Politics Thread!

[Governmentyard]

It would be nice if one of them had

[Wudzi]

Good old Murdoch

http://www.sunnation.co.uk/use-your-tv- ... -161067757

[merman]

What is really getting my goat is how the Tories are calling a potential Labour government "a coalition of chaos". Yeah, because your coalition was a good idea and anyone else's would automatically be bad.

Iain Duncan Smith on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday proved what a weasel he is.

"We won't tell you how we are going to make £12 billion in welfare cuts. Vote for us."

[zip accident]

It would be nice if one of them had

At the top of the page a non-sequiter compared to the thread title. Way to go (Not, for the sarcasm impaired).

I'm quite in favour of quoting whatever you are referring to in general, but even so I think there is a case for copying say the last five replies from the previous page at the start of every new one. I'm not suggesting dropping the number of replies per page, GITP has 30 replies per page, so a total of 20 shouldn't be a problem.

[offyoutoddle]

What is really getting my goat is how the Tories are calling a potential Labour government "a coalition of chaos". Yeah, because your coalition was a good idea and anyone else's would automatically be bad.

Iain Duncan Smith on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday proved what a weasel he is.

"We won't tell you how we are going to make £12 billion in welfare cuts. Vote for us."

In a sea of unlikeable tosspots, he really has managed to distinguish himself - no mean feat. He actually said that?? wow. His role in dismantling the welfare state as was to its current state is quite astonishing and frankly voting for him based on previous record or trust doesn't strike me as wise in any shape way or form.

Runner up award goes to Hague of course for his latest bit of childish and petty spite in the commons.

[zip accident]

What is really getting my goat is how the Tories are calling a potential Labour government "a coalition of chaos". Yeah, because your coalition was a good idea and anyone else's would automatically be bad.

Iain Duncan Smith on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday proved what a weasel he is.

"We won't tell you how we are going to make £12 billion in welfare cuts. Vote for us."

Yeah, but you'll vote Labour whatever he says, so according to him, you don't count. To those he cares about, he said we haven't yet decided which 12 billion in cuts we will make.

Speaking as a potential cuttee (spelt? google doesn't know), I'm finding that threatening.

I think the Greens as the new left need to get their act together.

[merman]

What is really getting my goat is how the Tories are calling a potential Labour government "a coalition of chaos". Yeah, because your coalition was a good idea and anyone else's would automatically be bad.

Iain Duncan Smith on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday proved what a weasel he is.

"We won't tell you how we are going to make £12 billion in welfare cuts. Vote for us."

Yeah, but you'll vote Labour whatever he says, so according to him, you don't count. To those he cares about, he said we haven't yet decided which 12 billion in cuts we will make.

Speaking as a potential cuttee (spelt? google doesn't know), I'm finding that threatening.

I think the Greens as the new left need to get their act together.

I was paraphrasing IDS, but the point stands. The Tories constantly make false claims about what Labour's plans mean while obscuring exactly what they are going to do.

Two other points.

1. I may not vote Labour automatically, as you seem to think.

2. I would be affected by benefit changes too, particularly the plan to TAX THEM.

[(o)(o)]

I was paraphrasing IDS, but the point stands. The Tories constantly make false claims about what Labour's plans mean while obscuring exactly what they are going to do.

On first read I saw "paralysing" and not "paraphrasing".. gutted...

IDS is a lying fuck.

His CV is a total fabricated it contains LIES that's in the public domain.

Cameron is a lying fuck.

Osbourne is a lying fuck.

Yes, there is a pattern here....

Hilarious to see IDS having a dig at Cameron's 2nd term pledge at the weekend. There is no honour among thieves.

[pogo]

I was paraphrasing IDS, but the point stands. The Tories constantly make false claims about what Labour's plans mean while obscuring exactly what they are going to do.

The problem is though while the Tories have said how they will tackle the deficit, even breaking it down by area of spending such as benefits, Labour have not said how they will do so. Or at least the things they have announced will raise little or no money, and they will have to make cuts too. But for whatever reason (scared of voters rejecting them, scared of their union paymasters kicking up a fuss) they’ve kept quiet about their cuts. Except “efficiency savings” in the civil service, but it’s hard to save money there without pay restraint and redundancies, staffing being their main costs, and you imagine unions will object to that.

Labour has the additional problem that the Tories policies essentially boil down to “more of the same”, at least until the deficit is brought down to reasonable levels and debt is on a sustainable course. It’s Labour that plans to do things differently and so needs to explain how, as the only other party that could plausibly form a government after the election.

So the onus is on Labour to say how much they will cut and where, in at least as much detail as the Tories, ideally more. Until they do there will many will suspect they are hiding their plans, and they will suffer electorally because of it.

[(o)(o)]

One of the reasons people want to know what is being cut in benefits especially is, because of the nightmare the conservatives have already created for people who are out of work or suffering ill health.

I note at his recent keynote speech to old biddy voter, Cameron said young people should either be learning or working after school. Great in principle but what if a person isn't in a position to do either and lacks wealthy parents to sponge off?

Judging by the numbers of young people are sleeping rough and being made homeless and growing needs of even workers to seek food shelters it's not looking good is it

So yeah, I think people have a right to know where the thumbscrews will be applied and how.. as it's already hell on earth for a lot of people through no fault of their own.. and the key point is : there is nothing left to cut which doesn't impinge and impact on peoples lives in a really devastating way..

Leaks suggest it is disabled and their carers who are in the firing line.

http://labourlist.org/2015/03/labour-de ... lity-cuts/

[The ghost of raids past]

I was paraphrasing IDS, but the point stands. The Tories constantly make false claims about what Labour's plans mean while obscuring exactly what they are going to do.

And Labour do exactly the same. No politician of any flavour will tell the truth. Whoever gets into power will increase tax either directly or by stealth.

[(o)(o)]

Labour do exactly the same. No politician of any flavour will tell the truth.

No that's not true there's spin and there's outright lies - only the Cons indulge in that on a daily basis.

It never ceases to amaze me how people will overlook their BLATANT lies.

Even today - Cameron claiming 10,000 extra jobs per day when it's 1000.

[gravy]

A bit dry but a good description of the process trying to form a minority governemnt without a coalition in the independant

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 47685.html

[Absolute_Zero]

Labour do exactly the same. No politician of any flavour will tell the truth.

No that's not true there's spin and there's outright lies - only the Cons indulge in that on a daily basis.

You'd have to be dumb or theologically committed to think so... both are disingenuous.

example: Balls' assertion that 'working people £1,600 a year worse off' - would true if people received their gross pay. But guess what, the money they actually get to spend/save is their net pay. But hey, let's pretend the changes to personal allowances never happened. Osborne's deployment of the OBR's RHDI, in this instance at least, is the more real and relevant assessment.

[(o)(o)]

Labour do exactly the same. No politician of any flavour will tell the truth.

No that's not true there's spin and there's outright lies - only the Cons indulge in that on a daily basis.

You'd have to be dumb or theologically committed to think so... both are disingenuous.

example: Ball's assertion that 'working people £1,600 a year worse off' - would true if people received their gross pay. But guess what, the money they actually get to spend/save is their net pay. But hey, let's pretend the changes to personal allowances never happened. Osborne's deployment of the OBR's RHDI, in this instance at least, is the more real and relevant assessment.

No you're wrong there is a magnitude to this.

Conservative party members persistently and knowingly tell untruths.

You might be able to find a few examples of Labour doing this but I'm talking about magnitude.

And I believe it's an objective fact which would be borne out under scrutiny.

Not just little white lies but absolute outright 100% total bollocks - even now during the elecytion campaign



The dumbness is the passive acceptance of this.