FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Boris had an...
Boris had an...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute mare at PMQ's... Starmer is his absolute nightmare." Totally agree! Starmer actually knows what he istalking about, understands the facts & won’t accept bullshit. Still Boris won’t explain the additional 10,000 deaths in Care Homes in April. Even if it wasn’t Covid, it needs explaining  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute mare at PMQ's... Starmer is his absolute nightmare. Totally agree! Starmer actually knows what he istalking about, understands the facts & won’t accept bullshit. Still Boris won’t explain the additional 10,000 deaths in Care Homes in April. Even if it wasn’t Covid, it needs explaining "I love the showing him his own graphs and asking why they had disappeared..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute mare at PMQ's... Starmer is his absolute nightmare." It is like a school teacher questioning why a pupil hasnt done his homework properly, Boris is getting destroyed  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute mare at PMQ's... Starmer is his absolute nightmare. Totally agree! Starmer actually knows what he istalking about, understands the facts & won’t accept bullshit. Still Boris won’t explain the additional 10,000 deaths in Care Homes in April. Even if it wasn’t Covid, it needs explaining
I love the showing him his own graphs and asking why they had disappeared....."Boris is used to Eton and University debating where you have a lot of rowdy mates supporting and agging you on. Parliament has traditionally reinforced this model, allowing people to bluster their way through. Unfortunately for BJ, having an empty house just shows him up as being an untalented, uncaring, unable buffoon. Sadly he is our PM...  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is" Boris was exposed as a fraud years ago. I watched the last few PMQs. I didn't think Boris did that badly. Just seemed his usual blustery self. Don't get me wrong, I'm still sure he would legalise shooting poor people if he thought he could get away with it. (He almost could get away with it). But I don't think he did as badly as people are making out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is Boris was exposed as a fraud years ago. I watched the last few PMQs. I didn't think Boris did that badly. Just seemed his usual blustery self. Don't get me wrong, I'm still sure he would legalise shooting poor people if he thought he could get away with it. (He almost could get away with it). But I don't think he did as badly as people are making out. " Oh, I knew he was a fraud ages ago. Sadly, people will swear blind he is amazing. As for not doing that bad, he was pulled apart. Starmer is forensic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is Boris was exposed as a fraud years ago. I watched the last few PMQs. I didn't think Boris did that badly. Just seemed his usual blustery self. Don't get me wrong, I'm still sure he would legalise shooting poor people if he thought he could get away with it. (He almost could get away with it). But I don't think he did as badly as people are making out. " I thought he was absolutely shocking today.He did the usual bluff by avoiding the question completely and starmer tore him apart. He is an absolute embarrassment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is" I think with Starmer across the box from him this is going to happen over and over and over again   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened" 5 years is a long time in politics | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics" It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is Boris was exposed as a fraud years ago. I watched the last few PMQs. I didn't think Boris did that badly. Just seemed his usual blustery self. Don't get me wrong, I'm still sure he would legalise shooting poor people if he thought he could get away with it. (He almost could get away with it). But I don't think he did as badly as people are making out. I thought he was absolutely shocking today.He did the usual bluff by avoiding the question completely and starmer tore him apart. He is an absolute embarrassment." Maybe I'm just used to his bullshit. But I didn't see him as being any worse than usual. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again." What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris exposed as the fraud he is Boris was exposed as a fraud years ago. I watched the last few PMQs. I didn't think Boris did that badly. Just seemed his usual blustery self. Don't get me wrong, I'm still sure he would legalise shooting poor people if he thought he could get away with it. (He almost could get away with it). But I don't think he did as badly as people are making out. I thought he was absolutely shocking today.He did the usual bluff by avoiding the question completely and starmer tore him apart. He is an absolute embarrassment. Maybe I'm just used to his bullshit. But I didn't see him as being any worse than usual." Maybe not but the usual peanut gallery on the political forum are unnaturally quiet | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk?" Like I say Labour should walk it. If they can't win after this then will they ever? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Please let me quote you on this.. Starmed fans beware.. All that glistens is not gold " It don't need to be gold Tom, just have a basic grasp of the facts.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk?" Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Like I say Labour should walk it. If they can't win after this then will they ever?" I don't agree with this sentiment. Look at how easily the British electorate are manipulated. ***Would you like to lose your freedom to travel, your rights as a worker, protection for the environment. Would you like to be poorer, your children to have less opportunities in life, and would you like the country to be poorer. Would you like food safety standards to be dropped. And would you like the rich and powerful to be even richer and have even more power. Fuck Yeah! - it was piss easy to get people to vote against their own interest. I don't see that changing anytime soon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. " It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them." Unless Starmer can illustrate that Labour could have done better it would appear then that he ( Starmer )has nothing to offer . A lawyer asking questions does nothing to help matter. At least Boris was elected with an 80 seat majority. It is best just to ignore those who choose to criticise him . They are simply a very vocal minority and part of the liberal metropolitan elite. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one including Starmer would want to be PM at the moment, and I am sure when Boris wanted the job even he may have decided against it if he had known what was coming. however would anyone have done it better; maybe; the restrictions came in too slowly and were too lax, the new ones are a mess and unenforceable and so stupid that 50% of the population will ignore them anyway. would labour have done better ? who knows and we never will !" Every single government in the whole of Europe has done this job better. Actually I can't imagine how it would be possible to have done it worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them. Unless Starmer can illustrate that Labour could have done better it would appear then that he ( Starmer )has nothing to offer . A lawyer asking questions does nothing to help matter. At least Boris was elected with an 80 seat majority. It is best just to ignore those who choose to criticise him . They are simply a very vocal minority and part of the liberal metropolitan elite. " Why does the ease of which the electorate are manipulated somehow translate into Boris being a good PM? