Stop voting for fucking Tories

[sockwithaticket]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

[tabascoboy]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

[fishfoodie]

Sunak isn't entirely wrong, the attacks on people in positions of authority are worrying and do speak to a problem in having officials vote openly and democratically. But an awful lot is getting conflated, much of it very unhelpfully. So our current government's authoritarian leanings are annoyingly giving cover to many serious underlying problems

it would be better if Sunak had given his statement in the Commons or even in a Select Committee, taken questions on it and set out what he thought should happen, not suddenly make an announcement late in the week for the Sunday papers. And he should probably have considered he's the one in charge, he doesn't need to be casting around for someone to have a plan, he is the someone

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

[Tichtheid]

Yes, he might well reflect on how damaging it is for members of his party to be openly challenging, undermining and generally slagging off those operating in the top eschelons of the civil service and judiciary (as well as those institutions as a whole) or participating in unedifying campaigns against individuals as we've recently seen from Badenoch on Staunton (soon to be formerly) of the Post Office.

I know that's not what you or he were getting at, but it's bloody rich to be hearing from him or any of the current Tories about cultivating dangerous extremism that undermines people just trying to do their jobs.

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

I've just deleted a post, it was about one nation Tories and how at least you could have a discussion with them, as much as one might disagree, but nah, they let this current state of affairs happen.

The Tories are fucking disgusting and can we all, as the thread title suggests, just stop voting for fucking Tories?

[dpedin]

And those attacks are very quickly pounced upon by a large part of the media often in an even more accusatory and vindictive way - remember "Enemies of the People"? Knowing this, you have to wonder if this isn't a deliberate ploy to use this and the inevitable outrage propagated through the hornet's nest of social media to create an angry populist backlash. It's at best a lack of proper responsibility from those who purport to be our leaders and betters.

I keep on going back to what for me was one of the most disgusting moments of the Bumblecunts rule, & dog knows there were plenty of them.

I remember him responding to pleas from Labour MPs to stop the toxic language, which they rightly pointed to as one of causes of Jo Cox's murder as; "Humbug"

He made plenty of vile statements, but that for me was the nadir.

And I don't remember Sunak, or any of the other scum in his Cabinet resigning in disgust.

Just days ago we saw Sunak making jibes about the transgender, while the mother of a murdered trans teen was in the House. Words are important, especially when they are uttered by people in power.

I've just deleted a post, it was about one nation Tories and how at least you could have a discussion with them, as much as one might disagree, but nah, they let this current state of affairs happen.

The Tories are fucking disgusting and can we all, as the thread title suggests, just stop voting for fucking Tories?

I honestly believe there is now an element of fear driving the Tories now. It isn't just fear of being driven out of office and into opposition but more the fear of what Labour will find out once in power - the covid PPE scandals, Teeside, Post Office scandal, etc will all be blown open and I am positive there will be civil and criminal prosecutions as a result. Once the Civil Servants are allowed to disclose fully what went on and show their paper trails, civil servants always have paper trails, then a number of senior Tories will be held to account for dodgy if not criminal actions. They know this well and will throw everything into covering their tracks and making escape plans but many will be held to account in courts. They are shitting themselves as their comfy little fiefdom implodes, their tory donors quietly distance themselves and move abroad and Labour keep making serious noises about a COVID corruption commissioner being appointed on Day 1 of when they come into power.

The Tories are now into desperate self preservation mode and do not underestimate how low or how dangerously they will act in the run up to the General Election to avoid defeat and personal financial ruin and/or prison!

[fishfoodie]

Hell you're going into a new GE, & no-one has seen the report on Russian interference in the last one !

The Bumblecunt should be spending as much time in court as the other scrote.

[Biffer]

Galloway - left wing or right wing? You decide

[sockwithaticket]

Conspiracy and grifting now fully encompasses those on both ends of the traditional left - right spectrum.

[C69]

Galloway - left wing or right wing? You decide

He is clearly left wing.
And a complete fucking nut job.

[Biffer]

Conspiracy and grifting now fully encompasses those on both ends of the traditional left - right spectrum.

