Are they up to anything in politics?
He should have sacked himself rather than Angela Rayner, maybe he is scared of her
starmer: two faced. " A once in a lifetime decision we will abide by your vote" Then campaigns for a second referendum when the result isn’t the one he wanted. Needs to throw his wig away and go down the pit/ crew a fishing trawler/dig up the road/ carry a hod/ go down the sewers/handball 200 tons a day of 1cwt bags onto a trailer and then off again for a couple of months. And above all keep his ■■■■■■■ trap shut.
Then the prat just might have a clue. What? get dirt under my fingernails? too much to ask. The man prefers playing with words - lying to you and me.
cav551:
starmer: two faced. " A once in a lifetime decision we will abide by your vote" Then campaigns for a second referendum when the result isn’t the one he wanted. Needs to throw his wig away and go down the pit/ crew a fishing trawler/dig up the road/ carry a hod/ go down the sewers/handball 200 tons a day of 1cwt bags onto a trailer and then off again for a couple of months. And above all keep his [zb] trap shut.Then the prat just might have a clue. What? get dirt under my fingernails? too much to ask. The man prefers playing with words - lying to you and me.
He is so unlike our present PM and Cabinet then isn`t he?
Never broken his nails in the difficult extraction of Greek Fairy Stories from the raw dark library as Johnson has.
Never fished for English Fiction in the stormy, dangerous waters of Oxford alongside Gove.
Never done the back breaking toil of studying history, nor the heavy lifting of investment management such as “Muscles” Rees-Mogg has in his efforts to better human kind.
No Starmer merely got a Law degree, and inbetween the lucrative(?) human rights work he did, managed to squeeze in some pro bono stuff too.
About the same time our present PM was busy too of course: after resigning after one week in his first job, he got a job as a journalist with The Times. Sacked from there for fabricating quotes, he went onto the Telegraph. Chris Patten described him as “one of the greatest exponents of fake journalism”. He had another job writing at GQ magazine, but wasnt always on time with his copy. However he did allegedly shout and berate the printers if they published without waiting for him to finish his work. Johnson returned to journalism with The Telegraph in 2018. But that didnt last too long: he was in breach of the Ministerial Code in taking on that job, and was found to have not declared (and not inadvertently!) £50,000 in earnings, and was culpable on 9 occasions.
At the same time he was admonished by the Press Standards Agency for inaccuracies, and corrections to his piece was ordered. So, he manged to get a job, against the rules, told fictions doing it, and failed to declare earnings from it.
Triple whammy. or what!
P.S. for RobRoy, I am not saying hateful things about Johnson.
I am repeating well known and repeated, verifiable facts. Any opinion you might form about whether an habitual liar is worthy of all that effort being put into actually hating him, is entirely your opinion.
Franglais:
cav551:
starmer: two faced. " A once in a lifetime decision we will abide by your vote" Then campaigns for a second referendum when the result isn’t the one he wanted. Needs to throw his wig away and go down the pit/ crew a fishing trawler/dig up the road/ carry a hod/ go down the sewers/handball 200 tons a day of 1cwt bags onto a trailer and then off again for a couple of months. And above all keep his [zb] trap shut.Then the prat just might have a clue. What? get dirt under my fingernails? too much to ask. The man prefers playing with words - lying to you and me.
He is so unlike our present PM and Cabinet then isn`t he?
Never broken his nails in the difficult extraction of Greek Fairy Stories from the raw dark library as Johnson has.
Never fished for English Fiction in the stormy, dangerous waters of Oxford alongside Gove.
Never done the back breaking toil of studying history, nor the heavy lifting of investment management such as “Muscles” Rees-Mogg has in his efforts to better human kind.No Starmer merely got a Law degree, and inbetween the lucrative(?) human rights work he did, managed to squeeze in some pro bono stuff too.
