Petition calling for another General Election

Jamie1952 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm **Posts:** 6982

Snowy wrote:

Poolie27 wrote:

Sussex UK wrote:

Ozzy Saltburn wrote:

Poolie27 wrote:

Another personal comment. Too many use these pathetic jokes these days on all sides of politics. The on line abuse is awful these days . Jonathan Brash can't post without being called Jonathan Trash , what is wrong with peop!e these days.

Well maybe people make these "pathetic jokes" because they are angry and frustrated regarding the conduct of politicians. In my case I am angry about the following aspects of Starmers performance.
1. Two tier justice system where one type of people get preferential treatment.
2. The blatant cover up of what went on at Southport: fecking outrageous.
3. The people who rioted because of what everyone except the Merseyside police and Starmer knew had happened were called "far right" though of course no one was allowed to specaulate about the motives of the Southport perpetrator because it might prejudice his chance of justice. No problem speculating about the motives of the rioters of course because Starmer tried them all and found them all guilty in a matter of seconds.
4. Starmers much publicized plan to stop the boats by "smashing the gangs". It was so obviously the worst kind of lie and I am very angry that Starmer thinks people are so stupid they would believe this bull excrement. Of course the numbers crossing the channel since Starmer got in are rising all the time.
5. Starmer said Labour would not house the migrants in Hotels but they are doing precisely that.
6. Zero emissions plan leading to thecost of everything rising.

So I dont mind what I call Starmer. It makes no difference to him or anything he does but it helps just a tiny bit to assauge my furious anger.

Even the most hard left 'proud'Labour voters must be shaking their heads at their failings..

And you have every right to say these things but too many people end up abusing others who they disagree with. In another point some of the abuse of Brash is made by Reform voters and who have also been to prison for serious offences. They're not peop!e to associate with.

Ah Brash, didn’t he jumps ship as Councillor when The Akers Belchers took over….and reappeared when they left..?
Wonder why?

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

Snowy wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

Seems to be a growing trend within the Labour Party....people being forced out who don't toe the line.......so Kier is getting inspiration from the Belchers........now there's a thing. Hilarious what?????

Poolie27 · **Joined:** Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:08 pm **Posts:** 588

Sussex UK wrote:

Poolie27 wrote:

Sussex UK wrote:

Ozzy Saltburn wrote:

Poolie27 wrote:

Another personal comment. Too many use these pathetic jokes these days on all sides of politics. The on line abuse is awful these days . Jonathan Brash can't post without being called Jonathan Trash , what is wrong with peop!e these days.

Well maybe people make these "pathetic jokes" because they are angry and frustrated regarding the conduct of politicians. In my case I am angry about the following aspects of Starmers performance.
1. Two tier justice system where one type of people get preferential treatment.
2. The blatant cover up of what went on at Southport: fecking outrageous.
3. The people who rioted because of what everyone except the Merseyside police and Starmer knew had happened were called "far right" though of course no one was allowed to specaulate about the motives of the Southport perpetrator because it might prejudice his chance of justice. No problem speculating about the motives of the rioters of course because Starmer tried them all and found them all guilty in a matter of seconds.
4. Starmers much publicized plan to stop the boats by "smashing the gangs". It was so obviously the worst kind of lie and I am very angry that Starmer thinks people are so stupid they would believe this bull excrement. Of course the numbers crossing the channel since Starmer got in are rising all the time.
5. Starmer said Labour would not house the migrants in Hotels but they are doing precisely that.
6. Zero emissions plan leading to thecost of everything rising.

So I dont mind what I call Starmer. It makes no difference to him or anything he does but it helps just a tiny bit to assauge my furious anger.

Even the most hard left 'proud'Labour voters must be shaking their heads at their failings..

And you have every right to say these things but too many people end up abusing others who they disagree with. In another point some of the abuse of Brash is made by Reform voters and who have also been to prison for serious offences. They're not peop!e to associate with.

Farage was pelted with missiles by far left thugs and a lot of people found it very funny..Did we hear you condemning it?

I think it was a disgrace. No
Politician should have to endure such pathetic acts from people who are just tbugs.

Jamie1952 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm **Posts:** 6982

Snowy wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

He didn’t jump ship he just didn’t stand for a Councillor again.

Jamie1952 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm **Posts:** 6982

derwent wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

Seems to be a growing trend within the Labour Party....people being forced out who don't toe the line.......so Kier is getting inspiration from the Belchers........now there's a thing. Hilarious what?????

