Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
The highest quality satire never goes out of style and accurately hits at the core of stupidity.
Andy Slaughter's great and the one reason I could overlook Corbyn and soon Starmer cos he's also a decent constituency MP too- fought off Tories trying to flog the A&E dept of the local hospital to their developer mates.
Gove at least listens to a question but never deviates from the set answers.
With Sunak, he doesn't even listen to the questions and then says the same old thing. The plan is working. Stick to the plan....
What fing plan?
And how is it actually working?
With Sunak, he doesn't even listen to the questions and then says the same old thing. The plan is working. Stick to the plan....
What fing plan?
And how is it actually working?
The bar is low.
I was talking to a geezer the other month (ironically when I was working over in Manchester) who’d done a lot of travelling. He’d lived in various African & Middle East places…..he was an interesting fella.
We talked a lot about what it’s like living in undemocratic countries and he was of the opinion that it’s not really much different. You’ve got the people at the top, they’ve got all the power, they’ll abuse it….but everyone knows it and knows their place. Over here the same thing happens but we all reckon we’ve got the liberty and the systems to make it different when really it’s mostly the same
I don’t mind him simply because the people I don’t like, don’t like him but he’s a self absorbed twat. I’ll give him that.
Maybe true about elites (and maybe your guy is/was an elite everywhere he travelled), but there is a world of difference for the common citizen. For example, there are many countries where access to a forum like this is barred, never mind the freedom to say half the stuff we say here. Similarly, in many other countries where elections are meaningless shams, i.e. if you are lucky to have a vote at all.
Having lived in a so-called one-party democracy, I really cannot see how such a comparison is apt. Sure, there is inequality everywhere, but there are levels of difference and pervasiveness we have yet to encounter in Western countries.
I thought Andy Burnham was pretty popular and has been doing a good job. Not that this matters.
Fair enough. I can’t speak from experience having been a U.K. resident for life but I thought it was an interesting perspective.
Which country were you referring to by the way?
I've spent enough time in China to know I agree with that other guy. There's a lot to admire about them but wild horses couldn't make me move there permanently.
Zambia in the 80's.
"Andy Burnham has a secret that he doesn't want you to know. Toffees. Not the toffees that you and I enjoy with our cup of local Manchester pressed pineapple and Bovril juice, but the Liverpool toffees. Because Andy Burnham supports Everton. Do you really want some Scouse lover telling you what you can and can't do with your Manc bins? Vote for local lad George Galloway!"
GG is just getting his retaliation in first, starting with threats to stand against Angela Rayner, and now Andy Burnham.
A sizeable Moslem population in Rayner's Ashton-U-Lyne constituency and across Grt. Manchester, no doubt GG is hoping they will vote with their hearts ( Gaza) as in Rochdale, rather than with their heads (getting rid of Tories)... expect more of the same, from GG, especially if nothing changes in Gaza .
You can always rely on George to have an eye on the main chance!
A sizeable Moslem population in Rayner's Ashton-U-Lyne constituency and across Grt. Manchester, no doubt GG is hoping they will vote with their hearts ( Gaza) as in Rochdale, rather than with their heads (getting rid of Tories)... expect more of the same, from GG, especially if nothing changes in Gaza .
You can always rely on George to have an eye on the main chance!
Fair enough. Then it’s good to hear, in a thread which is 99% bemoaning the way our societies are governed, that it’s actually better than some of the alternatives
I don't need to be in undemocratic country to know that. bipartidism exist in all the big countries and they make us believe that sense of choice when it doesn't exist. Lobbies are the ones ruling countries and who puts people in "power" in both parties
Exactly. Galloway is just a chancer with about as much credibility as Boris. And just as dangerous.
Trust me. My poster would guarantee him the knuckle dragging EDL vote. No need for facts.
Galloway is the most dangerous MP in the Commons. Mainly because he’s capable of taking the mood of the people correctly and exploiting it. The Tories (as they currently are) are inept. He’s not, so Galloway needs to get gone.
If I saw the fella fall down a flight of stairs that saw him bleeding out, I’d do no more than get his phone out of his pocket and hand it to him, then walk off. He’s an apex charlatan who contributes nothing to another if it doesn’t benefit himself.
This is outdated, surely?
Most dangerous MP? He has absolutely no power, unlike the party who've been impoverishing the country and persecuting minorities, the poor and disabled for the last 14 years. He's on his own. I don't like him one bit but he's one step above an irrelevance.