Yep, it's the old horseshoe theory coming back again.

Fascism isn't left or right wing, it's an extreme form of authoritarianism. Which is why left and right wing populist grifter often find alliances with each other.

[I like neeps]

After Keir Starmer praising her transformative change and Rachel "The iron chancellor" Reeves going for a bit of a thatcher cosplay. Why after pretty much everyone realises how selling off all our infrastructure and housing was bad is this the Labour strategy?

You can't be Thatcher, you have nothing to sell.

[Biffer]

After Keir Starmer praising her transformative change and Rachel "The iron chancellor" Reeves going for a bit of a thatcher cosplay. Why after pretty much everyone realises how selling off all our infrastructure and housing was bad is this the Labour strategy?

You can't be Thatcher, you have nothing to sell.

This is what gets me about the whole Thatcher / tax cut approach to economics. When Thatcher did it, she made a change to the structure of the economy of the UK, entirely deliberately, to transition from manufacturing and heavy industry to services and finance. Regardless of the debate about how she did that, the good and bad of it, what it did to cities and communities, the morality of it etc, she did achieve that shift.

But these fuckwits like Truss and Kwarteng think that what she and Lawson did is now a magic bullet so if they just do it more, it’ll work too. It’s the dumbest fucking take on economics that there is. But even left wing parties won’t stray from this new orthodoxy, despite the fact that it’s an outdated economic strategy that was only ever going to work once anyway.

[sockwithaticket]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... -hunt-told

In a report urging Hunt to look at areas other than tax cuts to support hard-pressed people, JRF said the budget risked keeping the UK economy locked on track to leave working families £1,900 a year worse off in 2029 than they were in 2021.

It said households’ average post-tax earnings at the start of 2024 were as much as £2,400 a year lower than at the start of 2021. Working households could benefit from rising wages and lower inflation as the UK economy recovers from recession, but it said progress would be limited and unable to overcome this earlier shortfall.

JRF’s chief economist, Alfie Stirling, said the prospect of a “second lost decade” would come after 14 years of stalling progress to raise living standards, including the failure to increase average workers’ pay substantially above pre-2008 levels after inflation was taken into account.

“Unless policy makers intervene, the 2020s are set to see an unprecedented second lost decade of living standards in a row. As an economy, as a society and as a country, we simply can’t afford this to happen,” he said

And yet...

Tory backbenchers have urged the chancellor and the prime minister to “be brave and bold” and fund tax cuts on Wednesday amid fears it is the party’s last chance to convince the public they actually have a plan.

One Tory MP said people needed to see an improvement in their finances “sharpish”. “It’s not enough to make a statement saying how much you love this country. They need to show it with a 2p tax cut.”

Another said: “Labour may find another way to trip themselves up, but we need to focus on tax cuts. It’s the only way we can show we understand the difficulties people are facing with high costs at the moment. It’ll be hard to fight ‘out of touch Tory’ slogans this election campaign.”

The Tory fetishisation of tax cuts is pathological and not connected to reality.

[Tichtheid]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... -hunt-told

In a report urging Hunt to look at areas other than tax cuts to support hard-pressed people, JRF said the budget risked keeping the UK economy locked on track to leave working families £1,900 a year worse off in 2029 than they were in 2021.

It said households’ average post-tax earnings at the start of 2024 were as much as £2,400 a year lower than at the start of 2021. Working households could benefit from rising wages and lower inflation as the UK economy recovers from recession, but it said progress would be limited and unable to overcome this earlier shortfall.

JRF’s chief economist, Alfie Stirling, said the prospect of a “second lost decade” would come after 14 years of stalling progress to raise living standards, including the failure to increase average workers’ pay substantially above pre-2008 levels after inflation was taken into account.

“Unless policy makers intervene, the 2020s are set to see an unprecedented second lost decade of living standards in a row. As an economy, as a society and as a country, we simply can’t afford this to happen,” he said

And yet...

Tory backbenchers have urged the chancellor and the prime minister to “be brave and bold” and fund tax cuts on Wednesday amid fears it is the party’s last chance to convince the public they actually have a plan.