Exactly Derwent, I am no fan of Starmer, currently anyone who doesn’t toe the line gets the whip removed, he has surrounded himself with centralist politicians.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

Jamie1952 wrote:

derwent wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

Seems to be a growing trend within the Labour Party....people being forced out who don't toe the line.......so Kier is getting inspiration from the Belchers........now there's a thing. Hilarious what?????

Exactly Derwent, I am no fan of Starmer, currently anyone who doesn’t toe the line gets the whip removed, he has surrounded himself with centralist politicians.

He also appointed a convicted criminal to his cabinet.

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

derwent wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

derwent wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Jamie1952 wrote:

Anyone who didn’t agree with the Belchers was forced out, Brash never jumped ship.

I know a lot of Labour Councillors who didn’t jump ship, so that’s just nonsense…again…..if he didn’t jump ship where did he go to

Seems to be a growing trend within the Labour Party....people being forced out who don't toe the line.......so Kier is getting inspiration from the Belchers........now there's a thing. Hilarious what?????

Exactly Derwent, I am no fan of Starmer, currently anyone who doesn’t toe the line gets the whip removed, he has surrounded himself with centralist politicians.

He also appointed a convicted criminal to his cabinet.

if thats the resigned transport secretary then she didn,t murder or scammed anybody. at the end of the day they are no different to us who in our lives have done wrong and either got caught or got away with something. if god botherers are not sqieeky clean how fo people expect our MP,s to be.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Fri Nov 29, 2024 11:39 am

Aye there was definitely no law breakers or scandals of any kind within the last 14 years of tory rule. :laugh:

Sussex UK · **Joined:** Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm **Posts:** 3439

When are people going to move on from the Tory party.

.. It's these tits in power now that folk are up in arms about...Well done to Aviva , hopefully she's not foolish enough to ask for a quote in the future

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

Sussex UK wrote:

When are people going to move on from the Tory party.

.. It's these tits in power now that folk are up in arms about...Well done to Aviva , hopefully she's not foolish enough to ask for a quote in the future

fine as most are not happy either with the current lot. however lets not forget us and others were equally unhappy with the last 5 years of tory rule and thought that change meant a change for the better which at the moment just aint happening.

PTID · **Joined:** Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm **Posts:** 3853

Think we all agree that we don't want convicted criminals or blatant liars governing us. Louise Haigh pleaded guilty to fraud so she us definitely a convicted criminal. She'll be forgiven a d back within a year anyway.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

MutleyRules wrote:

Aye there was definitely no law breakers or scandals of any kind within the last 14 years of tory rule. :laugh:

But there were and they were called out over it. However this lot slammed them for it and quite rightly so but they promised all that would change when they took over. There is nothing we can do about what happened under the Tories. The country got rid of them and entrusted Labour to the task of running the country. What the electorate didn't anticipate was the Labour policies and decisions that we have witnessed. We are jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
As I have said quite often when you get rid of a politician all you do is replace that politician with another politician.
The replacements are falling woefully short of the mark and we are paying the price for that.
Even one of the biggest unions are actually taking them to court. We now need change more and more and the first priority is to get them to get their collective arses into gear and lead us in the right direction or get out if the task is too much for them. If what has happened so far is indicative of what is to come then God help us.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

accrington fan wrote:

Sussex UK wrote:

When are people going to move on from the Tory party.

.. It's these tits in power now that folk are up in arms about...Well done to Aviva , hopefully she's not foolish enough to ask for a quote in the future

fine as most are not happy either with the current lot. however lets not forget us and others were equally unhappy with the last 5 years of tory rule and thought that change meant a change for the better which at the moment just aint happening.

For which the the Tory’s rightfully got constantly slagged off…..that’s why they lost the election
…..it’s Buggins turn now. Move on.

Ozzy Saltburn · **Joined:** Mon Nov 01, 2021 11:34 pm **Posts:** 3708

Tories were a terrible government and had some dishonest MPs no argument. BUT they didn't have people locked up for criticizing them. They never at any point were considering blasphemy laws to protect the Koran and they never deliberately covered up terrorist attacks. We can all accept governments dont suit all the people all the time but the current lot are not only incompetent, they are a danger to this country as I have said before and will continue to say.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

Ozzy Saltburn wrote:

Tories were a terrible government and had some dishonest MPs no argument. BUT they didn't have people locked up for criticizing them. They never at any point were considering blasphemy laws to protect the Koran and they never deliberately covered up terrorist attacks. We can all accept governments dont suit all the people all the time but the current lot are not only incompetent, they are a danger to this country as I have said before and will continue to say.