About the same time our present PM was busy too of course: after resigning after one week in his first job, he got a job as a journalist with The Times. Sacked from there for fabricating quotes, he went onto the Telegraph. Chris Patten described him as “one of the greatest exponents of fake journalism”. He had another job writing at GQ magazine, but wasnt always on time with his copy. However he did allegedly shout and berate the printers if they published without waiting for him to finish his work. Johnson returned to journalism with The Telegraph in 2018. But that didnt last too long: he was in breach of the Ministerial Code in taking on that job, and was found to have not declared (and not inadvertently!) £50,000 in earnings, and was culpable on 9 occasions.
At the same time he was admonished by the Press Standards Agency for inaccuracies, and corrections to his piece was ordered. So, he manged to get a job, against the rules, told fictions doing it, and failed to declare earnings from it.
Triple whammy. or what!P.S. for RobRoy, I am not saying hateful things about Johnson.
I am repeating well known and repeated, verifiable facts. Any opinion you might form about whether an habitual liar is worthy of all that effort being put into actually hating him, is entirely your opinion.
What is the relevance of Johnson in this debate? The labour Party despises the very people it was set up to represent here is a quote from one of Starmer’s backers Jane Gray “Yep as expected the working class love a bit of nationalism and racism. Well done Hartlepool you turkeys. I’ve never been and I never will” Good luck trying to win power when that is what you think of the people you need to put you into power. But hey just keep repeating that Johnson is a liar rather than address the real problems in the Labour Party and everything will come up roses.
Mazzer2:
What is the relevance of Johnson in this debate? The labour Party despises the very people it was set up to represent here is a quote from one of Starmer’s backers Jane Gray “Yep as expected the working class love a bit of nationalism and racism. Well done Hartlepool you turkeys. I’ve never been and I never will” Good luck trying to win power when that is what you think of the people you need to put you into power. But hey just keep repeating that Johnson is a liar rather than address the real problems in the Labour Party and everything will come up roses.
Cav551 was criticizing Starmer for being out of touch and a being a liar. I was making the point that the current Tories are even more out of touch, and even bigger liars, but they are not being bashed by him.
The present Gov have been elected in spite of being these same things (in spades) that makes Labour allegedly unelectable?
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
What is the relevance of Johnson in this debate? The labour Party despises the very people it was set up to represent here is a quote from one of Starmer’s backers Jane Gray “Yep as expected the working class love a bit of nationalism and racism. Well done Hartlepool you turkeys. I’ve never been and I never will” Good luck trying to win power when that is what you think of the people you need to put you into power. But hey just keep repeating that Johnson is a liar rather than address the real problems in the Labour Party and everything will come up roses.Cav551 was criticizing Starmer for being out of touch and a being a liar. I was making the point that the current Tories are even more out of touch, and even bigger liars, but they are not being bashed by him.
The present Gov have been elected in spite of being these same things (in spades) that makes Labour allegedly unelectable?
I think you’ll find that the Conservatives are more in touch with the electorate than Labour hence the position the two parties find themselves in, the influx of Northern Conservatives will keep the Conservative Party more in tune with the electorate. Did you not read the comment from Jane Gray, explain to me how she is more in touch with the electorate than the woman who won Hartlepool, if you cannot see the problem then you cannot fix it.
Franglais, you struggle to understand why people vote for Tory liars over Labour liars…. Well here’s an example below. You can quote your woke bulls@@t all day long, but it’s public perception that wins elections.
the maoster:
Franglais, you struggle to understand why people vote for Tory liars over Labour liars…. Well here’s an example below. You can quote your woke bulls@@t all day long, but it’s public perception that wins elections.
I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc. But that is certainly not what is being said above is it?
And yes, you are again correct public perception is the key here. Labour are criticised for many alleged offences that the Tories are equally or more guilty of, but Labour are seemingly held to a higher standard?
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.
If you say you wont support Labour because of past support for the IRA, fair enough, that I do understand.
I dont understand criticism of Labour being liars or out of touch when the Tories arent treated the same way?
Edit to add
theguardian.com/politics/20 … -tolerance
Franglais:
the maoster:
Franglais, you struggle to understand why people vote for Tory liars over Labour liars…. Well here’s an example below. You can quote your woke bulls@@t all day long, but it’s public perception that wins elections.I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc. But that is certainly not what is being said above is it?