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one including Starmer would want to be PM at the moment, and I am sure when Boris wanted the job even he may have decided against it if he had known what was coming. however would anyone have done it better; maybe; the restrictions came in too slowly and were too lax, the new ones are a mess and unenforceable and so stupid that 50% of the population will ignore them anyway. would labour have done better ? who knows and we never will ! Every single government in the whole of Europe has done this job better. Actually I can't imagine how it would be possible to have done it worse." It would be interesting to see how you could come to that conclusion and whether there is any evidence to support your opinion. As things stand we are the country with the fourth highest death rate per million of population . No one is in a position to compare deaths by country as there are too many anomalies in how different countries record deaths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them. Unless Starmer can illustrate that Labour could have done better it would appear then that he ( Starmer )has nothing to offer . A lawyer asking questions does nothing to help matter. At least Boris was elected with an 80 seat majority. It is best just to ignore those who choose to criticise him . They are simply a very vocal minority and part of the liberal metropolitan elite. Why does the ease of which the electorate are manipulated somehow translate into Boris being a good PM? " Unless I am missing something very obvious at each election every party drawa up a manifesto. Each party presents its policies to the electorate who then vote for a particular party based on both the policies presented to them and an assessment of the parties past performance. It is difficult to see how manipulation enters the equation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One word. Belgium. " Ah - I can add some words for you. In Belgium every death where COVID was suspected, especially in residential care settings, was counted as COVID. In the UK we are undercounting by more than enough to make up the difference. So there you have it - we are actually the worst in the world, per capita, for killing people. But only if our government can be persuaded to be open about the 10,000 or so deaths SKS was asking about today (which LSE study reckons is nearer 20,000). But I'm sure none of that will stick to Boris. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did Starmer ask the big question? . . . . . . . . How many kids you got Boris?" Well his father did say that welfred is his 14th grand child and another due shortly. So it's another one of his children or Boris was upto no good | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one including Starmer would want to be PM at the moment, and I am sure when Boris wanted the job even he may have decided against it if he had known what was coming. however would anyone have done it better; maybe; the restrictions came in too slowly and were too lax, the new ones are a mess and unenforceable and so stupid that 50% of the population will ignore them anyway. would labour have done better ? who knows and we never will ! Every single government in the whole of Europe has done this job better. Actually I can't imagine how it would be possible to have done it worse. It would be interesting to see how you could come to that conclusion and whether there is any evidence to support your opinion. As things stand we are the country with the fourth highest death rate per million of population . No one is in a position to compare deaths by country as there are too many anomalies in how different countries record deaths. " But the Tories were comparing deaths in other countries until we overtook other countries then they stopped. You can say all you like about what Labour would or would not have done. We live in the reality of now, not 'what about if...' Those now accusing Starmer of political point scoring are just facilitating the lies of Johnson and co. Johnson is in over his head, we have the worst PM at the worst possible time. Oh, and the clusterfuck that is Brexit for him to completely fuck up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one including Starmer would want to be PM at the moment, and I am sure when Boris wanted the job even he may have decided against it if he had known what was coming. however would anyone have done it better; maybe; the restrictions came in too slowly and were too lax, the new ones are a mess and unenforceable and so stupid that 50% of the population will ignore them anyway. would labour have done better ? who knows and we never will ! Every single government in the whole of Europe has done this job better. Actually I can't imagine how it would be possible to have done it worse. It would be interesting to see how you could come to that conclusion and whether there is any evidence to support your opinion. As things stand we are the country with the fourth highest death rate per million of population . No one is in a position to compare deaths by country as there are too many anomalies in how different countries record deaths. But the Tories were comparing deaths in other countries until we overtook other countries then they stopped. You can say all you like about what Labour would or would not have done. We live in the reality of now, not 'what about if...' Those now accusing Starmer of political point scoring are just facilitating the lies of Johnson and co. Johnson is in over his head, we have the worst PM at the worst possible time. Oh, and the clusterfuck that is Brexit for him to completely fuck up." Ahh so the real motive for this Boris bashing is Brexit. Westcliff-on- Sea is the Notting Hill of Southend. It's where the liberal elite discuss social inequality over a game of bridge and a glass of fine port. Be careful what we wish for is my motto. More time needed on this one methinks... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one including Starmer would want to be PM at the moment, and I am sure when Boris wanted the job even he may have decided against it if he had known what was coming. however would anyone have done it better; maybe; the restrictions came in too slowly and were too lax, the new ones are a mess and unenforceable and so stupid that 50% of the population will ignore them anyway. would labour have done better ? who knows and we never will ! Every single government in the whole of Europe has done this job better. Actually I can't imagine how it would be possible to have done it worse. It would be interesting to see how you could come to that conclusion and whether there is any evidence to support your opinion. As things stand we are the country with the fourth highest death rate per million of population . No one is in a position to compare deaths by country as there are too many anomalies in how different countries record deaths. But the Tories were comparing deaths in other countries until we overtook other countries then they stopped. You can say all you like about what Labour would or would not have done. We live in the reality of now, not 'what about if...' Those now accusing Starmer of political point scoring are just facilitating the lies of Johnson and co. Johnson is in over his head, we have the worst PM at the worst possible time. Oh, and the clusterfuck that is Brexit for him to completely fuck up. Ahh so the real motive for this Boris bashing is Brexit. Westcliff-on- Sea is the Notting Hill of Southend. It's where the liberal elite discuss social inequality over a game of bridge and a glass of fine port. Be careful what we wish for is my motto. More time needed on this one methinks... " Tom, I'm about as far from the liberal elite thsn you can possibly imagine, but you let Murdoch keep feeding you that nonsense. If it is 'liberal' and 'elitist' to not want poor people to get poorer, then I must be! No, Brexit is just part of the litany of shit that Boris will never hold his hands up to. I know how painful it must be to see Boris literally crumbling under scrutiny if, like so many you have fallen for the hype. Trouble is, people now just double down on being wrong, they are too invested. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I for one like poor Boris. " “poor” Boris 