One Tory MP said people needed to see an improvement in their finances “sharpish”. “It’s not enough to make a statement saying how much you love this country. They need to show it with a 2p tax cut.”

Another said: “Labour may find another way to trip themselves up, but we need to focus on tax cuts. It’s the only way we can show we understand the difficulties people are facing with high costs at the moment. It’ll be hard to fight ‘out of touch Tory’ slogans this election campaign.”

The Tory fetishisation of tax cuts is pathological and not connected to reality.

A 2p tax cut leaves the average earner about £8.60 a week better off, anyone earning more than £54k will be £14.50 per week better off.

It has to be asked, will those people be better off with the £13Bn hole it leaves in the budget (numbers from Torygraph) and the cuts in services across the board that comes with it?

[Biffer]

The latest Ipsos poll puts the Tories on 25 MPs, potentially fourth behind both the Liberals and SNP.

[SaintK]

What could possibly go wrong?

Plans for automated surveillance of millions of bank accounts to catch welfare cheats should be scrapped, campaigners have said, warning the approach risks a repeat of the Post Office Horizon scandal.
The Department for Work and Pensions is seeking new powers to require banks to trawl the accounts of millions of people who receive benefits in an effort to cut the £8bn currently lost annually to welfare fraud. The plan is close to being passed into law by parliament and will be “fully automated”, the government said. It is likely to use artificial intelligence to flag activity considered suspicious by the DWP.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2 ... ccounts

[Hal Jordan]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

[Tichtheid]

What could possibly go wrong?

Plans for automated surveillance of millions of bank accounts to catch welfare cheats should be scrapped, campaigners have said, warning the approach risks a repeat of the Post Office Horizon scandal.
The Department for Work and Pensions is seeking new powers to require banks to trawl the accounts of millions of people who receive benefits in an effort to cut the £8bn currently lost annually to welfare fraud. The plan is close to being passed into law by parliament and will be “fully automated”, the government said. It is likely to use artificial intelligence to flag activity considered suspicious by the DWP.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2 ... ccounts

From the government's own figures

3.6% (£8.3 billion) of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error
1.4% (£3.3 billion) of total benefit expenditure was underpaid due to fraud and error
the net loss to the Department for Work and Pensions, after accounting for recoveries, was 3.1% (£7.3 billion) of total benefit expenditure


HMRC estimates that losses to tax fraud amount to £16 billion each year. This is nearly half of HMRC's estimate of the tax gap (£34 billion): the difference between the amount of tax HMRC should collect each year and the amount it actually collects.

[tabascoboy]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

Under a broad definition like that you could argue that's just what the Tories have been doing!

More seriously, "groups or individuals deemed to be extremist by ministers can be excluded from government and council funding and barred from working with public bodies"

And who gets to make these judgements on what is a mostly subjective matter of "values"?

[tc27]

The latest Ipsos poll puts the Tories on 25 MPs, potentially fourth behind both the Liberals and SNP.

It wont obviously be this bad - they will comfortably be the second biggest party with the Lib Dems in third (lots of Tory/LD marginals in the West). I think the SNP will do better than indicated in UK wide polls but will be down to 30ish seats.

There is however a lot of denial in the Tory and the Tory supporting client press they have about how bad its going to be for them. Chucking most tax payers a £150 PA tax cut is not going to cut it.

[Biffer]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

If that were to go through, I’d love to see a court case going through about their relationships with Russian oligarchs, tufton street lobby groups and US Christian conservative movements.

[Biffer]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

If that were to go through, I’d love to see a court case going through about their relationships with Russian oligarchs, tufton street lobby groups and US Christian conservative movements.

I’ve also just realised that this could be used to ban the SNP & Plaid Cymru from parliament

[Hal Jordan]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

If that were to go through, I’d love to see a court case going through about their relationships with Russian oligarchs, tufton street lobby groups and US Christian conservative movements.

"We didn't mean them!"

[_Os_]

Meanwhile, Hunt has apparently chucked a spare £100k at his constituency party's funds to help with his re-election campaign. Robber buttonry at its finest.