The media chatter is suggesting that Rachel Reeves is under investigation.

Sussex UK · **Joined:** Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm **Posts:** 3439

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... cv-editing

just need to find out if starmer really did work on a farm now ...What's next from this lot?

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

Sussex UK wrote:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1976742/nigel-farage-rachel-reeves-cv-editing

just need to find out if starmer really did work on a farm now ...What's next from this lot?

I saw an interview with locals at the farm in question and he was ‘picking up stones’.to clear the site…a bit like saying saying I was in the newspaper industry because I had a paper round.
Sounded like a 16 year old doing a bit of odd jobbing.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

derwent wrote:

Ozzy Saltburn wrote:

Tories were a terrible government and had some dishonest MPs no argument. BUT they didn't have people locked up for criticizing them. They never at any point were considering blasphemy laws to protect the Koran and they never deliberately covered up terrorist attacks. We can all accept governments dont suit all the people all the time but the current lot are not only incompetent, they are a danger to this country as I have said before and will continue to say.

The media chatter is suggesting that Rachel Reeves is under investigation.

Would that be ‘Rachel from accounts’….?

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

Sussex UK wrote:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1976742/nigel-farage-rachel-reeves-cv-editing

just need to find out if starmer really did work on a farm now ...What's next from this lot?

need to ask old macdonald that one. he,s like the bloke at work who no matter where you have been so has he.

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

Ozzy Saltburn wrote:

Tories were a terrible government and had some dishonest MPs no argument. BUT they didn't have people locked up for criticizing them. They never at any point were considering blasphemy laws to protect the Koran and they never deliberately covered up terrorist attacks. We can all accept governments dont suit all the people all the time but the current lot are not only incompetent, they are a danger to this country as I have said before and will continue to say.

its only a certain section who have been banged up to keep the lid on any future disturbanses who have one thing in common by being white brits who last time i looked were the vast majority of this country. there is a big difference in respecting the rights of all minorities than allowing them to run the show in every aspect of life.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

What happened to that bloke with the finger over the throat gesture down London?

Sussex UK · **Joined:** Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm **Posts:** 3439

Snowy wrote:

What happened to that bloke with the finger over the throat gesture down London?

Still on bail like the Manchester airport thugs.....Nothing moves fast in some cases in the UK nowadays.And the common denominator is ??The evidence looks pretty clear to me.

Jamie1952 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm **Posts:** 6982

Debate in Parliament on the 9th of January.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

Jamie1952 wrote:

Debate in Parliament on the 9th of January.

Pointless.

Leggie43 · **Joined:** Wed Apr 15, 2020 4:55 am **Posts:** 7286

Snowy wrote:

Sussex UK wrote:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1976742/nigel-farage-rachel-reeves-cv-editing

just need to find out if starmer really did work on a farm now ...What's next from this lot?

I saw an interview with locals at the farm in question and he was ‘picking up stones’.to clear the site…a bit like saying saying I was in the newspaper industry because I had a paper round.
Sounded like a 16 year old doing a bit of odd jobbing.

Did you see him with the punch bag. :laugh:

He could not break out of a wet paper bag. So it's clear he has never done anything manuel in his life.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

Leggie43 wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Sussex UK wrote:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1976742/nigel-farage-rachel-reeves-cv-editing

just need to find out if starmer really did work on a farm now ...What's next from this lot?

I saw an interview with locals at the farm in question and he was ‘picking up stones’.to clear the site…a bit like saying saying I was in the newspaper industry because I had a paper round.
Sounded like a 16 year old doing a bit of odd jobbing.

Did you see him with the punch bag. :laugh:

He could not break out of a wet paper bag. So it's clear he has never done anything manuel in his life.

I bet if you told him you had an uncle who used to shot be shot out of a cannon at the Circus, he’d tell you he was shot out of one too.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2024 11:13 am

But Boris though eh...eh.

PTID · **Joined:** Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm **Posts:** 3853

To be fair to Boris and Two Tier you'd happily shoot the pair of them out of a canon. Maybe we should change the constitution and make it the done thing for outgoing PMs.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

derwent wrote:

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

Does that mean their Presidents get a turbo prop instead of a turbo jet executive jet to reduce emissions….?

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2024 12:49 pm

derwent wrote:

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

I'm sure the tories did the same.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

MutleyRules wrote:

derwent wrote:

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

I'm sure the tories did the same.

Did they indeed, naughty beggars.

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

derwent wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

derwent wrote:

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

I'm sure the tories did the same.