And yes, you are again correct public perception is the key here. Labour are criticised for many alleged offences that the Tories are equally or more guilty of, but Labour are seemingly held to a higher standard?
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.If you say you wont support Labour because of past support for the IRA, fair enough, that I do understand.
I dont understand criticism of Labour being liars or out of touch when the Tories arent treated the same way?Edit to add
theguardian.com/politics/20 … -tolerance
Again rather complain that life is so unfair than address the problem, the Labour Party was set up to represent the working class yet it now gives the impression that it despises them. You know that you are getting a liar with Johnson, what are you getting with Starmer? Putting a pro remain candidate in a pro leave constituency shows crass ignorance of the people you are asking to support.
Mazzer2:
Franglais:
the maoster:
Franglais, you struggle to understand why people vote for Tory liars over Labour liars…. Well here’s an example below. You can quote your woke bulls@@t all day long, but it’s public perception that wins elections.I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc. But that is certainly not what is being said above is it?
And yes, you are again correct public perception is the key here. Labour are criticised for many alleged offences that the Tories are equally or more guilty of, but Labour are seemingly held to a higher standard?
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.If you say you wont support Labour because of past support for the IRA, fair enough, that I do understand.
I dont understand criticism of Labour being liars or out of touch when the Tories arent treated the same way?Edit to add
theguardian.com/politics/20 … -toleranceAgain rather complain that life is so unfair than address the problem, the Labour Party was set up to represent the working class yet it now gives the impression that it despises them. You know that you are getting a liar with Johnson, what are you getting with Starmer? Putting a pro remain candidate in a pro leave constituency shows crass ignorance of the people you are asking to support.
Who is complaining “life is unfair”?
And since you may have missed this in your chosen news sources:
thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/ … rejoining/
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
Franglais:
the maoster:
Franglais, you struggle to understand why people vote for Tory liars over Labour liars…. Well here’s an example below. You can quote your woke bulls@@t all day long, but it’s public perception that wins elections.I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc. But that is certainly not what is being said above is it?
And yes, you are again correct public perception is the key here. Labour are criticised for many alleged offences that the Tories are equally or more guilty of, but Labour are seemingly held to a higher standard?
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.If you say you wont support Labour because of past support for the IRA, fair enough, that I do understand.
I dont understand criticism of Labour being liars or out of touch when the Tories arent treated the same way?Edit to add
theguardian.com/politics/20 … -toleranceAgain rather complain that life is so unfair than address the problem, the Labour Party was set up to represent the working class yet it now gives the impression that it despises them. You know that you are getting a liar with Johnson, what are you getting with Starmer? Putting a pro remain candidate in a pro leave constituency shows crass ignorance of the people you are asking to support.
Who is complaining “life is unfair”?
And since you may have missed this in your chosen news sources:
thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/ … rejoining/
I know Starmer has changed his stance on Brexit that’s old news, reading newspapers is not exclusive to the left, but why put the candidate forward that he did for Hartlepool? Doesn’t say a lot about his judgement or how in touch he is with the people of Hartlepool, constantly slagging off the Tories will not get him elected as PM, coming up with policies that will benefit the working classes not pandering to the latest trend in victim politics and running a party that is capable of listening to the electorate and not just a tiny vocal minority from the right on university campus’s of London. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the current Conservative party they are in power and due to the incompetence of the Labour Party look likely to stay there for quite a while
Franglais:
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.I don
t understand criticism of Labour being liars or OUT OF TOUCH when the Tories arent treated the same way
That first statement is bleeding obvious to everyone on here, everytime you refuse to accept the Brexit result.
News flash…ALL politicians of ALL parties are liars by nature, it’s part of the criteria and qualifications of actually becoming a (successful) politician. 
In comparison the Tories were not as ‘out of touch’ though were they?
Proven by the go ahead and actual implementation of BREXIT !!
Hope that explains what most of the rest of us can see.