Rather more disturbingly, the Government continues the dash for fash as it considers banning MPs and councillors from engaging with the likes of Just Stop Oil and pro-Palenstinian groups, and also redefining extremism as anything “undermining the country’s institutions, or values”. This is the language of dictatorship.

If that were to go through, I’d love to see a court case going through about their relationships with Russian oligarchs, tufton street lobby groups and US Christian conservative movements.

I’ve also just realised that this could be used to ban the SNP & Plaid Cymru from parliament

Don't forget that Sunak has launched all this in the wake of Galloway being elected. Galloway is one of the most frequently elected men in the UK's history often in tough elections he fought as an underdog too, Sunak has a strong Tory safe seat and lost an internal Tory party election. Sunak even had an emergency press conference outside Number 10 after Galloway was elected. This is crazy.

There's not really any such thing as "British values" beyond some vague stuff like politeness and then things which are aspirational and sometimes don't exist (try telling the post office scandal victims that everyone is equal before the law and everyone believes in fairness in the UK). There's no written constitution that allows people to read what these supposed foundational values are, instead new laws can fundamentally alter any of these "British values". A curious one at the moment is right wingers supporting extreme anti-protest laws, then getting upset when far right activists get sent down for half a decade for minor acts just like climate activists do.

The latest round of "British values" appears to be an attempt to use the law to enforce the view that Israel should always be supported no matter what. Hard to look at the polling then decide Galloway is an outsider on this topic, it appears most of the UK does not have "British values":
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/ ... 024-update

[tabascoboy]

By "British values" I strongly suspect this means Conservative Party values:

• Our individual freedoms and right to social justice are respected and upheld
  Our right to free enterprise and industry is protected and encouraged
  Our dignified institutions and traditions are safeguarded and carefully maintained

Which is makes it kind of ironic that these are values that they themselves have eroded consistently since 2016, but I suppose that's fine provided that enough idiots are happy to vote for dismantling them - but protest against this and...

[Biffer]

If that were to go through, I’d love to see a court case going through about their relationships with Russian oligarchs, tufton street lobby groups and US Christian conservative movements.

I’ve also just realised that this could be used to ban the SNP & Plaid Cymru from parliament

Don't forget that Sunak has launched all this in the wake of Galloway being elected. Galloway is one of the most frequently elected men in the UK's history often in tough elections he fought as an underdog too, Sunak has a strong Tory safe seat and lost an internal Tory party election. Sunak even had an emergency press conference outside Number 10 after Galloway was elected. This is crazy.

There's not really any such thing as "British values" beyond some vague stuff like politeness and then things which are aspirational and sometimes don't exist (try telling the post office scandal victims that everyone is equal before the law and everyone believes in fairness in the UK). There's no written constitution that allows people to read what these supposed foundational values are, instead new laws can fundamentally alter any of these "British values". A curious one at the moment is right wingers supporting extreme anti-protest laws, then getting upset when far right activists get sent down for half a decade for minor acts just like climate activists do.

The latest round of "British values" appears to be an attempt to use the law to enforce the view that Israel should always be supported no matter what. Hard to look at the polling then decide Galloway is an outsider on this topic, it appears most of the UK does not have "British values":
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/ ... 024-update

This line about Galloway being one of the most elected men in Britain is something I’ve heard floating about a few times. He’s won seven elections out of twelve. He also ran for London mayor and lost, and twice for Scottish parliament, both lost. Peter Bottomley has won 12 out of 12. Harriet Hartman has won 11 out of 11.

[_Os_]

By "British values" I strongly suspect this means Conservative Party values:

• Our individual freedoms and right to social justice are respected and upheld
  Our right to free enterprise and industry is protected and encouraged
  Our dignified institutions and traditions are safeguarded and carefully maintained

Which is makes it kind of ironic that these are values that they themselves have eroded consistently since 2016, but I suppose that's fine provided that enough idiots are happy to vote for dismantling them - but protest against this and...

