|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Nov 28, 2019 17:00:49 GMT
You didnt ask me anything. You said 'let's talk about pathetic anti Tory tactical voters'. So let's talk - what have you got to say? I guess you can see my apathy in discussing anti-Tory tactical voting with, um, anti-Tories. I'd get bored very quickly. Don't hate me for this. See you on the 12th. Ah you have nothing to say. Righto. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 17:29:37 GMT
Don't know what Boris is scared off We had this argument on the Brexit thread ad infinitum. Doesn't matter how often it is said, how often different research proves it, still leavers dont accept it and will vote Tory and quote immigration as one of their reasons. Andrew N skewered this bloke as well when he quoted the numbers for those immigrants not from the EU who, he said, are NOT, net contributors, the very ones where there no barriers or treaties to enable to control their levels. Ah well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 17:31:01 GMT
I guess you can see my apathy in discussing anti-Tory tactical voting with, um, anti-Tories. I'd get bored very quickly. Don't hate me for this. See you on the 12th. Ah you have nothing to say. Righto. A Tory supporter with the usual reaction when you shine a light in their face. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 19:05:57 GMT
Made me laugh Boris Johnson's avoiding the climate debate and personally I find it very competent and reassuring flip.it/jWV9sC |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 20:24:56 GMT
Don't know what Boris is scared off Why does it have to be the case that we have either an open door policy or let nobody in? Whether there is a positive or negative figure of tax paid versus benefits taken doesn’t really matter. Why should we take anyone who adds little and will be a net taker from an already stretched state benefit system? Does anyone really have a grievance against an immigrant coming in who has valuable skills and contributes to the UK both financially and socially? By immigrant I mean from anywhere in the world, not the current racist arrangement where people from the EU ‘club’ are treated differently from those outside. A points system seems the most logical and fairest policy. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 6:37:20 GMT
Don't know what Boris is scared off Why does it have to be the case that we have either an open door policy or let nobody in? Whether there is a positive or negative figure of tax paid versus benefits taken doesn’t really matter. Why should we take anyone who adds little and will be a net taker from an already stretched state benefit system? Does anyone really have a grievance against an immigrant coming in who has valuable skills and contributes to the UK both financially and socially? By immigrant I mean from anywhere in the world, not the current racist arrangement where people from the EU ‘club’ are treated differently from those outside. A points system seems the most logical and fairest policy. So you missed the point of the question. Why are the Tories trying to deliberately mislead about what immigrants take out |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 8:15:07 GMT
So Tories accusing C4 of a stunt. I guess all this was just conveniently caught on Camera Mr Gove. Nice bit of a lie about not wanting to debate a Conservative as well. Sure that will go down well with your voters
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 9:03:21 GMT
Apparently, the ice block won the debate !
|
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 10:40:03 GMT
f**king hell. truth hurts....
Stanley Johnson - the father of Boris Johnson - appeared on the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme this morning.
Asked about a viewer's tweet calling his son "Pinocchio", Stanley Johnson replies: "Pinocchio, that requires a degree of literacy which I think the great British public doesn't necessarily have."
The presenter asks what he means by that.
"I don't want to get into that... they couldn't spell Pinocchio if they tried," says Mr Johnson.
"Well can you spell Pinocchio?" he adds.
"I think it is utterly absurd and wrong that you can read out on air a tweet coming in from one of your readers on air which calls the prime minister a liar... I think it's amazing you can do that."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:09:51 GMT
Stanley is right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:11:07 GMT
Why does it have to be the case that we have either an open door policy or let nobody in? Whether there is a positive or negative figure of tax paid versus benefits taken doesn’t really matter. Why should we take anyone who adds little and will be a net taker from an already stretched state benefit system? Does anyone really have a grievance against an immigrant coming in who has valuable skills and contributes to the UK both financially and socially? By immigrant I mean from anywhere in the world, not the current racist arrangement where people from the EU ‘club’ are treated differently from those outside. A points system seems the most logical and fairest policy. So you missed the point of the question. Why are the Tories trying to deliberately mislead about what immigrants take out No didn’t miss the point - all the parties figures on every bit of their manifestos are being called into question. The point on this particular subject is the precise numbers and estimations don’t really matter, the principle should be we control who comes in. If they are going to be a net contributor and a positive for the country then welcome them. If they are going to be net ‘takers’ why should they be allowed to arrive? We should have control over this and largely speaking the net takers should be denied entry. I don’t get this notion that because many contribute we should have to accept a similar number who don’t. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:15:58 GMT
Apparently, the ice block won the debate ! Pathetic but not unexpected from C4. Like I’ve said a few times recently the media are just using the election to grandstand and make it all about them while pushing their own agendas. If the debate was about climate change why could Gove, a high ranking member of the government, not be allowed to attend? If the programme was serious about climate change why obstruct the countries main party from taking part? |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 11:18:45 GMT
care to elaborate?
