UK Conservative Party Leadership Election

[Webzcas]

A new thread WooHoo! It kind of makes sense to move on from the 2019 General Election, seeing as we are half way through 2022 already! I have written a piece concerning the remaining five contenders, which later this afternoon will be whittled down to 4.

My own personal preference. Has to be Kemi Badenoch or Tom Tugendhat from what I have seen and heard so far. One thing I am not though, is in anyway shape or form, ready for Rishi!

Conservative Party Leadership Runners and Riders

 

[Webzcas]

So Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have pulled out of the next Leadership Debate which was to be held tomorrow night on Sky News. Sky subsequently have pulled the debate, which as a result would have thus only had two of the candidates taking part, out of the remaining field of 4.

Apparently Tory Party bosses are concerned of the damage that is being done to the party as a result of the debates. LOLOLOL

Seriously, 12 years in government and Johnson's continual lying hasn't done any damage then?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[pinnit2014]

There's nothing like transparency in Government is there?

I'm surprised Dishy's in for it - given the tax hikes i thought he would have been poached by the SNP/Labour

 

[mack341]

It probably is damaging the party, shire conservatives are sat watching thinking 'is this the best we can muster, the cream of the crop '

 

[pinnit2014]

I was listening to a few backbenchers over the last month on various channels and it makes you remember what you see before you, cabinet and otherwise, isn't necessarily the mood of the party - ie, they spoke sense and had, seemingly, a bit of class.

 

[Webzcas]

So unsurprisingly Tugendhat came in fifth place last night and leaves the contest, leaving Sunak, Mordaunt, Truss and Badenoch to duel it out, with another vote taking place this afternoon.

Mordaunt's vote went down by 1 MP, whilst Sunak picked up another 14 votes and Truss another 7. Also Tobias Elwood has had the Conservative Party whip removed this morning, for not coming back from Moldova in time for the vote of no confidence in the government held last night - A vote of No Confidence that the government brought on itself!

As a publicly declared supporter of Mordaunt, this means she will lose at least another vote in this afternoon's ballot.

 

[Webzcas]

So are your Ready 4 Rishi ? or do you trust Liz Truss

Putting this out here now, lump on Labour to win the next General Election. As whoever becomes Tory Party leader and subsequently Prime Minister, they will lose the next General Election. Unless of course Labour bring back Corbyn.

 

[mack341]

I thought truss was alright a while back when she was globe trotting and signing trade deals, but greater time under the spotlight shows she's not very convincing or charismatic.

Neither her nor Rishi will be able to inspire folk to go out and vote for them, it would be an anti labour vote.

If Boris was so bad and a rank liar etc..why even install one of his senior ministers, who served closely, to replace him. Get someone totally fresh in.

 

[Webzcas]

This is the parliamentary Conservative Party that put these two forward. There in lies the problem, the parliamentary party. They will get decimated in 2024. Labour Landslide of 1997 proportions incoming IMO

Even though they are led by the "Human Bollard" LOLOL

 

[dunover]

So Risky Sunak or Liz Trump - going by @ChopleyIOM analysis, the 'racist pensioners' who form the majority of Tory members apparently, will surely vote for her. So it will be an ex Lib-Dem remoaner in charge. Actually, that would likely be the best option for the Con's electoral chances.

Remember, the Boris majority of 80 is actually a pyrrhic figure as about 30 of those 'red wall' seats were borrowed from Labour by Farage ensuring the Tories won them by taking Labour votes from those who wouldn't have voted Con. if you paid them.

So in 'normal' electoral conditions, the Con. majority is really about 20-25 and as @Webzcas says this makes LieBore hot favourites.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I've had a timeout for the last week or so because the General Election thread was starting to properly do my nut in, especially when dunover blessed himself with mind-reading abilities, so it's probably for the best that we have a new thread to track the self-immolation of the Tory party in.

Anyway, I predicted we'd end up here a couple of weeks ago, before the first round of voting had happened, as me and a mate made a bet of a token 'point' on it. (Snip from WhatsApp below, you can see the date is the 7th July.)

