is also racists, we don't need to talk about the Letterbox ladies again, do we? Or the pickaninnies?

Anyway, part of me wished JRM would be Tory party leader now. Just for the fun of having an 18th century aristocrat facing off against a 19th century Marxist to become British PM in the 21st century.

Anyway, has Labour announced who will run in Vauxhall? I am really curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

That's interesting. Sorry what 'post' is this and why does 'debate her' get Brexiters 'fired up'?

 

As to Why it gets them fired up?  I'm guessing hard core Brexiters what Jo to be irreverent in this election and not worthy of sharing a TV debate with Boris.   Your guess as to the reasons are as good as mine.

The data analysts have seen when looking at who and how people have interacted with this post show them being all worked up other this one in particular.

 

Edited by Pebble thats Stubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Not bothered about the anti-British/unpatriotic bit. Patriotism has never been my cup of tea. 

O woe. 

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

However, WRT to the anti-semitism bit. It's not like Petty Pity Priti Patel is above anti-semitic dogwhistles, and she is not on the Labour frontbench, is she? 

Evidence? I don't think Priti Patel is anti-Semitic. I do remember there was an allegation from various media including Peston but it was really nonsense (something about North London being code for Jew). 

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

He is so much more than a mere charlatan. He is also racists, we don't need to talk about the Letterbox ladies again, do we? Or the pickaninnies?

I don't think Johnson has it in for black people/Muslims the way Corbynites have it in for Jews. There hasn't been evidence of bullying in the party of black people/Muslims under Johnson. 

 

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Anyway, part of me wished JRM would be Tory party leader now. Just for the fun of having an 18th century aristocrat facing off against a 19th century Marxist to become British PM in the 21st century.

No one cares. 

 

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Anyway, has Labour announced who will run in Vauxhall? I am really curious.

I think so, Adonis did not make the short-list. 

Edited by Chaircat Meow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain to me exactly what’s so ‘dangerous’ about Corbyn being Prime Minister? Between the Conservatives banging that drum constantly (the Tories really do know how to bang a very simplistic drum, over and over and over again) and the ex-Labour MP’s calling on the public to vote for Johnson, it’s really gonna stick with a lot of voters. It bugs me that there’s this imaginary line being laid down separating ‘policies’ and ‘dangerousness’; sure, Johnson might flog the NHS, but Corbyn would be truly dangerous.

I’m not a huge fan of Corbyn but the Tories are, have been, will be, dangerous. I don’t see anything in Corbyn’s ideologies that would scar the country any worse (or anywhere near as bad) as Tory policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

Can someone explain to me exactly what’s so ‘dangerous’ about Corbyn being Prime Minister?

He wants rich people to pay tax, even if they have off-shore bank accounts and a few shell companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Evidence? I don't think Priti Patel is anti-Semitic. I do remember there was an allegation from various media including Peston but it was really nonsense (something about North London being code for Jew). 

North London Metropolitan Liberal Elite.

Let's be accurate please. Somehow I have the vague feeling, if somebody from Corbyn's circle had uttered those words, you wouldn't be as dismissive.

10 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

I don't think Johnson has it in for black people/Muslims the way Corbynites have it in for Jews. There hasn't been evidence of bulling in the party of black people/Muslims under Johnson. Even if I'm wrong (happens frequently) so what? The fact the Tories are racist doesn't make Labour under Corbyn not racist.  

Nope, it doesn't. Which is kinda my point. I am just pointing out, that you bringing up the very ghastly bits of Corbyn's cult, that has infected the Labour party, while being pretty dismissive about the Tories own racist problems, doesn't feel particularly balanced. I think that's a neutral way to put it (at least I hope so). I am refraining from two explanations,  one being, that you are ok, with one form of racism (Islamophobia from the Tories (the Muslim terrorist trope in various shape and forms)), whie you are appaled by another form racism (anti-semitism as displayed by the Cult of Corbyn); or that you don't really care for either form of racism, but that you just want to weaponize the anti-semitism claim against Labour. Personally I think, it's more of case of not wanting to look too closely at your own (former?) party. But that's obviously speculation on my part.