It's fair to say it he has been proven to have shall we say 'bent the truth' in the past. Why shouldn't he be called out on it
should he not be called out on his numerous offensive remarks by the public that he wishes to put him into power?
He has the opportunity to defend himself when such claims of are put to him.
Interesting question/position on Radio 5 today put to Gavin Williamson, which he avoided answering, that Prospective candidates from all parties have been stood down over their past comments about Muslims/Islam or anti-semitic remarks etc, that it Boris Johnson was just another parliamentary candidate he would be asked to stand down
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:26:53 GMT
I remember doing a job between Uni, years back. Everyone I worked with was either Polish or Portugese. Every single one of them used to say they send most of their wages back to their home country. Still, I guess they were paying tax. Be interesting to see how much stays in our economy.
Just thought that was a cool story.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:27:56 GMT
care to elaborate?
It's fair to say it he has been proven to have shall we say 'bent the truth' in the past. Why shouldn't he be called out on it
should he not be called out on his numerous offensive remarks by the public that he wishes to put him into power?
He has the opportunity to defend himself when such claims of are put to him.
Interesting question/position on Radio 5 today put to Gavin Williamson, which he avoided answering, that Prospective candidates from all parties have been stood down over their past comments about Muslims/Islam or anti-semitic remarks etc, that it Boris Johnson was just another parliamentary candidate he would be asked to stand down
Ah, are you one of those who were offended by his 'letterbox' so-called comment? |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 11:37:21 GMT
care to elaborate?
It's fair to say it he has been proven to have shall we say 'bent the truth' in the past. Why shouldn't he be called out on it
should he not be called out on his numerous offensive remarks by the public that he wishes to put him into power?
He has the opportunity to defend himself when such claims of are put to him.
Interesting question/position on Radio 5 today put to Gavin Williamson, which he avoided answering, that Prospective candidates from all parties have been stood down over their past comments about Muslims/Islam or anti-semitic remarks etc, that it Boris Johnson was just another parliamentary candidate he would be asked to stand down
Ah, are you one of those who were offended by his 'letterbox' so-called comment? because that is the only offensive thing he has said isn't it.
Man of the people my f**king arse. At best he doesn't believe it and is a sh** stirrer which doesn't make any of it right either
|
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Nov 29, 2019 11:43:07 GMT
Apparently, the ice block won the debate ! Pathetic but not unexpected from C4. Like I’ve said a few times recently the media are just using the election to grandstand and make it all about them while pushing their own agendas. If the debate was about climate change why could Gove, a high ranking member of the government, not be allowed to attend? If the programme was serious about climate change why obstruct the countries main party from taking part? yeah, because The Tories don't take part in petty gimmicks like banning The Daily Mirror, or changing their Twitter account, or editing videos to make something seem like it wasn't |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 13:30:07 GMT
Ah, are you one of those who were offended by his 'letterbox' so-called comment? because that is the only offensive thing he has said isn't it.
Man of the people my f**king arse. At best he doesn't believe it and is a sh** stirrer which doesn't make any of it right either
Did you ever read the article where the 'selective quote' was taken from? If you had you would have read that Johnson was actually defending the rights of Muslim women to wear the Burkha. This is a modern problem where people get fed one line out of context, whereupon like you have done,a label is applied to that person as being a racist, which results in the hatred and bitterness you seem to be displaying. Try reading the article yourself and stop being influenced by people whose only intention is to spread that hatred and bitterness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 13:32:26 GMT
Pathetic but not unexpected from C4. Like I’ve said a few times recently the media are just using the election to grandstand and make it all about them while pushing their own agendas. If the debate was about climate change why could Gove, a high ranking member of the government, not be allowed to attend? If the programme was serious about climate change why obstruct the countries main party from taking part? yeah, because The Tories don't take part in petty gimmicks like banning The Daily Mirror, or changing their Twitter account, or editing videos to make something seem like it wasn't Gove was the Minister for the Environment at one point so maybe he was better qualified to talk about Climate Change? Remind us again just why Plaid are so important in this debate? Why are the Lib Dems so important, or the one MP Green's? Why was Sturgeon there, she is not even up for election so in reality nobody really gives a toss about what she has to say. |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Nov 29, 2019 14:06:43 GMT
because that is the only offensive thing he has said isn't it.
Man of the people my f**king arse. At best he doesn't believe it and is a sh** stirrer which doesn't make any of it right either
Did you ever read the article where the 'selective quote' was taken from? If you had you would have read that Johnson was actually defending the rights of Muslim women to wear the Burkha. This is a modern problem where people get fed one line out of context, whereupon like you have done,a label is applied to that person as being a racist, which results in the hatred and bitterness you seem to be displaying. Try reading the article yourself and stop being influenced by people whose only intention is to spread that hatred and bitterness. Hot take as confirmed Tory sympathiser defends Tory. Have you read the one on single mothers? Not much in the way of context to excuse him there but looking forward to your attempt to justify it all the same  |
|