Mazzer2:
I know Starmer has changed his stance on Brexit that’s old news, reading newspapers is not exclusive to the left, but why put the candidate forward that he did for Hartlepool? Doesn’t say a lot about his judgement or how in touch he is with the people of Hartlepool, constantly slagging off the Tories will not get him elected as PM, coming up with policies that will benefit the working classes not pandering to the latest trend in victim politics and running a party that is capable of listening to the electorate and not just a tiny vocal minority from the right on university campus’s of London. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the current Conservative party they are in power and due to the incompetence of the Labour Party look likely to stay there for quite a while
Good post. (IMHO)
Constantly slagging off the Tories wont get him elected? When Johnson (and his press baron masters) and others slag off him and his predecessors? It works for them doesn`t it?
You read more than one source? Im not at all surprised! But dont you accept that that many sources chose to soft pedal on much of CURRENT Labour thinking?
Franglais:
I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc.
But that’s the thing mate, very few are letting past events such as IRA support colour their voting patterns. I personally have had direct involvement with the IRA but as far as I’m concerned it’s water under the bridge and we’ve moved on from there.
As I asserted before it’s all about perception; people perceive Labours alignment with what they perceive to be lunatic causes such as BLM and obsessions with fringe causes. Your average working man/woman only wants food on the table, a new car every five years and an annual family puke fest in Benidorm. With all due respect to gay pride or whichever cause is flavour of the month people don’t actually care nor discriminate against them. Labour attempt to force feed how we should feel or act, the Tories do not. In a nutshell that is primarily why Labour are unelectable.
robroy:
Franglais:
No, I don`t understand how the public are thinking as they apparently do.I don
t understand criticism of Labour being liars or OUT OF TOUCH when the Tories arent treated the same wayThat first statement is bleeding obvious to everyone on here, everytime you refuse to accept the Brexit result.
News flash…ALL politicians of ALL parties are liars by nature, it’s part of the criteria and qualifications of actually becoming a (successful) politician.
In comparison the Tories were not as ‘out of touch’ though were they?
Proven by the go ahead and actual implementation of BREXIT !!Hope that explains what most of the rest of us can see.
I know where we are.
I still don`t undersatnd why.
OK. Call me thick, or stupid, or whatever you like*. I dont understand it. If the Tories are repeating what the majority of "news sources" are saying, is it such a surprise that they are believed? That the most popular "news sources" are owned by a few rich persons who stand to gain both influence and financial gain from Brexit, that those persons and sources are employers of politicians.... Well, you aint stupid, join the dots.
The implementation of Brexit! What?
Did we get back £350million a week?
Johnson said the Irish border would remain “absolutely unchanged”. It hasnt and is still in flux. Numerous trade deals ready by 2019 Easy with no downsides Free trade agreement easiest in history Increase funding to science and save millions Sorry, Im getting RSI from typing the same stuff, which doesn`t get disputed, only ignored…
*I do realize that me giving permission isn`t a prerequisite!
Hmmmm not disputed and totally ignored…scratchy beard moment.
I reckon there may be a message in there somewhere, just saying. 
the maoster:
Franglais:
I can certainly understand why some would choose to vote because of stances on the IRA etc.But that’s the thing mate, very few are letting past events such as IRA support colour their voting patterns. I personally have had direct involvement with the IRA but as far as I’m concerned it’s water under the bridge and we’ve moved on from there.
As I asserted before it’s all about perception; people perceive Labours alignment with what they perceive to be lunatic causes such as BLM and obsessions with fringe causes. Your average working man/woman only wants food on the table, a new car every five years and an annual family puke fest in Benidorm. With all due respect to gay pride or whichever cause is flavour of the month people don’t actually care nor discriminate against them. Labour attempt to force feed how we should feel or act, the Tories do not. In a nutshell that is primarily why Labour are unelectable.
And who is primarily pushing the agenda of Labour being extreme leftie IRA supporters etc?
The right leaning news media sites etc? Those who DO stand to win from Tory wins and Brexit? Those who employ and give funds and loans to politicians?
Look for yourself at who funds Farage and Johnson etc. There is smoke and false reporting against them of course, but there has been some substantiated by proper inquiries.
Then count how many claims there are against Starmer (and even Corbyn!) and then find how many are held up.
Tell me they are all the same if you want. I don`t see the evidence for that.