So yes I think Pound Shop Thatcher Truss will win, which is what I thought two weeks ago. And now she's throwing around crazy uncosted inflationary tax cuts like confetti, she's completely unfit for the job on every single level, she's basically a robot that has learned a load of different Tory phrases that the old white Southern men who principally make up Tory party members will find comforting, so for those reasons I think she will win.

Which is great news for Labour.

PORK MARKETS!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Quite likely our next Prime Minister, folks.

 

[dunover]

I've had a timeout for the last week or so because the General Election thread was starting to properly do my nut in, especially when dunover blessed himself with mind-reading abilities, so it's probably for the best that we have a new thread to track the self-immolation of the Tory party in.

Anyway, I predicted we'd end up here a couple of weeks ago, before the first round of voting had happened, as me and a mate made a bet of a token 'point' on it. (Snip from WhatsApp below, you can see the date is the 7th July.)

So yes I think Pound Shop Thatcher Truss will win, which is what I thought two weeks ago. And now she's throwing around crazy uncosted inflationary tax cuts around like confetti, she's completely unfit for the job on every single level, she's basically a robot that has learned a load of different Tory phrases that the old white Southern men who principally make up Tory party members will find comforting, so for those reasons I think she will win.

Which is great news for Labour.

PORK MARKETS!

View attachment 170203

Maybe it's not 'racism' but the fact they know his missus' non-dom tax affairs will come up and bite his ass if he wins?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

This one is almost mesmerising. (PORK MARKETS is in here, but the rest of it is magnificent too.)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Maybe it's not 'racism' but the fact they know his missus' non-dom tax affairs will come up and bite his ass if he wins?

Oh for sure Sunak is a disaster too, all the entitlement of Johnson with none of the charisma, plus a blatant tax dodger whilst also being one of the UK's richest men.

At every stage of the process the Tory MPs got rid of the least horrible candidates, to leave the two most horrible ones as the final choices. If Labour were writing the script for it they couldn't have done a better job.

 

[dunover]

Oh for sure Sunak is a disaster too, all the entitlement of Johnson with none of the charisma, plus a blatant tax dodger whilst also being one of the UK's richest men.

At every stage of the process the Tory MPs got rid of the least horrible candidates, to leave the two most horrible ones as the final choices. If Labour were writing the script for it they couldn't have done a better job.

To be fair, in this village we do allow the pensioners to goose-step with a mere 45 degree angle on their legs, in consideration of their ageing limbs, as opposed to the full 90 degrees for the under-50's.

 

[mack341]

Has Rishi even done a big tory conference speech, passed me by if he has. I think the members might choose him to prove they're not racist, plus Truss comes across as though she's not plugged in, winging it far too much.

Rishi's explanation re his wife's tax situation is not acceptable and she's received lockdown handouts for some of her failing businesses [something like that] not good optics. So either way we, or conservatives, are *****d.

Bring back Boris I say, for all his faults he's better than these two put together.

 

[ads2003uk]

It's shocking..
We now have a choice of someone who has been doing his "Campiaign" and someone who is incapable of using a telephone!

 

[slot_zombie]

Why tf would someone with 600 million quid in the bank want to go through all that trouble, to get a bloody difficult job, that pays a fraction of his vast income and fortune. Surely he doesn't actually believe his own bullshit - that he is for the good of the country?

If I were in his situation, it would be feet up for the rest of my life somewhere quiet.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Why tf would someone with 600 million quid in the bank want to go through all that trouble, to get a bloody difficult job, that pays a fraction of his vast income and fortune. Surely he doesn't actually believe his own bullshit - that he is for the good of the country?

If I were in his situation, it would be feet up for the rest of my life somewhere quiet.

Because it will put him in a position where he has control over the laws of the land, and can pass laws for the benefit of himself, his family, and his friends. (And perhaps more importantly, make sure that laws he doesn't like don't get passed. What chance of a wealth tax gaining any traction whilst Dishy Rishi is PM, do you think?......)

Just as the Tories and their mates made out like bandits over Covid (crony PPE contracts, dodgy business loans etc), imagine what being Prime Minister and heading up a government will open up to him.