Anyway, like I said, I find both British parties major parties to be pretty appaling at the moment. And I really don't think either of them have the moral high ground on the issue of racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

Can someone explain to me exactly what’s so ‘dangerous’ about Corbyn being Prime Minister? Between the Conservatives banging that drum constantly (the Tories really do know how to bang a very simplistic drum, over and over and over again) and the ex-Labour MP’s calling on the public to vote for Johnson, it’s really gonna stick with a lot of voters. It bugs me that there’s this imaginary line being laid down separating ‘policies’ and ‘dangerousness’; sure, Johnson might flog the NHS, but Corbyn would be truly dangerous.

I’m not a huge fan of Corbyn but the Tories are, have been, will be, dangerous. I don’t see anything in Corbyn’s ideologies that would scar the country any worse (or anywhere near as bad) as Tory policy.

1. He has an anti-western world view which means he instinctively supports the country's enemies in times of conflict, i.e. he opposed the British attempt to retake the Falkland Islands even though we were attacked. This makes him obviously unfit to be PM. He also opposed western intervention in Bosnia to stop Serbian atrocities against the Bosnian Muslims. There was no wisdom in his opposition to the Iraq war, saving the wisdom a stopped clock has when it tells the right time.

2. He may or may not be personally a racist but he has enabled a culture of anti-Semitism to flourish in the Labour party; Jews have deserted Labour in droves and leading Jewish newspapers have called on the country to oppose Corbyn because of his lax stance on anti-Semitism. 

3. He has been anti-EU and anti-NATO. Basically he wants to crash all the nation's alliances. This would make us less safe and less influential in the world. He may now be pro-EU but this is because of political expediency not conviction. 

4. He supported the IRA during the Troubles, attending the funerals of terrorists who killed British soliders and civilians and protesting outside the courts when these terrorists were brought to trial. 

Essentially he is, to quote Nye Bevin in another context, lower than vermin. 

It is true that the Tory support for Brexit makes the anti-Corbyn case harder to make, as Brexit is also all about making the country less prosperous, free and sovereign. 

Edited by Chaircat Meow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DaveSumm said:

Can someone explain to me exactly what’s so ‘dangerous’ about Corbyn being Prime Minister? Between the Conservatives banging that drum constantly (the Tories really do know how to bang a very simplistic drum, over and over and over again) and the ex-Labour MP’s calling on the public to vote for Johnson, it’s really gonna stick with a lot of voters. It bugs me that there’s this imaginary line being laid down separating ‘policies’ and ‘dangerousness’; sure, Johnson might flog the NHS, but Corbyn would be truly dangerous.

I’m not a huge fan of Corbyn but the Tories are, have been, will be, dangerous. I don’t see anything in Corbyn’s ideologies that would scar the country any worse (or anywhere near as bad) as Tory policy.

An instinctive sympathy towards people who are hostile towards us and our allies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

That's great and everything but if Johnson is not deprived of a majority at this election we are fucked. 

I can't stand the idea of another zombie Parliament.

I don't particularly like Johnson, but regard him as the least bad of the lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Evidence? I don't think Priti Patel is anti-Semitic. I do remember there was an allegation from various media including Peston but it was really nonsense (something about North London being code for Jew). 

After another user in the last thread, this is the second time in two days I've seen people airily dismissing coded anti-Semitic language as 'nonsense' on the basis of their own lack of understanding of it. This is, needless to say, exactly why coded racist language exists and why it is used.

Was Patel using this language as a deliberate code or was it just something she picked up from hanging out with the wrong people? I can't say. I can only say that she did, for a fact, use a phrase that is used by anti-Semites as a dog whistle. And that people really ought to read up on such things before confidently proclaiming them to be 'nonsense' from a position of ignorance.

8 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

I don't think Johnson has it in for black people/Muslims the way Corbynites have it in for Jews. There hasn't been evidence of bullying in the party of black people/Muslims under Johnson. 