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Oh that has tickled me, thanks Tom. I'll have to tell my mates that they have been hanging out with the liberal elite for years.... brilliant | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them. Unless Starmer can illustrate that Labour could have done better it would appear then that he ( Starmer )has nothing to offer . A lawyer asking questions does nothing to help matter. At least Boris was elected with an 80 seat majority. It is best just to ignore those who choose to criticise him . They are simply a very vocal minority and part of the liberal metropolitan elite. Why does the ease of which the electorate are manipulated somehow translate into Boris being a good PM? Unless I am missing something very obvious at each election every party drawa up a manifesto. Each party presents its policies to the electorate who then vote for a particular party based on both the policies presented to them and an assessment of the parties past performance. It is difficult to see how manipulation enters the equation. " Lol I wish this were the case. Of course it's not. Brexit was a huge factor. The smear campaign against Corbyn was a huge factor. The right wing press played a blinder. Have you seen the results of those tests where people pick their favoured policy on a number of subjects, it doesn't tell you which party the policy belongs to? One party always comes out on top by a mile. Spoiler. It's not the Tories. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I for one like poor Boris. " One thing he will never be is poor. The 250k a year he was trousering from The Telegraph highlights that...'chicken feed' I believe he called it. Probably why it's easy to not be too bothered about the ordinary folk's finances if you are never ever going to have anything to worry about. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I for one like poor Boris. “poor” Boris
"Not sure I would consider him poor either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well people vote for different reasons. I know people who voted for Tony Bliar because he had a nice smile. I like Boris because I like his hair. You cannot win every debate with logic. Humans are involved. I did not vote Labour because I don't like beards. I listened to a wise man once who told me never to trust whistlers and smilers. I met a man once who did both and he was a slimeball. I go with gut instinct over logic.. Jeremy may be your idol Belle and Sebastian but never worship false idols... " Again Tom, wrong. You assume so much. I started out liking Corbyn, but he was not an effective leader. Used to drive me mad at PMQ's, never pressed any decent points he had. So, I was wrong, I can admit that. You like his hair? Ok... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well people vote for different reasons. I know people who voted for Tony Bliar because he had a nice smile. I like Boris because I like his hair. You cannot win every debate with logic. Humans are involved. I did not vote Labour because I don't like beards. I listened to a wise man once who told me never to trust whistlers and smilers. I met a man once who did both and he was a slimeball. I go with gut instinct over logic.. Jeremy may be your idol Belle and Sebastian but never worship false idols... Again Tom, wrong. You assume so much. I started out liking Corbyn, but he was not an effective leader. Used to drive me mad at PMQ's, never pressed any decent points he had. So, I was wrong, I can admit that. You like his hair? Ok..." I actually do.. it's white and fluffy.. it makes me smile and lifts my mood. It sounds like you favour dartboard politics. Throw a dart and it lands on Corbyn. Throw another and Starmer is the bull. But my question is this. When do you throw your last dart. ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well people vote for different reasons. I know people who voted for Tony Bliar because he had a nice smile. I like Boris because I like his hair. You cannot win every debate with logic. Humans are involved. I did not vote Labour because I don't like beards. I listened to a wise man once who told me never to trust whistlers and smilers. I met a man once who did both and he was a slimeball. I go with gut instinct over logic.. Jeremy may be your idol Belle and Sebastian but never worship false idols... Again Tom, wrong. You assume so much. I started out liking Corbyn, but he was not an effective leader. Used to drive me mad at PMQ's, never pressed any decent points he had. So, I was wrong, I can admit that. You like his hair? Ok... I actually do.. it's white and fluffy.. it makes me smile and lifts my mood. It sounds like you favour dartboard politics. Throw a dart and it lands on Corbyn. Throw another and Starmer is the bull. But my question is this. When do you throw your last dart. ?" Does his fluffy hair make up for his appalling voting record? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I for one like poor Boris. “poor” Boris
Not sure I would consider him poor either. "Hence the  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well people vote for different reasons. I know people who voted for Tony Bliar because he had a nice smile. I like Boris because I like his hair. You cannot win every debate with logic. Humans are involved. I did not vote Labour because I don't like beards. I listened to a wise man once who told me never to trust whistlers and smilers. I met a man once who did both and he was a slimeball. I go with gut instinct over logic.. Jeremy may be your idol Belle and Sebastian but never worship false idols... Again Tom, wrong. You assume so much. I started out liking Corbyn, but he was not an effective leader. Used to drive me mad at PMQ's, never pressed any decent points he had. So, I was wrong, I can admit that. You like his hair? Ok... I actually do.. it's white and fluffy.. it makes me smile and lifts my mood. It sounds like you favour dartboard politics. Throw a dart and it lands on Corbyn. Throw another and Starmer is the bull. But my question is this. When do you throw your last dart. ?" Dartboard politics? Eh? No, I prefer to look at policies and think what is best for the country and who wants to look after the least well off in society. After all that is how a society is judged is it not, by how well you look after the weakest? But if fluffy hair gives a fella a free pass to be incompetent, light on detail and just downright deceptive....good luck. It's the kind of thing you read coming from banana republics...'we voted him in because of his fluffy hair' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again." This wont be issue in the next election. The media will see to that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Looks like starmer and Labour will walk it in the next GE No reason or excuses for not now with what's happened5 years is a long time in politics It is but as the crises has a long time to run yet and something of this magnitude will never be forgotten I don't see them not winning assuming the comments on most threads are anything to go by. No excuses if they loose again. What age group does the typical Tory voter fall into? Which age group are most at risk from COVID-19. Would you vote for the guy who put your life needlessly at risk? Starmer has not provided a single piece of evidence that Labour could have done any better. Asking questions does not provide a solution to problems. If he had any points that were of any relevance to resolving the crisis he would not need to ask questions. It's not Starmers job to prove he could do better. Boris got the job he lied and connived to get. Now he needs to be accountable and take responsibility for his mistakes like an adult. Perhaps now that he is having his decisions held up to the light he will put more thought into them. Unless Starmer can illustrate that Labour could have done better it would appear then that he ( Starmer )has nothing to offer . A lawyer asking questions does nothing to help matter. At least Boris was elected with an 80 seat majority. It is best just to ignore those who choose to criticise him . They are simply a very vocal minority and part of the liberal metropolitan elite. " Brilliant rebuke | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It seems that buzzards are circling to peck at my carcass or in Bella and Sebastians case, seagulls. I do not know what PMQ stands for and won't ask. Remember that if the average man in the street is stupid then 50% of the population are even more stupid. I am a conviction voter. I look the man or woman in the eye, decide and cast my vote accordingly. Belle and Sebastian dither too much and this indecision shines through.." I think you inadvertently demonstrated my point to the other person who suggested that people voted for the Tories because of their policies and manifesto. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I pick one horse and run with it. I don't pick Corbyn one day and Cameron the next. How do you decide where to run. Belle:You decide Sebastian: No, you decide Belle: No, you Sebastian: You Belle: On the seafront Sebastian: No, the beach Belle: Corbyn Avenue Sebastian: No, Cameron Close " So, in short, if you find out you are doing something badly, you just carry on? Again, really odd logic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I pick one horse and run with it. I don't pick Corbyn one day and Cameron the next. How do you decide where to run. Belle:You decide Sebastian: No, you decide Belle: No, you Sebastian: You Belle: On the seafront Sebastian: No, the beach Belle: Corbyn Avenue Sebastian: No, Cameron Close So, in short, if you find out you are doing something badly, you just carry on? Again, really odd logic." I rarely choose wrongly..I will stick with Boris but change if he goes bald or dyes his hair orange. Both unlikely so it's foolproof really.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For what it’s worth, here is my take on all things Sir Kier Starmer. Right now he has the easiest job in politics, and yes it’s being made easier by the government’s perceived failure in managing this crisis. If, as some have forecasted there is a 2nd and 3rd wave of CV19 only then will we be able to understand how badly, or well it has been managed here. Undoubtedly his recent performances at PMQ’s have been better and more coherent than has been seen in a number of years. The media are raving about his forensic style but the man was a top barrister for years so it’s only to be expected. Rather amazingly the only person who didn’t expect this was the PM and his usual bluff and bluster doesn’t stand a chance against this approach. Johnson needs to up his game. It is so easy to play the hindsight card right now which he is doing to great effect but this strategy will only work for a limited time. He is the golden boy of British politics but this won’t last either - he has his baggage and it’s already starting to surface. If a week is a long time in politics then 4 and a half years is an eternity. The reality is that is when the next general election is going to be and who knows what issues of the day will be. Assuming CV19 is a distant memory and we’ve got post Brexit trade deals in place, IMO the main focus will be on economic recovery. History has proved that the electorate don’t trust Labour when it comes to matters financial. At some point Starmer will need to devise his own policies and address his party’s failures in the last election. There is still division within his party that doesn’t appear to be going away. Preaching to the converted is a great ego boost but the electorate, particularly in the north still see someone who tried to derail Brexit (which they voted for) and someone who has questions to answer over decisions he made in his role as DPP. I certainly wouldn’t put money on Starmer v Johnson in 2024 never mind the outcome. Only time will tell but for now I’m actually quite pleased to see a better functioning Opposition in place. A stronger Opposition leads to a stronger government and we need that more than ever right now. " I actually agree with some of that..I dont think covid will be an issue during the election. I'm not sure about being an easy job but he is making Johnson look like an utter buffoon.Not difficult tbh. The hard bit is going to be to try and unite the 2 wings of the party who are ideologically light years apart. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For what it’s worth, here is my take on all things Sir Kier Starmer. Right now he has the easiest job in politics, and yes it’s being made easier by the government’s perceived failure in managing this crisis. If, as some have forecasted there is a 2nd and 3rd wave of CV19 only then will we be able to understand how badly, or well it has been managed here. Undoubtedly his recent performances at PMQ’s have been better and more coherent than has been seen in a number of years. The media are raving about his forensic style but the man was a top barrister for years so it’s only to be expected. Rather amazingly the only person who didn’t expect this was the PM and his usual bluff and bluster doesn’t stand a chance against this approach. Johnson needs to up his game. It is so easy to play the hindsight card right now which he is doing to great effect but this strategy will only work for a limited time. He is the golden boy of British politics but this won’t last either - he has his baggage and it’s already starting to surface. If a week is a long time in politics then 4 and a half years is an eternity. The reality is that is when the next general election is going to be and who knows what issues of the day will be. Assuming CV19 is a distant memory and we’ve got post Brexit trade deals in place, IMO the main focus will be on economic recovery. History has proved that the electorate don’t trust Labour when it comes to matters financial. At some point Starmer will need to devise his own policies and address his party’s failures in the last election. There is still division within his party that doesn’t appear to be going away. Preaching to the converted is a great ego boost but the electorate, particularly in the north still see someone who tried to derail Brexit (which they voted for) and someone who has questions to answer over decisions he made in his role as DPP. I certainly wouldn’t put money on Starmer v Johnson in 2024 never mind the outcome. Only time will tell but for now I’m actually quite pleased to see a better functioning Opposition in place. A stronger Opposition leads to a stronger government and we need that more than ever right now. " Good Post. As a Conservative, I've always urged the Labour stalwarts on here just to do one thing. Go and win an election, not rely on the other side losing it. I think with SKS, they have started on that path. He has the luxury of opposition, and the gift of time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I pick one horse and run with it. I don't pick Corbyn one day and Cameron the next. How do you decide where to run. Belle:You decide Sebastian: No, you decide Belle: No, you Sebastian: You Belle: On the seafront Sebastian: No, the beach Belle: Corbyn Avenue Sebastian: No, Cameron Close So, in short, if you find out you are doing something badly, you just carry on? Again, really odd logic. I rarely choose wrongly..I will stick with Boris but change if he goes bald or dyes his hair orange. Both unlikely so it's foolproof really.." Well, when you base his success on hairstyle rather than performance, I suppose so. I doubt those dying in care homes would find it so amusing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I rarely choose wrongly..I will stick with Boris" This is an oxymoron | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am no admirer of these slippery lawyer types. Yes they may have the gift of the gab.. it does not impress me and K would certainly not buy double glazing from them" But if he had nice hair, then you would! You have no conviction but the person you support should be convicted... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And now Cummings has ordered the circulation of a doctored and libellous video of Starmer being interviewed about grooming gangs. Tweeted by 3 MPs, one of them subsequently locked and then deleted her twitter account. Lies, smears and libel." Lovely fella. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer has the easiest job in politics so far. Who woyld want to be PM in this. Lets see what his politics is really like once (if ever) this crisis is over." Yes, anything than look at the shambles that the bloke who is running the show is currently presiding over... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer has the easiest job in politics so far. Who woyld want to be PM in this. Lets see what his politics is really like once (if ever) this crisis is over. Yes, anything than look at the shambles that the bloke who is running the show is currently presiding over..." A shambles? I’m not sure it’s good enough to be called that. The fellow is an utter johnson. I refuse to call him by any other name because he’s not my mate - his only mates are those like him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1281964/brexit-news-irish-sea-boris-Johnson-northern-Ireland-withdrawal-deal-delay-trade-talks As if by magic....and there he goes again. Categorically said this would not happen... People like being lied to? Do you Tom?" Every manifesto ever written has been a pack of lies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did anyone see the video of Starmer at last weeks clap for carers? Quite revealing I thought ..." Indeed... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did anyone see the video of Starmer at last weeks clap for carers? Quite revealing I thought ..." What, clapping?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did anyone see the video of Starmer at last weeks clap for carers? Quite revealing I thought ..." Why what did he do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1281964/brexit-news-irish-sea-boris-Johnson-northern-Ireland-withdrawal-deal-delay-trade-talks As if by magic....and there he goes again. Categorically said this would not happen... People like being lied to? Do you Tom? Every manifesto ever written has been a pack of lies. " If you dont get to implement it..how can it be a lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More clap for the cameras than clap for the carers..." Yeah, but Tom, his hair looked good.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer was asked how his party was going to vote on the UKs withdraw from the EU. He said he had more pressing things to worry about, that's ok but news flash Starmer you have to do more than one thing at a time in government. Life is still going on so has to keep his eye on the ball. " We have already withdrew havent we? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer was asked how his party was going to vote on the UKs withdraw from the EU. He said he had more pressing things to worry about, that's ok but news flash Starmer you have to do more than one thing at a time in government. Life is still going on so has to keep his eye on the ball. We have already withdrew havent we?" Yes we let the EU on 31st January. Anyone who doesn't believe this just look at the EU website. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer was asked how his party was going to vote on the UKs withdraw from the EU. He said he had more pressing things to worry about, that's ok but news flash Starmer you have to do more than one thing at a time in government. Life is still going on so has to keep his eye on the ball. We have already withdrew havent we? Yes we let the EU on 31st January. Anyone who doesn't believe this just look at the EU website." So I dont get the starmer reference. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did anyone see the video of Starmer at last weeks clap for carers? Quite revealing I thought ..." Is that the one where he asked a photographer if he had finished, so he could get his young daughter across the road and back in the house? Typically misrepresented by The Mail but thankfully the photographer was quick to correct them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More clap for the cameras than clap for the carers... Yeah, but Tom, his hair looked good.." I like Boris's hair. It makes me grateful that I'm bald. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did anyone see the video of Starmer at last weeks clap for carers? Quite revealing I thought ... Is that the one where he asked a photographer if he had finished, so he could get his young daughter across the road and back in the house? Typically misrepresented by The Mail but thankfully the photographer was quick to correct them." Ah, and there we have it! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More clap for the cameras than clap for the carers... Yeah, but Tom, his hair looked good.. I like Boris's hair. It makes me grateful that I'm bald. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail "We guessed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail "That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer was asked how his party was going to vote on the UKs withdraw from the EU. He said he had more pressing things to worry about, that's ok but news flash Starmer you have to do more than one thing at a time in government. Life is still going on so has to keep his eye on the ball. " Out of interest, how did you find Boris having his pants pulled down and bum smacked at PMQ's?? Was that a good performance from a Prime minister? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Starmer was asked how his party was going to vote on the UKs withdraw from the EU. He said he had more pressing things to worry about, that's ok but news flash Starmer you have to do more than one thing at a time in government. Life is still going on so has to keep his eye on the ball. Out of interest, how did you find Boris having his pants pulled down and bum smacked at PMQ's?? Was that a good performance from a Prime minister?" Should be an interesting answer. Personally I can't bear to watch. It's like seeing baby seals being clubbed, brutal and no sport in it at all. The lawyer vs the showman was never going to be a fair fight... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. " Except Johnson, the most famous proven liar in the country? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in "My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market. Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages . Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK. These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done . Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. Except Johnson, the most famous proven liar in the country?" And the footage is available. So why not just watch it and decide for yourself..... Unless watching a grown man being made a fool of and humiliated is as embarrassing for you as it for most of us... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored ."I'm sorry. This is a wind up. Please tell me this is a wind up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored ."No one reads the daily mail past the headlines. Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored ."The Daily Mail is owned by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere. A person who makes his money in the UK whiles enjoying the tax benefits of his expat status and therefore has a vested interest in supporting the Tory government. As such it cannot even be described as the frew press. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
"They wouldn't need to make donations if people like Jonathan Harmsworth paid their tax. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
The Daily Mail is owned by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere. A person who makes his money in the UK whiles enjoying the tax benefits of his expat status and therefore has a vested interest in supporting the Tory government. As such it cannot even be described as the frew press."A paper that openly supported Hitler in the 30s. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored ."Thing is, Starmer is not criticising, he is cross examining to expose his inadequate response to the crises. He is basically trying to ensure mistakes are not made. It's the job of the opposition you know | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
The Daily Mail is owned by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere. A person who makes his money in the UK whiles enjoying the tax benefits of his expat status and therefore has a vested interest in supporting the Tory government. As such it cannot even be described as the frew press.