It's all about consolidating power and wealth in the hands of the rich, the Tories are a party of the rich, they govern for their benefit, Sunak is one of the rich, and this will open up a huge tranche of opportunities to him.

Remember, capitalism isn't about having loads of money and then stopping, it's about keeping going until you've got all the money.

 

[pinnit2014]

Do you have a sliding scale of wealth being acceptable? Reason being Sir Kier (Sir and Tory should surely go together?) is hardly short of a few bob and doesn't strike me as a docker from Unison etc.

Often find it amusing when folk say owt about capitalism whilst, you know, continuing to enjoy the benefits of it

And to get in there - I have never put an X beside a Tory candidate, nor SNP, in my voting record - pretty much a moderate. It's pretty easy to be outward looking as a Labour voter as it enables you to bypass the 'why are we not resonating with the electorate' questions that they have still yet to answer (easier to pick a bogeyman)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Do you have a sliding scale of wealth being acceptable? Reason being Sir Kier (Sir and Tory should surely go together?) is hardly short of a few bob and doesn't strike me as a docker from Unison etc.

Often find it amusing when folk say owt about capitalism whilst, you know, continuing to enjoy the benefits of it

And to get in there - I have never put an X beside a Tory candidate, nor SNP, in my voting record - pretty much a moderate. It's pretty easy to be outward looking as a Labour voter as it enables you to bypass the 'why are we not resonating with the electorate' questions that they have still yet to answer (easier to pick a bogeyman)

This is the thing, I'm not 'anti-capitalism' as a default response to everything, as an economic system it can work pretty well, but it absolutely needs checks, balances, and regulation to reign in its worst excesses. Would I want to live in a Communist state? Absolutely not. Would I want to live in a Socialist state? In its purest sense, no. I think there's a balance that we can find where elements of both Capitalism and Socialism can co-exist, so that private enterprise and business can prosper, but we also don't find ourselves in a world where people working full time jobs are so poor they need to resort to food banks to eat.

What we're witnessing at the moment is what late-stage neoliberal capitalism looks like, the massive consolidation of wealth, assets and power in the hands of the few, at the expense of the many, and it is a consolidation that is accelerating.

Remember, we're talking about extreme wealth here, individuals who have amassed hundreds of millions, or even billions, tens of billions of pounds in wealth and assets, and they pay little to no tax on any of it, whilst your average working person is enduring the highest personal tax rates for seventy years.

I'm not advocating for taking it all off them, or even most of it, or even 10% of it, wealth taxes in the region of 3-4% per year on the very richest in the UK, would net tens upon tens of billions of tax revenue annually, and those people could still make more money in a day without getting out of bed, than most average people would make working for ten years or more.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I thought truss was alright a while back when she was globe trotting and signing trade deals, but greater time under the spotlight shows she's not very convincing or charismatic.

This is the trade deal Truss signed with Australia, have a guess how UK farmers feel about it.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

He's going to be furious when he finds out who's been in charge for the last twelve years.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

So the two candidates are now engaged in what can only really be described as a 'cunt-off'.

We're now into what can only really be described as National Front territory. (Nice to see Princess Di still making copy three million years after her death.)

Meanwhile Rwanda, after taking £120m from the UK government, has said it can only take 200 refugees, which works out to £600K per refugee. Now I'm no mega-maths-genius, but for that money we could have given them the best possible education and training in the world, and had them working productively in our society as doctors and scientists and researchers and nurses and surgeons and all that kind of good shit.

Instead, we spent £600K per refugee to not send them to Rwanda.

Still, it's nice to see Boris 'World's Biggest Fucking Liar' Johnson enjoying his tax-payer's funded jolly doing literally no work and instead playing around in Top Gun style jet stunts and chucking pretend grenades around.

 

[electronictonic]

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Nadine earning herself a 'for fuck's sake' from a Conservative MP.

Also Liz Truss.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The strange thing about Liz Truss is she was actually correct about all this stuff back in 2016, so her 'journey' on the subject has gone from being right, to being wrong. And yet it is being wrong about it that now makes her so appealing to the Tory grassroots.

The world is odd sometimes.

(The answer of course is that Liz Truss wrote this.)