I suspect that a moderate centre right Tory party is dead and those people are already or soon will be voting Lib Dems. Brexit, then Big Dog winning without appealing to the centre ground, then historic levels of mass migration under Tory rule, all cooked the brains of a lot of Tories. The last sentence is what the Tories are now.

Interesting that GB News have got upset about this far right goon whilst also supporting anti-protest and anti-free speech laws. They seem to view him as some sort of martyr. They don't complain when climate activists go to jail and state they want pro-Palestine protesters in jail, suddenly there's quite a lot of claims about unfair treatment and "British values" when some far right goon goes down. Reform's unofficial TV channel is a very strange place.

Darren Grimes - defending an active member of Patriotic Alternative, who was a member of the (now proscribed) National Action. This Stickers vs Actual Crimes argument specifically involves defending of stirring up antisemitic hatred as "free speech"
So Grimes on GBNEWS are explicitly saying that producing, distributing this antisemitic content should be defended as "free speech". By implication that there should be no laws at all against stirring up racial hatred
Grimes says you might not want to go to the pub with the guy, but does not see why incitement to racial hatred should be against the law, when the unlawful production and distribution of stickers inciting hatred can be seen as free speech
Melia claimed (falsely) never to have been involved in National Action. In fact, Melia also met with leaders of the group in July 2017 [after it was banned as a terror organisation] to discuss forming a new National Socialist fascist brotherhood front
National Action had been proscribed as a terrorist group in 2016. The involvement of leading members in an assassination plot against an MP was one key factor.
The focus on "stickers' versus actual crime is a deliberate attempt to trivialise a sustained effort at stirring up hatred by a man with a long track record of seeking to radicalise people towards active and violent neo-Nazi ideologies and behaviours
Patriotic Alternative still claim Sam Melia never had any involvement with National Action. Hope Not Hate have published pics of him marching in formation under the NA flag + a Stormfront post saying he joined a local NA branch just before its proscription as a terror group
A jury convicted Melia. He claimed the sticker texts were toned down to stay legal. The claim that "Second generation? Third? Fourth? You have to go back" would not intimidate anybody, & were not seeking to incite hate, failed with the jury as well as police and prosecutors.
Times (9.10.21) reported Laura Towler's denial of Melia/Patriotic Alternative involvement in the Hundred Handers network he has been convicted for ("There is no evidence to suggest tht Sam Melia has or has ever had any involvement in the Hundred Handers")
CPS: Melia was convicted because created that Hundred Handlers Telegram network & used it to Publish/distribute material intending to stir up racial hatred & to encourage/assist the commission of the offence of racially aggravated criminal damage.
Nick Griffin believes if we criminalise the distribution of materials saying "2nd, 3rd, 4th generation - you have to go back" as "peaceful and constructive" there will be violence. (Melia's career shows a persistent dedication to socialising people towards hatred & violence)
I wonder if Grimes has any boundaries as to what he would defend as free speech. These are public communications from the person he is defending (for organising a network to distribute public stickers telling British-born 4th generation minorities "you have to go back)

[I like neeps]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... -hunt-told

In a report urging Hunt to look at areas other than tax cuts to support hard-pressed people, JRF said the budget risked keeping the UK economy locked on track to leave working families £1,900 a year worse off in 2029 than they were in 2021.

It said households’ average post-tax earnings at the start of 2024 were as much as £2,400 a year lower than at the start of 2021. Working households could benefit from rising wages and lower inflation as the UK economy recovers from recession, but it said progress would be limited and unable to overcome this earlier shortfall.

JRF’s chief economist, Alfie Stirling, said the prospect of a “second lost decade” would come after 14 years of stalling progress to raise living standards, including the failure to increase average workers’ pay substantially above pre-2008 levels after inflation was taken into account.

“Unless policy makers intervene, the 2020s are set to see an unprecedented second lost decade of living standards in a row. As an economy, as a society and as a country, we simply can’t afford this to happen,” he said

And yet...

Tory backbenchers have urged the chancellor and the prime minister to “be brave and bold” and fund tax cuts on Wednesday amid fears it is the party’s last chance to convince the public they actually have a plan.