A paper that openly supported Hitler in the 30s."Ohh, don't remind them of that... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. " Watch it Tom,it's always best. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
The Daily Mail is owned by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere. A person who makes his money in the UK whiles enjoying the tax benefits of his expat status and therefore has a vested interest in supporting the Tory government. As such it cannot even be described as the frew press.
A paper that openly supported Hitler in the 30s."No press is impartial in my opinion. Remember the gag about the American racing against the Russian. The American won and the Communist Weekly reporting that the Russian came second and the American next to last.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. " You could just watch the PMQs and see for yourself, Boris was embarrassing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. Watch it Tom,it's always best." I listened on the radio when a Labour politician was complaining about the lockdown and no plan to ease the lockdown. A lady phoned in and asked her what plan the Labour had and she said, I don't know, we don't have one. It's not our role.. Could not make it up . But if the lockdown is being lifted early because of pressure from Labour and the second wave is epic then Labour are nasty bullies in my opinion. They should all be working together in a time of national crisis | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For those of you who do not know Tom saw this whole thing coming and is known for his slogan "WAKE UP PEOPLES". He could see what others couldn't. In February. The fact that a forumite on a swingers site had more foresight than our entire government is a sad state of affairs to say the least. While Boris is being defended for not having "hindsight" why is it that Tom could see what was coming? Good on you Tom for opening our eyes when so many of us were blind. "Oh nuts .. please don't embarrass me in public but thank you for those lovely kind words .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. Watch it Tom,it's always best. I listened on the radio when a Labour politician was complaining about the lockdown and no plan to ease the lockdown. A lady phoned in and asked her what plan the Labour had and she said, I don't know, we don't have one. It's not our role.. Could not make it up . But if the lockdown is being lifted early because of pressure from Labour and the second wave is epic then Labour are nasty bullies in my opinion. They should all be working together in a time of national crisis " It isn't labour's role. It is the government's role. You can't win an election, claim all the victories for yourself and blame all your failures on others. The buck stops at Boris Johnson's door. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored ."Still the fellow traveller eh Pat? You really don’t seem to understand what democracy means or who stands to gain by promoting their vested interests through their award winning news (awards from the old boys club btw - that made me chuckle!) but then again I imagine you would be far happier being dictated to by your lords and masters wouldn't you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
They wouldn't need to make donations if people like Jonathan Harmsworth paid their tax."Unless you have access to his tax returns ( which are in any case confidential) you would not know how much tax ( if any ) he paid . Last time I checked the Daily Mail and General Trust paid in excess of £20 million pounds in Corporation tax. The accounts are available to the general public for inspection and include 1. The charge to the P and L 2. Balance Sheet liability 3. Notes explaining the taxation charge 4. Movement on the movement on the deferred taxation account 5. Analysis of the cash flow | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
They wouldn't need to make donations if people like Jonathan Harmsworth paid their tax. Unless you have access to his tax returns ( which are in any case confidential) you would not know how much tax ( if any ) he paid .
Last time I checked the Daily Mail and General Trust paid in excess of £20 million pounds in Corporation tax. The accounts are available to the general public for inspection and include
1. The charge to the P and L
2. Balance Sheet liability
3. Notes explaining the taxation charge
4. Movement on the movement on the deferred taxation account
5. Analysis of the cash flow
"You must be very devoted to spend so much time on it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's." Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I read in the Guardian that he did great in the question thing and in the Telegraph and Times it said the complete opposite. I believe very little I read and trust nobody. Watch it Tom,it's always best. I listened on the radio when a Labour politician was complaining about the lockdown and no plan to ease the lockdown. A lady phoned in and asked her what plan the Labour had and she said, I don't know, we don't have one. It's not our role.. Could not make it up . But if the lockdown is being lifted early because of pressure from Labour and the second wave is epic then Labour are nasty bullies in my opinion. They should all be working together in a time of national crisis " What's the point of devising a plan you are never going to implement? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
They wouldn't need to make donations if people like Jonathan Harmsworth paid their tax. Unless you have access to his tax returns ( which are in any case confidential) you would not know how much tax ( if any ) he paid .
Last time I checked the Daily Mail and General Trust paid in excess of £20 million pounds in Corporation tax. The accounts are available to the general public for inspection and include
1. The charge to the P and L
2. Balance Sheet liability
3. Notes explaining the taxation charge
4. Movement on the movement on the deferred taxation account
5. Analysis of the cash flow
"He is an expat and enjoys expat tax status. There are at least hundreds if not thousands of articles explaining why expat tax dodgers are the worst of the lot. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
"This reply has confused me a bit.! The NHS is funded by taxation which is paid by ordinary people. The issue of PPE during COVID-19 has always been supply and not lack of funds to pay for it. If someone decided to raise money for the NHS it's up to the individual if they want to contribute. I don't think anyone has complained about the thousands of people raising money each year running the London Marathon or Captain Tom who raised money. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's." Boris isn't the underdog in this scenario. You an vote for anyone you want for any reason. I would suggest that policy, voting record, amount of racist shit the person says, is better than hairstyle as a selection criteria. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours" Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. " Let's just hope he doesn't cut his hair, otherwise there won't be any reason to vote for him! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. " But not Sharks....  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
This reply has confused me a bit.!
The NHS is funded by taxation which is paid by ordinary people.
The issue of PPE during COVID-19 has always been supply and not lack of funds to pay for it.
If someone decided to raise money for the NHS it's up to the individual if they want to contribute.
I don't think anyone has complained about the thousands of people raising money each year running the London Marathon or Captain Tom who raised money."Missing the point, it's great to see a few people donating a few quid but the government should have been prepared and not left our hospitals and care homes desperately short of stock, what's the point of being in government if you cant plan ahead. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
This reply has confused me a bit.!
The NHS is funded by taxation which is paid by ordinary people.
The issue of PPE during COVID-19 has always been supply and not lack of funds to pay for it.