 

[mack341]

She comes from a very liberal family apparently, even further left to corbyn's labour was the quote I read!

I think she was herself a member of the liberal democrats:



Then again the mid 90s libdems would probably be defined as extreme rightwing now such is the general shift leftwards and embrace of the PC culture/thought police.

And typical of the conservative parliamentary party to give the grass roots members a choice between a superficial johnny-come-lately [who's already had top job no2 and fucked up] or a former libdem.

 

[slot_zombie]

So the two candidates are now engaged in what can only really be described as a 'cunt-off'.

View attachment 170321

We're now into what can only really be described as National Front territory. (Nice to see Princess Di still making copy three million years after her death.)

View attachment 170322

Meanwhile Rwanda, after taking £120m from the UK government, has said it can only take 200 refugees, which works out to £600K per refugee. Now I'm no mega-maths-genius, but for that money we could have given them the best possible education and training in the world, and had them working productively in our society as doctors and scientists and researchers and nurses and surgeons and all that kind of good shit.

Instead, we spent £600K per refugee to not send them to Rwanda.

Still, it's nice to see Boris 'World's Biggest Fucking Liar' Johnson enjoying his tax-payer's funded jolly doing literally no work and instead playing around in Top Gun style jet stunts and chucking pretend grenades around.

View attachment 170323

I can 't believe I'm reading this objectionable tosh. So wanting to prevent 10s of thousands of illegal economic migrants breaking in from safe countries is being a cunt now is it? Well I guess I'm a cunt then.

How many of these gentlemen are you putting up in your own home? Thought so.

Seriously, stick to the (great) slot wittering on YouTube mate.

 

[pinnit2014]

Check out the Brexit thread - you'll see more platitudes being thrown around as Boris and his grenades

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I can 't believe I'm reading this objectionable tosh. So wanting to prevent 10s of thousands of illegal economic migrants breaking in from safe countries is being a cunt now is it? Well I guess I'm a cunt then.

How many of these gentlemen are you putting up in your own home? Thought so.

Seriously, stick to the (great) slot wittering on YouTube mate.

I was very specific to describe the candidates as being involved in a 'cunt-off', because I think when you're making a cornerstone of your campaign to be Prime Minister how horrible you're planning to be to people fleeing persecution and war, that's a bit cunty. (And Sunak's proposal is actually illegal under international law.)

Refugees are absolutely not the same thing as illegal economic migrants, and conflating the two is entirely disingenuous. (Although we could actually do with some economic migrants at the moment given the crippling staff shortages we're seeing in many sectors and the fact we have food rotting in our fields because there's no one to pick it.)

Given the headwinds the UK is facing at the moment in terms of economic crisis, an NHS on the brink, surging inflation, suppressed wages, rising interest rates, and an impending energy price crisis this winter, at a time when the UK has more food banks than at any point in its history - the Tories are getting tied up in knots over who can be the biggest arsehole to desperate refugees and, lord have mercy, whether or not a woman can have a penis. It's fucking tragic.

 

[slot_zombie]

They're not fleeing persecution from safe country France though, are they. Therefore they are economic migrants coming to soft touch Britain.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

They're not fleeing persecution from safe country France though, are they. Therefore they are economic migrants coming to soft touch Britain.

This was brought up in the Brexit thread earlier in the month.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

These were things Liz Truss said in the last leadership debate. The Tories have been in power for twelve straight years, they also gave us a deeply damaging Hard Brexit which has tanked UK GDP by 4% (tens of billions pounds of lost revenues every year).

So yeah, LOOK OVER THERE, MIGRANTS, I'LL SEND THEM TO RWANDA!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Crikey, this is actually like a party political broadcast for the Labour Party.

This stuff would probably land better if the Tories hadn't been in uninterrupted power since 2010.

It's like someone who's walked into your house and done a massive great shit on your kitchen table offering to lend you a bucket.

 

[dunover]

<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src=""></iframe>


The power of Truss. Poor Kate McCann, now you know how we feel listening to @ChopleyIOM

(Off camera Truss gives her a sly kick in the head for breaking her stride.)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src=""></iframe>


The power of Truss. Poor Kate McCann, now you know how we feel listening to @ChopleyIOM

In fairness she probably did them a favour, given how comprehensively they were describing the utter shitness of twelve years of Tory government.