Did they indeed, naughty beggars.

and really would things be much different if labour had not got back into power. the pensioners might have kept their fuel payment but others are bound to have lost out on another issue.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

accrington fan wrote:

derwent wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

derwent wrote:

I see two tier has just committed another TWO BILLION to the World bank to help poorer countries towards climate targets. He'll help anybody but his own.

I'm sure the tories did the same.

Did they indeed, naughty beggars.

and really would things be much different if labour had not got back into power. the pensioners might have kept their fuel payment but others are bound to have lost out on another issue.

We will never know for sure what another party would have done if that party had gained power on July 4th. What we do know for certain is what has happened under the present Government and are able to scrutinize that. We do know the WFA has been scrapped for millions of pensioners for example but it might be restored next year. We judge on what we see today and can only speculate on what might happen tomorrow or what would have happened under another party. If we are going to continuously quote the Tory record, which is there for all to see, then on the WFA they protected it for fourteen years and increased it over the last two years. That's what they did and is fact but what they would have continued to do is a person's guess.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2024 2:26 pm

Yeah it's a shame the likes of Paula Vennels and millions more who didn't need it had the Winter Fuel Payments taken away.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12320

MutleyRules wrote:

Yeah it's a shame the likes of Paula Vennels and millions more who didn't need it had the Winter Fuel Payments taken away.

No the shame lies with the blanket decision to remove it the way it was done, especially when an impact study done by the Labour party when in opposition showed up to 4000 people would probably die.
What people are upset about is that people whilst in opposition were totally against removing it, and then ten minutes after gaining power removed it for everybody except those on pension credits. It could have been handled better and criticism has come from every quarter with the Unite union actually taking the Government to court over it.
I don't want it restoring for wealthy pensioners but a fairer and better cut off point should at least have been discussed or considered prior to it's removal. One death is one too many. You have to remember the elderly feel the cold more and have their heating on longer than those who are out all day.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

I’ll be honest, I don’t need it, but I know plenty who depend on it and in reality it could have been sorted simply by using the tax system to exclude those over a certain income.
They just couldn’t be arsed.
I do wonder why, despite their promises, they ain’t collared the mega rich yet.?
If Starmer and Co are socialists, they must have changed the definition in the dictionary.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2024 3:33 pm

derwent wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

Yeah it's a shame the likes of Paula Vennels and millions more who didn't need it had the Winter Fuel Payments taken away.

No the shame lies with the blanket decision to remove it the way it was done, especially when an impact study done by the Labour party when in opposition showed up to 4000 people would probably die.
What people are upset about is that people whilst in opposition were totally against removing it, and then ten minutes after gaining power removed it for everybody except those on pension credits. It could have been handled better and criticism has come from every quarter with the Unite union actually taking the Government to court over it.
I don't want it restoring for wealthy pensioners but a fairer and better cut off point should at least have been discussed or considered prior to it's removal. One death is one too many. You have to remember the elderly feel the cold more and have their heating on longer than those who are out all day.

I totally agree.

PTID · **Joined:** Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm **Posts:** 3853

Probably because in most people's perspectives Starmer is or aspires to be the Mega Rich. Why shit in your own nest?

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 36241

MutleyRules wrote:

derwent wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

Yeah it's a shame the likes of Paula Vennels and millions more who didn't need it had the Winter Fuel Payments taken away.

No the shame lies with the blanket decision to remove it the way it was done, especially when an impact study done by the Labour party when in opposition showed up to 4000 people would probably die.
What people are upset about is that people whilst in opposition were totally against removing it, and then ten minutes after gaining power removed it for everybody except those on pension credits. It could have been handled better and criticism has come from every quarter with the Unite union actually taking the Government to court over it.
I don't want it restoring for wealthy pensioners but a fairer and better cut off point should at least have been discussed or considered prior to it's removal. One death is one too many. You have to remember the elderly feel the cold more and have their heating on longer than those who are out all day.

I totally agree.

The deaths are bad enough, but don’t forget the actual people experiencing a cold winter who obviously don’t die but are still living in discomfort to put it mildly.

PTID · **Joined:** Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm **Posts:** 3853

And putting added strain on the NHS.

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 18786

PTID wrote:

And putting added strain on the NHS.

bloody sick of hearing that phrase. nobody really gets ill on purpose and more people read that there will be some frightened to use something they have paid for. if the organisation cannot cope then lets scrap it for something that will and put it out of its misery.

Petition calling for another General Election

Gadgies online