One Tory MP said people needed to see an improvement in their finances “sharpish”. “It’s not enough to make a statement saying how much you love this country. They need to show it with a 2p tax cut.”

Another said: “Labour may find another way to trip themselves up, but we need to focus on tax cuts. It’s the only way we can show we understand the difficulties people are facing with high costs at the moment. It’ll be hard to fight ‘out of touch Tory’ slogans this election campaign.”

The Tory fetishisation of tax cuts is pathological and not connected to reality.

A 2p tax cut leaves the average earner about £8.60 a week better off, anyone earning more than £54k will be £14.50 per week better off.

It has to be asked, will those people be better off with the £13Bn hole it leaves in the budget (numbers from Torygraph) and the cuts in services across the board that comes with it?

No, but the complete intellectual dishonesty at the heart of the Conservatives, the media including the BBC, and even Labour and the Lib Dems in not pointing out all tax cuts and our taxation regime being the cause of the current public sector decay means they get away without that question being asked.

[_Os_]

I’ve also just realised that this could be used to ban the SNP & Plaid Cymru from parliament

Don't forget that Sunak has launched all this in the wake of Galloway being elected. Galloway is one of the most frequently elected men in the UK's history often in tough elections he fought as an underdog too, Sunak has a strong Tory safe seat and lost an internal Tory party election. Sunak even had an emergency press conference outside Number 10 after Galloway was elected. This is crazy.

There's not really any such thing as "British values" beyond some vague stuff like politeness and then things which are aspirational and sometimes don't exist (try telling the post office scandal victims that everyone is equal before the law and everyone believes in fairness in the UK). There's no written constitution that allows people to read what these supposed foundational values are, instead new laws can fundamentally alter any of these "British values". A curious one at the moment is right wingers supporting extreme anti-protest laws, then getting upset when far right activists get sent down for half a decade for minor acts just like climate activists do.

The latest round of "British values" appears to be an attempt to use the law to enforce the view that Israel should always be supported no matter what. Hard to look at the polling then decide Galloway is an outsider on this topic, it appears most of the UK does not have "British values":
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/ ... 024-update

This line about Galloway being one of the most elected men in Britain is something I’ve heard floating about a few times. He’s won seven elections out of twelve. He also ran for London mayor and lost, and twice for Scottish parliament, both lost. Peter Bottomley has won 12 out of 12. Harriet Hartman has won 11 out of 11.

Which still makes him one of the most elected people in the UK's history. He's won with 3 parties, 2 of those very minor (I posted the list of people who had done this which included floor crossers and still amounted to almost no one). He's won in 4 distinct constituencies (5 if you count boundary changes). He's won elections for Westminster seats in the 1980s/90s/00s/10s/20s.

Seems uncontroversial to point out "whatever anyone thinks of him hard to deny he gets elected a lot". Galloway's repeated election creates a problem for the advocates of "British values", something similar happens to "will of the people" advocates also (oddly they're usually the same people). Which is why we're seeing hysteria and an emergency PM speech in the wake of his election.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Galloway being elected is a problem for people with values anywhere you'd hope.

[tabascoboy]

Galloway being elected is a problem for people with values anywhere you'd hope.

It certainly is, but this is the "democratic process" our Government supposedly want to defend. If he's not explicitly legally disqualified from standing and taking his seat, what should we do?

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Galloway being elected is a problem for people with values anywhere you'd hope.

It certainly is, but this is the "democratic process" our Government supposedly want to defend. If he's not explicitly legally disqualified from standing and taking his seat, what should we do?

Condemn him and the arseholes that voted for him. Other than that he has to be allowed to take his seat as things stand.

[Biffer]

Don't forget that Sunak has launched all this in the wake of Galloway being elected. Galloway is one of the most frequently elected men in the UK's history often in tough elections he fought as an underdog too, Sunak has a strong Tory safe seat and lost an internal Tory party election. Sunak even had an emergency press conference outside Number 10 after Galloway was elected. This is crazy.