 

[mcgameboy]

I was very specific to describe the candidates as being involved in a 'cunt-off', because I think when you're making a cornerstone of your campaign to be Prime Minister how horrible you're planning to be to people fleeing persecution and war, that's a bit cunty. (And Sunak's proposal is actually illegal under international law.)

Refugees are absolutely not the same thing as illegal economic migrants, and conflating the two is entirely disingenuous. (Although we could actually do with some economic migrants at the moment given the crippling staff shortages we're seeing in many sectors and the fact we have food rotting in our fields because there's no one to pick it.)

Given the headwinds the UK is facing at the moment in terms of economic crisis, an NHS on the brink, surging inflation, suppressed wages, rising interest rates, and an impending energy price crisis this winter, at a time when the UK has more food banks than at any point in its history - the Tories are getting tied up in knots over who can be the biggest arsehole to desperate refugees and, lord have mercy, whether or not a woman can have a penis. It's fucking tragic.

That's no way to talk about the most important policy that Labour will have on their next GE manifesto.....

And you call yourself a Labour supporter? Pfftttt......

 

[pinnit2014]

That's no way to talk about the most important policy that Labour will have on their next GE manifesto.....

And you call yourself a Labour supporter? Pfftttt......

I said the SNP's only policies were legislation and regulation and i see Labour today came out with their solution - more regulation. Pretty much sums them up - bereft of ideas, lets regulate some more.

If only some people would critique their own party with as much effort as they do the opposing one, we might even reach a talking point

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I said the SNP's only policies were legislation and regulation and i see Labour today came out with their solution - more regulation. Pretty much sums them up - bereft of ideas, lets regulate some more.

If only some people would critique their own party with as much effort as they do the opposing one, we might even reach a talking point

You can achieve a lot with tight regulation, (I mean, we all agree that some regulation is required, right?), although in the case of energy, water, rail and mail I'd be much happier if Starmer had stuck to his original pledge to renationalise, as advocated and put in the Labour manifesto by ? CORBYN THE SUPREME LEADER ?(At the moment he's only sticking to rail, which is largely renationalised now anyway.)

I'm not wildly impressed with Starmer (as I've said here many times before, contrary to your assertion that I never critique Labour), he's ditched a lot of what I'd see as core Labour policies, and his lack of public support for striking workers is shocking.

I get that they're focus grouping the shit out of this stuff and are being very careful about how things will play out, and they need to be careful of a rabid right wing press, but polls are consistently showing that the public are (for example), generally in favour of renationalisation and Labour are being far too timid on the issue.

As for Starmer fumbling the answer to can a woman have a penis, I absolutely couldn't give less of a shit, it's a total non-issue for me, and the polling on this shows most of the public don't really care either. Grant Shapps gave the best answer to this out of all the Tory leadership candidates.

 

[mack341]

You can achieve a lot with tight regulation, (I mean, we all agree that some regulation is required, right?), although in the case of energy, rail and mail I'd be much happier if Starmer had stuck to his original pledge to renationalise, as advocated and put in the Labour manifesto by ? CORBYN THE SUPREME LEADER ?(At the moment he's only sticking to rail, which is largely renationalised now anyway.)

I'm not wildly impressed with Starmer (as I've said here many times before, contrary to your assertion that I never critique Labour), he's ditched a lot of what I'd see as core Labour policies, and his lack of public support for striking workers is shocking.

I get that they're focus grouping the shit out of this stuff and are being very careful about how things will play out, and they need to be careful of a rabid right wing press, but polls are consistently showing that the public are (for example), generally in favour of renationalisation and Labour are being far too timid on the issue.

As for Starmer fumbling the answer to can a woman have a penis, I absolutely couldn't give less of a shit, it's a total non-issue for me, and the polling on this shows most of the public don't really care either. Grant Shapps gave the best answer to this out of all the Tory leadership candidates.

View attachment 170474

If Stamer finds that too difficult to answer honestly, whether a woman can have a knob, it doesn't bode well for his basic level of common sense.