If someone decided to raise money for the NHS it's up to the individual if they want to contribute.
I don't think anyone has complained about the thousands of people raising money each year running the London Marathon or Captain Tom who raised money."Now I'm confused. If NHS had already been funded once through taxation.... why does it need to be funded again through donations? Also tax doesn't just come from 'ordinary people' a large portion of tax is generated from corporate entities. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/" I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
This reply has confused me a bit.!
The NHS is funded by taxation which is paid by ordinary people.
The issue of PPE during COVID-19 has always been supply and not lack of funds to pay for it.
If someone decided to raise money for the NHS it's up to the individual if they want to contribute.
I don't think anyone has complained about the thousands of people raising money each year running the London Marathon or Captain Tom who raised money."They shouldn't have to raise money for a system which is funded by the taxpayer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I like the Mail
That's good, even they have been calling Boris and co out lately....must be a shitshow if even they pile in My guess is that you do not read the Daily Mail. They have been undertake an objective analysis of the facts. The Daily Mail recognises that everyone can make mistakes ( with the benefit of hindsight ) . However they have not provided any indication that anyone else could do a better job
It is worth noting that the Daily Mail is an award winning newspaper who have increased their circulation in a declining market.
Instead of criticising people, they have teamed up with Mailforce and are taking action to help address PPE shortages .
Donations total.£ 7.1 million ( one Daily Mail reader donated £100,000 and 43700 Daily Mail readers have donated ) . Even better news is that the PPE is now being manufactured in the UK.
These people are not keyboard warriors, they are acting in a positive manner and getting things done .
Anyone can criticise Boris. Unless they can prove that they could have done a better job themselves, their criticisms can simply be ignored .
No one reads the daily mail past the headlines.
Why is it a good thing that they're encouraging ordinary people to pay for the NHS through donations instead of suggesting that it should be properly funded by the government?
This reply has confused me a bit.!
The NHS is funded by taxation which is paid by ordinary people.
The issue of PPE during COVID-19 has always been supply and not lack of funds to pay for it.
If someone decided to raise money for the NHS it's up to the individual if they want to contribute.
I don't think anyone has complained about the thousands of people raising money each year running the London Marathon or Captain Tom who raised money.
Missing the point, it's great to see a few people donating a few quid but the government should have been prepared and not left our hospitals and care homes desperately short of stock, what's the point of being in government if you cant plan ahead."My understanding of the PPE shortage supply was that the government put Brexit politics before the lives of their own NHS workers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks.... "No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one .. Evil buggers .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. " Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers .." were they English sharks or German sharks? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers ..
were they English sharks or German sharks?"If they were English Sharks then they were traitorous bastards. If they were German sharks then we hsve no right to yhe fishing waters we claim are ours in the Brexit fiasco... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please? "So it's a failure of the system? Or a failure of government? He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
"The government is responsible for the system. The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent."However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?"Indeed. Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not. The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?"So really its Labour from 1998 that's caused the woefull lack of ppe ? Makes sense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few."With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
So really its Labour from 1998 that's caused the woefull lack of ppe ? Makes sense."Where did you come up with that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you."Only if you are saying that the electorate placed their vote because they believed Boris would close "non dom" tax loopholes. If the electorate placed their vote because they were sick and tired of hearing about Brexit or because of unsustaintiated rumours of antisemitism libellously propagated by the sane newspapers in question then the 80 seat majority is irrelevant. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
So really its Labour from 1998 that's caused the woefull lack of ppe ? Makes sense.
Where did you come up with that?"Seems strange to reference a government from 22 years ago in reference to our disastrous shortage of supplies and planning from the nasty party. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers ..
were they English sharks or German sharks?"Well that's a whole new discussion which I am very passionate about. I am a lover of the sea and most things in it. I love eating fish and seafood. I find the terms Dover sole, Cromer Crab and Cornish sardines repulsive. Do the crabs know they are from Cromer? No.. it's a marketing nonsense. Scottish salmon. Do the fish know they are Scottish? No. What were they called before Scotland as a name existed? And the Westcliff Winkles. Another marketing ploy that does not impress. Rant over . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you."Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
"To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
"I'm not suggesting anything. The GE result is plan to see. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable.
"He really wasnt. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers ..
were they English sharks or German sharks?
Well that's a whole new discussion which I am very passionate about. I am a lover of the sea and most things in it. I love eating fish and seafood. I find the terms Dover sole, Cromer Crab and Cornish sardines repulsive. Do the crabs know they are from Cromer? No.. it's a marketing nonsense. Scottish salmon. Do the fish know they are Scottish? No. What were they called before Scotland as a name existed? And the Westcliff Winkles. Another marketing ploy that does not impress. Rant over ."15 years ago I survived a drowning incident and was taken by currents past a rocky shoreline. Blood which was coming out of my lungs attracted a shark which forced me to risk the rocks and leave the water. It turns out that I was rescued and had I stayed in the water would have died of hypothermia. That shark saved my life...  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
I'm not suggesting anything.
The GE result is plan to see.
"You say you're not suggesting anything. But you did say "With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.". As if gerrymandering doesn't exist in the UK, or as if the media were in any way impartial or factual. Your statement suggests a lot of things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable.
He really wasnt."He lost two elections and by a country mile | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers ..
were they English sharks or German sharks?
Well that's a whole new discussion which I am very passionate about. I am a lover of the sea and most things in it. I love eating fish and seafood. I find the terms Dover sole, Cromer Crab and Cornish sardines repulsive. Do the crabs know they are from Cromer? No.. it's a marketing nonsense. Scottish salmon. Do the fish know they are Scottish? No. What were they called before Scotland as a name existed? And the Westcliff Winkles. Another marketing ploy that does not impress. Rant over .
15 years ago I survived a drowning incident and was taken by currents past a rocky shoreline. Blood which was coming out of my lungs attracted a shark which forced me to risk the rocks and leave the water. It turns out that I was rescued and had I stayed in the water would have died of hypothermia.