There's not really any such thing as "British values" beyond some vague stuff like politeness and then things which are aspirational and sometimes don't exist (try telling the post office scandal victims that everyone is equal before the law and everyone believes in fairness in the UK). There's no written constitution that allows people to read what these supposed foundational values are, instead new laws can fundamentally alter any of these "British values". A curious one at the moment is right wingers supporting extreme anti-protest laws, then getting upset when far right activists get sent down for half a decade for minor acts just like climate activists do.

The latest round of "British values" appears to be an attempt to use the law to enforce the view that Israel should always be supported no matter what. Hard to look at the polling then decide Galloway is an outsider on this topic, it appears most of the UK does not have "British values":
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/ ... 024-update

This line about Galloway being one of the most elected men in Britain is something I’ve heard floating about a few times. He’s won seven elections out of twelve. He also ran for London mayor and lost, and twice for Scottish parliament, both lost. Peter Bottomley has won 12 out of 12. Harriet Hartman has won 11 out of 11.

Which still makes him one of the most elected people in the UK's history. He's won with 3 parties, 2 of those very minor (I posted the list of people who had done this which included floor crossers and still amounted to almost no one). He's won in 4 distinct constituencies (5 if you count boundary changes). He's won elections for Westminster seats in the 1980s/90s/00s/10s/20s.

Seems uncontroversial to point out "whatever anyone thinks of him hard to deny he gets elected a lot". Galloway's repeated election creates a problem for the advocates of "British values", something similar happens to "will of the people" advocates also (oddly they're usually the same people). Which is why we're seeing hysteria and an emergency PM speech in the wake of his election.

There are 68 MPs in the current parliament alone who have won that many or more.

In the past, Churchill was elected 16 times for three different parties in five different constituencies. Tony Benn won 15 in two different constituencies (he actually won another time as well, but was denied entry due to his peerage).

[_Os_]

Galloway being elected is a problem for people with values anywhere you'd hope.

Fairly obvious the real issue some have with Galloway is that a lot of people agree with him.

Galloway has values, for example he campaigned against Scottish independence and then campaigned for Brexit. Part of his values is being a pro-Union Brexiter. If their were more MPs in the Commons from minor parties like the BNP and UKIP who had those values pre-2016, then maybe a lot of (ongoing) trouble could've been avoided. FPTP meant the likes of BNP and UKIP contested huge numbers of seats over many GEs and byelections receiving large amounts of votes but winning not much. Then because FPTP heavily punishes small parties (something the Tories will learn if they keep sinking, Lib Dem polling levels means a Lib Dem level result) whilst heavily rewarding larger parties, the Tories had to absorb BNP and UKIP positions which had never really been debated and exposed to scrutiny but were becoming popular or risk losing ground and being punished by FPTP.

The bad man getting elected seems preferable to one of the main parties in a two party system going insane.

[Biffer]

Galloway being elected is a problem for people with values anywhere you'd hope.

Fairly obvious the real issue some have with Galloway is that a lot of people agree with him.

Galloway has values, for example he campaigned against Scottish independence and then campaigned for Brexit. Part of his values is being a pro-Union Brexiter. If their were more MPs in the Commons from minor parties like the BNP and UKIP who had those values pre-2016, then maybe a lot of (ongoing) trouble could've been avoided. FPTP meant the likes of BNP and UKIP contested huge numbers of seats over many GEs and byelections receiving large amounts of votes but winning not much. Then because FPTP heavily punishes small parties (something the Tories will learn if they keep sinking, Lib Dem polling levels means a Lib Dem level result) whilst heavily rewarding larger parties, the Tories had to absorb BNP and UKIP positions which had never really been debated and exposed to scrutiny but were becoming popular or risk losing ground and being punished by FPTP.

The bad man getting elected seems preferable than one of the main parties in a two party system going insane.

Nah, his values are whatever are handy for his own self furtherance. The Scottish independence one is a case in point. He bangs on about the right for self determination for people all over the world, particularly parts of the old British Empire, but there’s one group he says shouldn’t get that opportunity and it’s his own country, because he loves sucking on the Westminster teat (and knows he’d get nowhere in Scotland).

