:sunglasses: 50 % :pray: 6.3 % :laughing: 34.4 % :cry: 3.1 % :poo: 6.3 %
User avatar
By Abernathy
#63085
NevTheSweeper wrote: Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:28 pm
Abernathy wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2024 6:06 pm Ach, well, so you’re not prepared to put your money where your gob is. I can’t say I’m surprised.
I don't need to.
Neither do I. But I am prepared to back up my point of view with action, since I know I’m right. You, however, know you’re wrong, so you won’t.
User avatar
By Malcolm Armsteen
#63088
It amazes me that anyone would bother to come to a small forum like this just to try to wind people up - when they are on to their plan immediately and don't give a fuck.
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#63101
Oboogie wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:37 am It demonstrates a distinct lack of ambition.
And talent. I assume joining under a new name, then being normal for a bit and then suddenly wheeling out the absurd trot lines is meant to either bamboozle or make people think ‘Gosh. Maybe this claim that Labour will lose against a party in freefall with a chronically unpopular leader has some merit after all? Maybe we’d better look again at that Corbyn feller’. Or possibly just annoy, but really you’d have to be a leagues better troll than that.
Oboogie liked this
By Philip Marlow
#63657
It’s easy enough to make politicians look weird with a maliciously timed candid shot (see Ed and the bacon sarnie), but uncanny valley photoshoots fascinate me. I suspect someone was indulging a ‘stern grown-up face of authority’ kink, but Reeves looks like she should be asking Clarice if the lambs have stopped screaming yet.

By Philip Marlow
#63689
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 6:37 pm I quite like that. I get the same vibe as the OP does there.
There’s a hint of Carrie Brownstein there too. Although I suspect that the likelihood of anything Reeves does in government bringing me as much joy as even a middling Sleater-Kinney record is, alas, slim.
By Bones McCoy
#63780
Tic-tic-genics aside.

I have a mild concern about the next administration.

I am sure it will be Labour.
I am sure there will be a very large majority.
And we've seen how large majorities bring problems of their own.

Admittedly fewer problems than a minority (coalition) or a tiny majority (A couple of coronaries away form an election).

If the majority is in the 60+ mark (or even 120 as some predict, you get a lot of untried "new blood" among your MPs.
That will include momentumites, corbynistas and people with a grubby social media history.
The types who always want to be campaigning and never governing.
Essentially the mirror image of the various tory splinter nutjobs.

Splinter nutjobs are one thing when you have a compliant media, covering your every blunder.
You could be Norman Wisdom and they'd paint you as a safe pair of hands.

The very same titles will be up in arms about some backbencher who attended a jumble sale at a mosque, signed a petition about Nicaragua or donated to the RNLI.

The culture wars ain't gonna stop on account of a general election.
And the valuable Ming vase will be just as valuable and fragile after the vote as before.
Oboogie, davidjay, zuriblue liked this
User avatar
By Abernathy
#63795
Contrary to what the Rochdale by-election farrago might suggest, Labour's due diligence in candidate selection is actually more rigorous and effective than it has ever been. So there should be very few, if any, Momentumites, Corbynistas and people with a grubby social media history (scrutiny of would-be candidates' social media accounts is especially thorough), other than nut jobs and cranks that are already there and who get re-elected.
  • 1
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 98
Blue Labour

and even Blair did nationalisation (Railtrack, m[…]

Reform Party

Break out the popcorn/Michael Jackson GIF; http[…]

Gorgeous George Garglewax

Most don't complete that journey from right-o[…]

Kemi Badenoch

Well, this must be a bit inconvenient for her th[…]