That shark saved my life... "Or a shark feast.. Glad you survived.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable.
He really wasnt.
He lost two elections and by a country mile"In 2017 he got more votes than Brown or Miliband and forced may into a minority gmnt. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable.
He really wasnt."WOW just WOW | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, inherited The Daily Mail from his father through a Jersey trust and an offshore entity registered in Bermuda. Not happy with the benefits of these two tax havens, he had no qualms registering as a ‘non-dom’ to further reduce his tax liabilities. Meanwhile, a 1999 report found that Sun proprietor Rupert Murdoch had paid zero net tax on his UK holdings (The Sun, The Times etc) for the previous 11 years – despite making pre-tax profits of nearly £1.4bn. https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/02/21/jeremy-corbyns-message-britains-billionaire-tax-exile-press-barons-change-coming/ I fail to see your point. If he is a non dom he is not using the NHS and at guess has a private insurance policy. His visits to the UK would be restricted and carefully monitored. The Daily Mail and General Trust pay Corporation Tax in the UK. Here's the point. He is dodging tax. He makes money in the UK why shouldn't he pay tax in the UK? And if he is in the UK and should need the NHS he is entitled to use it. Whether he does or not is moot. If I don't use the NHS may I be exempt from paying tax too please?
So it's a failure of the system?
Or a failure of government?
He became controlling shareholder in 1998, who's watch was that?
The government is responsible for the system.
The current government have no motivation to close tax dodging loop holes. Because this would impact the rich few whose interests they represent.
However it would appear the last Labour government failed to close the very same loophole?
Indeed.
Personally I don't care what the name of the party is. I care if there doing a good job or not.
The Tories are doing a good job representing the rich few.
With an 80 seat majority at the last GE it would appear not every one agrees with you.
Come on now, are you suggesting that the sustained media attack on Labour and Corbyn had nothing to do with the result? Or the hangover from people still thinking that Brexit is a good idea and that Johnson is the one they want to "get it done"?
To be fair Corbyn was a disaster for the party like Michael Foot. Totally unelectable.
He really wasnt.
WOW just WOW"And you don't think your view is skewed by reading the Daily Mail? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just to appease B & S I will look at the video but to honest whoever mauled who is of little interest to me. I have always supported the underdog in FA cup finals and I like Boris because of his hair and crazy zip wire thing he did. David beat Goliath with a single slingshot and Average Joe doesn't give two hoots about the PQM thingy. I am not a clever man. I do know that my vote cannot be bought or influenced or bought but is counted like everyone else's. Men fought and died for you to vote on funny hair, so yes, your vote is yours Don't forget our brave women and animals such as horses etc. But not Sharks....
No but 600 brave navy soldiers were lost at sea. Torpedoed by a U Boat and 600 murdered by sharks. One by one ..
Evil buggers ..
were they English sharks or German sharks?
Well that's a whole new discussion which I am very passionate about. I am a lover of the sea and most things in it. I love eating fish and seafood. I find the terms Dover sole, Cromer Crab and Cornish sardines repulsive. Do the crabs know they are from Cromer? No.. it's a marketing nonsense. Scottish salmon. Do the fish know they are Scottish? No. What were they called before Scotland as a name existed? And the Westcliff Winkles. Another marketing ploy that does not impress. Rant over .
15 years ago I survived a drowning incident and was taken by currents past a rocky shoreline. Blood which was coming out of my lungs attracted a shark which forced me to risk the rocks and leave the water. It turns out that I was rescued and had I stayed in the water would have died of hypothermia.
That shark saved my life...
Or a shark feast..
Glad you survived..
"Cheers buddy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded " You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate?" He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded " He didnt win the election. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else..." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else..." Hi. It looks like he made a very wise decision. Elections are about winning seats , not answering questions on a tv show. The result of the election is self explanatory | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else... Hi. It looks like he made a very wise decision. Elections are about winning seats , not answering questions on a tv show. The result of the election is self explanatory " So winning the election is the end game, not serving the country? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate?" If he won the debate he would not have lost by a landslide.. deluded man and now deluded followers.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? If he won the debate he would not have lost by a landslide.. deluded man and now deluded followers.." Since what does winning the debate have to do with winning an election? Johnson refused to debate half the time, and when he did, he just got confused, and or hid in a fridge. If you're asking why did the Tories win, even though their leader failed to debate, and their policies were second to those of Labour. Then you're asking the correct question at least. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? If he won the debate he would not have lost by a landslide.. deluded man and now deluded followers.. Since what does winning the debate have to do with winning an election? Johnson refused to debate half the time, and when he did, he just got confused, and or hid in a fridge. If you're asking why did the Tories win, even though their leader failed to debate, and their policies were second to those of Labour. Then you're asking the correct question at least." And the answer is that Corbyn was an unelectable man.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else... Hi. It looks like he made a very wise decision. Elections are about winning seats , not answering questions on a tv show. The result of the election is self explanatory " He isnt answering any questions in parliament neither. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? If he won the debate he would not have lost by a landslide.. deluded man and now deluded followers.." What debate exactly? Johnson's victory was largely down to Brexit. Which he now has to deliver smoothly in the middle of this shitstorm. Let's see how that goes eh,? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else... Hi. It looks like he made a very wise decision. Elections are about winning seats , not answering questions on a tv show. The result of the election is self explanatory He isnt answering any questions in parliament neither." Well I like him and his hair and he gets my vote ... Out of here now... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My view is only skewed by Jeremy himself. As he said .. he won the debate but not the election.. Deluded You managed to contradict yourself in twenty words. Pretty good going. In what way did he not win the debate? He ran away, refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil and hid in a fridge... Oh no wait that was someone else... Hi. It looks like he made a very wise decision. Elections are about winning seats , not answering questions on a tv show. The result of the election is self explanatory So winning the election is the end game, not serving the country?" If you are unable to win an election you are then unable to serve your country. The winning team are able to follow up their promises, losers can do nothing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