Don't usually agree with this sort of behaviour, but this is fantastic
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is so funny <a href="https://t.co/kSc3kBZAeF">https://t.co/kSc3kBZAeF</a> <a href="https://t.co/t4ERMIQXgE">pic.twitter.com/t4ERMIQXgE</a></p>— Benjamin Sharp (@bensharp555) <a href="">March 15, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is so funny <a href="https://t.co/kSc3kBZAeF">https://t.co/kSc3kBZAeF</a> <a href="https://t.co/t4ERMIQXgE">pic.twitter.com/t4ERMIQXgE</a></p>— Benjamin Sharp (@bensharp555) <a href="">March 15, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Totally within the rules for debating Private Members Bills. Truss could of course have changed the rules, but I suppose she wasn't in power long enough...
He's very popular round here. To the point people will vote for him regardless of the rosette he's wearing.
Lovely bloke too. You'll see him out and about quite often around the city chatting to people or enjoying a pint. Occasionally doing a dj set
I mean isn't that what all politicians do? There are perhaps a handful of benevolent MPs who are genuinely looking to do some good, whereas the rest are only interested in enriching themselves or their mates, most of whom capitalise on divisive politics.
I'm not a fan of his, but the moral point is a bit of an odd one, especially when you compare him to politicians who've taken the country to wars that have killed countless innocents, or those giving a genocide the greenlight. From a moral perspective he's no worse than a Starmer, and certainly not a murderous cnut like Blair.
So, an independent MP, with no party structure and no way to enact any policy and with no possibility of even influencing policy is "the most dangerous MP in the commons"? This is, objectively, wrong.
He's "apex" nothing.
Also, what do you mean by "taking the mood of the people and exploiting it"? He's pretty politically consistent, the moustachioed, hat wearing pompous twat that he is.
More dog whistling. In basic English it means dodgy "immigrants" like me, who've been here for nearly 50 years, are a bit thick because of our brainwashing "exotic religion" so can be easily swayed.
As you know I'm not an intelligent poster like many on here, but I call out the spade for what it is so casual readers on this thread are in zero doubt. Thanks for the chance.
As opposed to the constant dog whistling to the rural white population of the country from the Tories? (And Reeves and Starmer)
He may be the one that makes your flesh crawl but he's in no way the most dangerous politician in the country, not even close.
Agree with all of that.
The reason I called him dangerous is not because of his consistent rhetoric about Palestine.
It was because he is good at identifying any particular issue and getting a certain type of people to follow his lead by virtue of his clever use of words.
The more gullible people.
We can clearly see the damage Boris Johnson has done to the country through his lies about Brexit.
Galloway will promise the people of Rochdale lots of things but won't be able to deliver much at all.
I don't understand the significance of.... the rural white population.
With a parliamentary system especially one so dominated by two parties the idea of one dangerous MP doesn’t make any sense.
In my experience rural areas and small towns are far more racist and/or scared of immigration than cities. Most likely because there aren't many immigrants there compared to the cities.
Boris was a very dangerous MP. But moreso once he'd wormed his way to the top.
Ok. But I would be a bit careful over generalisations. Especially the colour of people skins.
I was replying to @unrelatedPseudo 's hyperbolic statement that Galloway is "the most dangerous MP in Comms" and pointing out that it is a patently incorrect.
Irrespective of whether you may think that the preening self styled intellectual shagger is, or isn't, an opportunist who uses incendiary rhetoric, he is powerless in the two party House of Commons and he is, in no way, capable of being the most dangerous MP.
Your comparison to Johnson demonstrates this point practically. Whether you believe Galloway to be a liar, using rhetoric and stylised charisma in a similar manner to Johnson to influence or not, he is clearly incapable of actually having the political influence that Johnson had to actually alter reality.
Therefore, he is less dangerous than the many lying manipulators with actual power in the Commons, notably the current Tory party Government and, to a lesser extent, chunks of Labour.
Last edited:
When talking about race? That's literally how it works
It's a made up construct by which people can discriminate against each other on the basis of culture and appearance. And white people in small towns in the south of England are the most numerous group to do it in the UK in my experience. It's not to say nobody else does it, just that the most numerous groups are the ones the politicians target most.
Except in this instance it is you doing the targeting. 'Talking about race' is what racists do.When talking about race? That's literally how it works
It's a made up construct by which people can discriminate against each other on the basis of culture and appearance. And white people in small towns in the south of England are the most numerous group to do it in the UK in my experience. It's not to say nobody else does it, just that the most numerous groups are the ones the politicians target most.
Why is it outdated?
Isn't GG exploiting the Moslem fears, over understandable concern for what is happening in Gaza?