There was a telegraph headline yesterday that he's removed 10 socialist promises from his manifesto or policy plan, paywalled otherwise I'd have read it.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

If Stamer finds that too difficult to answer honestly, whether a woman can have a knob, it doesn't bode well for his basic level of common sense.

There was a telegraph headline yesterday that he's removed 10 socialist promises from his manifesto or policy plan, paywalled otherwise I'd have read it.

I didn't think Starmer's answer was even that bad in terms of the content, but he delivered it rather clumsily. The 'trans debate' is relatively new in terms of being publicly discussed, and it raises issues that will need to be resolved, which in time, they will be. (Trans women in sports, toilet facilities, changing rooms etc.) Lest we forget that Alan Turing, who played an instrumental part in Britain being on the winning side in the Second World War, was essentially hounded to his death by the British state for the 'crime' of being gay, and that wasn't even that long ago. So for my money it'd be nice if we didn't subject trans people to the same sort of prejudice and demeaning questions about their anatomies.

None of this stuff is beyond our ability to sort out, and taken against the massive issues that are facing the UK at the moment, is it honestly near the top of the list? (Again, the polling on this says that for the vast majority of people, it really isn't.)

We've now got very good evidence that Boris Johnson was having private meetings with actual ex-KGB agents after losing his security detail and he may or may not have discussed UK government matters with them (and he definitely put Lebedev into the House of Lords), but yeah, Starmer making a bit of a fumble of the question 'can a woman have a penis' is what makes him unsuitable material to be Prime Minister.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The whole 'trans issue' is mere trivia compared to the corruption and lies of the Tories which are in absolute plain view.

Remember that both Truss and Sunak propped this guy up time and time again.

Lest we forget that Johnson is still PM, just having a jolly at the tax payer's expense and not even pretending to actually do any work any more.

Also remember that Johnson is a known and proven serial liar, so when he says he didn't discuss UK government business with an actual ex-KGB agent, he's almost certainly lying.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

The whole 'trans issue' is mere trivia compared to the corruption and lies of the Tories which are in absolute plain view.

Remember that both Truss and Sunak propped this guy up time and time again.

Lest we forget that Johnson is still PM, just having a jolly at the tax payer's expense and not even pretending to actually do any work any more.

Also remember that Johnson is a known and proven serial liar, so when he says he didn't discuss UK government business with an actual ex-KGB agent, he's almost certainly lying.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

View attachment 170481

Lebedev owns the evening standard, the independent newspaper and the 'london live' tv channel, so if he's that dodgy the intelligence services and uk govt have been asleep somewhat. [putting aside the lordship bojo gave him]

Homosexuality was illegal during Turing's troubles, being trans isn't today so the comparison doesn't really match.

The state should stop confusing children further than normal, putting it into their heads they may be a different 'gender'.

Adults can do what they want regarding trans ops and medication, privately funded of course, we have other things to spend NHS money on like real physical illnesses that need expensive treatment and drugs.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Lebedev owns the evening standard, the independent newspaper and the 'london live' tv channel, so if he's that dodgy the intelligence services and uk govt have been asleep somewhat. [putting aside the lordship bojo gave him]

Homosexuality was illegal during Turing's troubles, being trans isn't today so the comparison doesn't really match.

The state should stop confusing children further than normal, putting it into their heads they may be a different 'gender'.

Adults can do what they want regarding trans ops and medication, privately funded of course, we have other things to spend NHS money on like real physical illnesses that need expensive treatment and drugs.

Remember there are two Lebedevs - there's Lebedev Snr, the ex-KGB agent who Johnson met at a party and 'doesn't remember' if he discussed government business with or not, then there's Lebedev Jnr who British Intelligence Services did indeed raise red flags over and recommended he not be given a peerage but Johnson went and did it anyway.

As for the trans situation, the language being used around trans people is painfully close to that which was used about gay blokes in the 1980s, when AIDS was kicking off and we even had Police Chief Constables like James Anderton coming out with vile homophobic comments stating gay men were 'swirling in a human cesspit of their own making' and that 'sodomy in males ought to be against the law' - so yeah, even though it wasn't illegal to be gay at that time, you can guess whose side some in the law were on.