20 cases are not evidence of a problem?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/20/conservative-members-suspended-for-online-islamophobia

There has been evidence of Islamophobia and anti-black racism from Johnson, let alone 'under' him. At least the allegation against Corbyn is merely that he tolerates anti-Semitism, not that he personally propogates it for the benefit of his own career.

But at least Johnson has promised to hold an independent inquiry into the problem, right?

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/107875/boris-jonson-faces-backlash

Oh.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to all of the above, I don't know in what kind of mental gymnastics you have to do to consider Johnson is seen as the 'least bad' of the lot. I suppose the answer to that is easy, let's ignore the plethora of stuff Johnson & his allies have said, but more importantly, let's ignore the policies they have enacted. Let's vote in a party & a PM that has pummeled the most vulnerable over the last 4-5 years, if not longer.

What a strange take.

Edited by Raja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Corbyn should absolutely be called out for the anti-Semitism in Labour that he allows to happen (I firmly believe  this is him being so keen to find allies in his criticism of Israel that he doesn't check properly who he's associating with isn't genuinely anti-semite, but he has to be more responsible) but thinking he's worse than Boris who is not only openly personally racist in multiple ways but is clearly a guy who just wants power to be in power and is from a party that's been shitkicking vulnerable people for their whole time in power, is a baffling take. It feels like it can only be a result of that Trumpy thing where he does so many things egregiously wrong that any individual wrong thing just kind of blurs in and it all becomes unremarkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SeanF said:

I can't stand the idea of another zombie Parliament.

I would disagree with that "zombie parliament".

Since he became PM Johnson has demonstrated himself an existential threat to our democracy. Most clearly first by illegally attempting to close down parliament so as to centralise power on himself and carry out a no deal Brexit he certainly had no mandate for; then in his unprecedented attempt to ram through his Brexit bill without giving any time for it to be scrutinised, hoping that the clauses that gave him personally enormous unchecked powers would sneak through unnoticed.

Parliament has fought him all the way, with even some Tories finally putting their principles before their party loyalty (a big thing for many of them) and careers. It then agreed to its own dissolution to break the deadlock. Personally I think that (perhaps belatedly) it woke up and did us proud.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mormont said:

After another user in the last thread, this is the second time in two days I've seen people airily dismissing coded anti-Semitic language as 'nonsense' on the basis of their own lack of understanding of it. This is, needless to say, exactly why coded racist language exists and why it is used.

I didn't 'airily dismiss' anything. I asked for an explanation as to why an innocent looking (to my eyes at least) sentence was considered anti-semitic. It's telling that the reason you gave was different to the objections being raised in the anti-Corbyn press (holocaust reference). 

After reading your post I googled "The Wealthy Establishment", because I'd never heard that exact phrase before. According the googles, it simply means Old Money. The only anti-semitic references I could find amongst my search results were newspaper reports about the offending blog post.

Anyway, my bad for not being up to date on all the latest racist codewords. Pardon my ignorance. 

Question: If I make the OK hand sign, does that make me a white supremacist? 

 

Edited by Spockydog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

North London Metropolitan Liberal Elite.

 

3 hours ago, mormont said:

After another user in the last thread, this is the second time in two days I've seen people airily dismissing coded anti-Semitic language as 'nonsense' on the basis of their own lack of understanding of it. This is, needless to say, exactly why coded racist language exists and why it is used.

Was Patel using this language as a deliberate code or was it just something she picked up from hanging out with the wrong people? I can't say. I can only say that she did, for a fact, use a phrase that is used by anti-Semites as a dog whistle. And that people really ought to read up on such things before confidently proclaiming them to be 'nonsense' from a position of ignorance.

Thx for that clarification - to be very honest, I haven't heard "North London Metropolitan Elite" before (even though I lived in Kilburn/Queens Park for a short time) and if I'd heard Patel say it, I would have taken it as a reference to liberal, intellectual Islington types (including champagne Marxists) and not as anti-Semitic, but that's just me.

As far as Patel is concerned, she is certainly a bit of a nutter, but I would be really, really surprised if she used anti-semitic dog whistle phrases, because it wouldn't make any political sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×