Jeremy Corbyn

I was genuinely interested to hear which policies you saw as madcap, it's a perfectly reasonable view to take as he is so different from the current political set.

okocha wrote:
And you need to check reality, as per the actual statistics below:

" Cameron’s Tories won the support of only around 24 per cent of all those who could have voted. The ‘none of the above’ party of non-voters totalled 34 per cent, finishing a close second this time. Millions of those who did vote will feel no more represented than those who did not."


 Of those who did vote, only a third voted Tory despite the denigration of the other parties by the right-wing press, and the decimation of Labour in Scotland by the SNP, gleefully and slyly backed  by the Tories and the Rupert Murdochs of this world. 


Whatever happened to the conclusions of Lord Leveson? ......Oh, I remember now.......Cameron refused to accept the (extremely expensive) findings because he didn't like them despite promising that he would abide by them!! Now we see signs of Tories attempting to pretend they have a mandate to do whatever they want in ways in which they think will weaken opposition parties.

As I said, you need to let your bitterness go. The election is over, Cameron won fair and square.

bwfc1874 wrote:I was genuinely interested to hear which policies you saw as madcap, it's a perfectly reasonable view to take as he is so different from the current political set.

You might be genuinely interested, but you genuinely like conflict, and that's a perfectly good reason for not answering your question.

SK, you soft bastard. I've seen bigger balls in my knickers.

Natasha Whittam wrote:SK, you soft bastard. I've seen bigger balls in my knickers.

they are the biggest ever though so not a fair comparison

Natasha Whittam wrote:SK, you soft bastard. I've seen bigger balls in my knickers.

I would expect you have!
Cross dressing is your fort I believe!?

Nat I suspect you have a big knob as well and it pokes out of your shirt collar!!!

Soul Kitchen wrote:Nat I suspect you have a big knob as well and it pokes out of your shirt collar!!!

I think you're wearing your shirts wrong.

Soul Kitchen wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:I was genuinely interested to hear which policies you saw as madcap, it's a perfectly reasonable view to take as he is so different from the current political set.

You might be genuinely interested, but you genuinely like conflict, and that's a perfectly good reason for not answering your question.

Deary me, the abuse / conflict on the thread was from Johnny and yourself, can only assume this is a concerted effort. No need to try and blame me.

Nat's right, very soft.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:Nat I suspect you have a big knob as well and it pokes out of your shirt collar!!!

I think you're wearing your shirts wrong.

No Nat, you're the one with the knobhead!!

Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:I was genuinely interested to hear which policies you saw as madcap, it's a perfectly reasonable view to take as he is so different from the current political set.

You might be genuinely interested, but you genuinely like conflict, and that's a perfectly good reason for not answering your question.

Deary me, the abuse / conflict on the thread was from Johnny and yourself, can only assume this is a concerted effort. No need to try and blame me.

Nat's right, very soft.

See there you go, no need to answer but you can't resist.
For the record , Corbryn has madcap ideas, you should know that, hence a Tory party will be laughing it's socks off come Saturday.
The Labour Party is as much use as a chocolate fireguard I'm afraid, born to oppose and not much else.

okocha wrote:Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

I think Manda's onto something with what she said earlier.

I've long argued that when you get a turn out of 35% of the available electorate and only 30% of them vote for the party that gets returned to form a government, something's very wrong.

When 4.2 million people can get a party elected to form a government that dictates to 60 million people......summat's wrong with the system.

okocha wrote:Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

Unfortunately nothing is going to change in the next 10 years I'm afraid, especially when the madcap laughs come Saturday. However Cameron will laugh the longest.

Breadman wrote:

okocha wrote:Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

I think Manda's onto something with what she said earlier.

I've long argued that when you get a turn out of 35% of the available electorate and only 30% of them vote for the party that gets returned to form a government, something's very wrong.

When 4.2 million people can get a party elected to form a government that dictates to 60 million people......summat's wrong with the system.

It matters not a jot, those that can change it won't. What's the old saying about turkeys and Christmas?

Good point.

But that's where we come in.

If we let the bastards know that we're not happy with it, they'll have to do something.

Or am I being 17 again.......? 

Yes, you are being 17 again........Happy Days.
Blair had his chance but, as they all do, looked after himself!


I find it most bizarre when politicians balloon on about democracy, that we edge ever closer to a one party state, with the most un democratic electoral system in the "Democratic World".

Soul Kitchen wrote:For the record , Corbryn has madcap ideas, you should know that, hence a Tory party will be laughing it's socks off come Saturday.
The Labour Party is as much use as a chocolate fireguard I'm afraid, born to oppose and not much else.

You have a point about being more suited to opposition, Labour's a broad church and as an extension the left wing is even more so. Uniting those ideas is a near impossible job. 

In terms of Corbyn I was only wondering which policies you find madcap, for me the public investment bank is the most 'out there' but supposedly - according to Paul Mason - there are some solid economics behind it.

Britain seems to have gone from a nation where everybody was drawn increasingly to the centre ground to the opposite of people pulling away to the left and right, going forward I think Manda's right that more compromise needs to be found. Coalition based governments like that of Denmark would be better suited considering there are such strongly opposing views.

okocha wrote:Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

If Labour had won with similar results would you be saying the same thing? Of course not.

Cameron won, he was by far the best candidate, you need to accept it and move on.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

okocha wrote:Nat said: "The election is over, Cameron won."  You're wrong again; the discredited electoral system won......... leaving more than two-thirds of the electorate with a governing party they did not vote for. 


Reform is needed in order to produce a fairer system that more accurately reflects the views of the majority in the country. Otherwise there is no mandate to make suitable policies.

If Labour had won with similar results would you be saying the same thing? Of course not.

Cameron won, he was by far the best candidate, you need to accept it and move on.

1. Cameron won under a ludicrously undemocratic system. 
2. You should vote on policies, not personalities.
3. Good policies were spread across the parties. We need consensus approach. You might be surprised who I voted for!
4. "Accepting" blatant faults is pitiful. People must fight for what is right. Breadman's rekindled passion for his values is to be praised. Now act!
5. More evidence of heartless government lacking morality emerged today:


"At least 15,000 children are separated from a parent because of income rules affecting some migrants, says the Children's Commissioner for England.
The estimate comes from an analysis of a policy that bars the UK entry of a non-EU parent if their British spouse earns less than £18,600 a year.
Children's commissioner Anne Longfield said the UK was creating "Skype families" who had been forced apart.
The Home Office says the rules are lawful and compatible with rights."


The rules may be lawful but, as with so many other issues, our leaders  lack compassion.