Finally, if you think the (very small!) number of trans people getting ops and medication on the NHS are the problem, you probably need to take a look at this. I don't think 19 patients waiting on trolleys because A&E is full are being bed blocked by trans people. What's killing the NHS is twelve years of Tory neglect, not trans people. Remember who the villains are here, it isn't the people struggling terribly with gender identity and trying to find a way forward with their lives.

 

[slot_zombie]

???

Just the first 30 seconds..

 

[mack341]

Remember there are two Lebedevs - there's Lebedev Snr, the ex-KGB agent who Johnson met at a party and 'doesn't remember' if he discussed government business with or not, then there's Lebedev Jnr who British Intelligence Services did indeed raise red flags over and recommended he not be given a peerage but Johnson went and did it anyway.

As for the trans situation, the language being used around trans people is painfully close to that which was used about gay blokes in the 1980s, when AIDS was kicking off and we even had Police Chief Constables like James Anderton coming out with vile homophobic comments stating gay men were 'swirling in a human cesspit of their own making' and that 'sodomy in males ought to be against the law' - so yeah, even though it wasn't illegal to be gay at that time, you can guess whose side some in the law were on.

Finally, if you think the (very small!) number of trans people getting ops and medication on the NHS are the problem, you probably need to take a look at this. I don't think 19 patients waiting on trolleys because A&E is full are being bed blocked by trans people. What's killing the NHS is twelve years of Tory neglect, not trans people. Remember who the villains are here, it isn't the people struggling terribly with gender identity and trying to find a way forward with their lives.

We're talking about kids in the main, I didn't say the A&E queues were due to trans ops, but the NHS has limited resources not infinite.

All this trans gender stuff is far left marxist nonsense, waved on by adult politicians who should know better and sign off the funding and assign priorities in health and education etc... Kids are regretting later on having the ops which can't be reversed, they didn't have the adult minds capable of making such life changing decisions.

This support for all things 'transgender' is the kind of thing that puts normal people off Labour, we know they're all for it and don't give a toss about any negative consequences, undermining normality and traditional society. [The tories are half supporting it or passive about it, so not much better in my book]

 

[pinnit2014]

We're talking about kids in the main, I didn't say the A&E queues were due to trans ops, but the NHS has limited resources not infinite.

All this trans gender stuff is far left marxist nonsense, waved on by adult politicians who should know better and sign off the funding and assign priorities in health and education etc... Kids are regretting later on having the ops which can't be reversed, they didn't have the adult minds capable of making such life changing decisions.

This support for all things 'transgender' is the kind of thing that puts normal people off Labour, we know they're all for it and don't give a toss about any negative consequences, undermining normality and traditional society. [The tories are half supporting it or passive about it, so not much better in my book]

I've pretty much reached the end of my tether with Labour - i have voted for them, whilst not agreeing with their stance on a lot of things, over the years. One of the most common feelings i have though, certainly precipitating over the years, is that i've grown more disconnected with them and unable to relate to a lot of what they have to say/care about. Still wouldn't cast an X beside the Tories to be fair, but it's a lot more a possibility now than say 10 or so years ago.

 

[mack341]

I've pretty much reached the end of my tether with Labour - i have voted for them, whilst not agreeing with their stance on a lot of things, over the years. One of the most common feelings i have though, certainly precipitating over the years, is that i've grown more disconnected with them and unable to relate to a lot of what they have to say/care about. Still wouldn't cast an X beside the Tories to be fair, but it's a lot more a possibility now than say 10 or so years ago.

I think we need some new parties, based more around common sense and priorities. The tories are not exactly rolling back some of this madness which has got into the institutions and public services.

I see Starmer has sacked someone for doing a tv interview on a picket line, so labour are now going to piss off their union members, whether you agree with the rail strikes or not, it seems the rail workers haven't got a political recourse, a party in the HOC on their side.

Yet asked to define a biological woman and starmer quibbles, trying to gain brownie points or not be cancelled. He's more submissive to the trans lobby than the union one paying for his conferences and party structure.