[_Os_]

This line about Galloway being one of the most elected men in Britain is something I’ve heard floating about a few times. He’s won seven elections out of twelve. He also ran for London mayor and lost, and twice for Scottish parliament, both lost. Peter Bottomley has won 12 out of 12. Harriet Hartman has won 11 out of 11.

Which still makes him one of the most elected people in the UK's history. He's won with 3 parties, 2 of those very minor (I posted the list of people who had done this which included floor crossers and still amounted to almost no one). He's won in 4 distinct constituencies (5 if you count boundary changes). He's won elections for Westminster seats in the 1980s/90s/00s/10s/20s.

Seems uncontroversial to point out "whatever anyone thinks of him hard to deny he gets elected a lot". Galloway's repeated election creates a problem for the advocates of "British values", something similar happens to "will of the people" advocates also (oddly they're usually the same people). Which is why we're seeing hysteria and an emergency PM speech in the wake of his election.

There are 68 MPs in the current parliament alone who have won that many or more.

In the past, Churchill was elected 16 times for three different parties in five different constituencies. Tony Benn won 15 in two different constituencies (he actually won another time as well, but was denied entry due to his peerage).

Galloway doesn't have any additional democratic legitimacy because his election record is similar to Churchill's in terms of parties and constituencies represented, are you sure about this?

MPs who have won elections for 3+ different parties (when I looked it up no one was over 3), in 4+ constituencies, over decades. Is not a very long list. It could well be just Galloway and Churchill.

[Biffer]

Which still makes him one of the most elected people in the UK's history. He's won with 3 parties, 2 of those very minor (I posted the list of people who had done this which included floor crossers and still amounted to almost no one). He's won in 4 distinct constituencies (5 if you count boundary changes). He's won elections for Westminster seats in the 1980s/90s/00s/10s/20s.

Seems uncontroversial to point out "whatever anyone thinks of him hard to deny he gets elected a lot". Galloway's repeated election creates a problem for the advocates of "British values", something similar happens to "will of the people" advocates also (oddly they're usually the same people). Which is why we're seeing hysteria and an emergency PM speech in the wake of his election.

There are 68 MPs in the current parliament alone who have won that many or more.

In the past, Churchill was elected 16 times for three different parties in five different constituencies. Tony Benn won 15 in two different constituencies (he actually won another time as well, but was denied entry due to his peerage).

Galloway doesn't have any additional democratic legitimacy because his election record is similar to Churchill's in terms of parties and constituencies represented, are you sure about this?

MPs who have won elections for 3+ different parties (when I looked it up no one was over 3), in 4+ constituencies, over decades. Is not a very long list. It could well be just Galloway and Churchill.

I didn’t say anything about democratic legitimacy, I said this idea of him being one of the most successful MPs in history is hyperbole. He’s nowhere near the two examples I mentioned. And many other people have won as many times or more.

[Hal Jordan]

Perhaps we could all agree that Galloway's elastic beliefs allow him to be electable under many different circumstances, but once elected he is less than worthless as a constituency MP?

[Tichtheid]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... -hunt-told



And yet...


The Tory fetishisation of tax cuts is pathological and not connected to reality.

A 2p tax cut leaves the average earner about £8.60 a week better off, anyone earning more than £54k will be £14.50 per week better off.

It has to be asked, will those people be better off with the £13Bn hole it leaves in the budget (numbers from Torygraph) and the cuts in services across the board that comes with it?

No, but the complete intellectual dishonesty at the heart of the Conservatives, the media including the BBC, and even Labour and the Lib Dems in not pointing out all tax cuts and our taxation regime being the cause of the current public sector decay means they get away without that question being asked.

They always default to the facile mantra "We believe the pound is better in your pocket than in the government's, so that you can spend it and boost the economy, or save it for your children, blah blah"

It's just bollocks, it's always about the right of the individual for them, rather than the responsibilities of that individual.

[C69]

Perhaps we could all agree that Galloway's elastic beliefs allow him to be electable under many different circumstances, but once elected he is less than worthless as a constituency MP?

No idea what he is like as constituency MP but I suspect he is useless.
That said he is an excellent or indefatigable orator.