[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Think Reform will surprise. I can't stand Farage personally.

Just had a depressing client meeting where I was told that normal people are flocking to vote Reform because they are fed up of the ultra woke movement.

They are seeing it everywhere including in schools. Very concerning.

Let's hope they are just a noisy minority.

I'm thinking that just as a certain element in Labour kept falling into the trap of saying anti-Semitic shite (nd being booted out by Starmer), it won't take long before the Farage gang, if they get any seats, start shooting themselves in the foot with their nonsense. We have already had one of the goons outed for wishing Hitler had won the war. More will follow. And the dust will then hopefully settle.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But what actually is a proper manifesto? I'm not sure they exist anymore. I worry labours manifesto doesn't add up just like everyone else's. I am now wobbling on my vote and may not bother at all.

Let's get the Tories out. All manifestos are mere wish lists. That's no reason to not vote.

 

[nicko31]

Sunak promised to be different when he took over from that clown Johnson. He hasn't been different.
He is the same but all "nicey nicey blokey blokey", and is actually more incompetent/ineffective if that were possible.

Johnson was worse and should be in prison, just better at lying and getting away with it

 

[AlbionBro]

Let's get the Tories out. All manifestos are mere wish lists. That's no reason to not vote.

I think the Tories are out by a huge margin. But I would still prefer the manifesto to look about right, but none of them appear to. I still have sometime to think about it. I just want to hear more on the detail to totally convince me that they are not just Tories with red rosettes.

 

[Bodian]

But what actually is a proper manifesto? I'm not sure they exist anymore. I worry labours manifesto doesn't add up just like everyone else's. I am now wobbling on my vote and may not bother at all.

Vote for whomever you think fits best with your overriding belief system; whether that be fairness for all, private gain, immigration - whatever. No real need to delve too deeply into manifestos, most of them won't be adhered to anyway - it's the general direction of travel that's important.

 

[essbee1]

Vote for whomever you think fits best with your overriding belief system; whether that be fairness for all, private gain, immigration - whatever. No real need to delve too deeply into manifestos, most of them won't be adhered to anyway - it's the general direction of travel that's important.

Bodian- is "whomever" a word? Whomsoever is I think, but no sure.

 

[AlbionBro]

Vote for whomever you think fits best with your overriding belief system; whether that be fairness for all, private gain, immigration - whatever. No real need to delve too deeply into manifestos, most of them won't be adhered to anyway - it's the general direction of travel that's important.

I understand what you're saying but I feel Angela has gone very Keir, I know they are trying not trying to show their hand, but it worries me that perhaps they have gone too central. So it leaves me in a bit of dilemma, anyway, they have plenty of time to convince me and others like me before we go to the polls.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think the Tories are out by a huge margin. But I would still prefer the manifesto to look about right, but none of them appear to. I still have sometime to think about it. I just want to hear more on the detail to totally convince me that they are not just Tories with red rosettes.

Ah, you are concerned that Labour will be similar to the Tories, right of centre. You are not buying the Tory line that Labour have a secret hard left agenda, then. That's something.

By and large both the main parties have tried to do what they have 'promised' over the years, when they got in. I would cut them both a bit of slack on delivery. They can only do what is possible.

The difference is the intent.

The two main parties have had a clear difference of intent since Thatcher defended her first term. That was when the 'post war consensus' ended. Both parties have danced around between moderate and extreme promises since then. Blair was moderate. Corbyn was extreme. Call me Dave was moderate. Michael 'man of the pipple' Howard was extreme. Ironically Dave wrote Howard's manifesto. Then he switched to mini Blair mode. That was the first time I remember a party flying a false flag. But Dave did actually stick to his new guns so the flag turned out to not be false after all. But it was cynical and opportunistic. And we ended up leaving the EU, with Dave resigning.

My recommendation is don't fret about it. Trust your gut. Just decide which manifesto suits your preferences. And consider the weft of the promisers.

I suspect Sunk is over-promising (out of desperation). Farage has no chance of delivering his promises were he to get in so he can promise anything. No Net Migration. OK Nige. Ditto Liberals and Greens. You can promise unrealistically when you know you won't win. That, now it seems, encompasses the Tories, perhaps the first time ever. Which is yet another reason they need to be crushed. Then they can find themselves some grown ups to revitalize the party.

From what I can see, there is only one party promising realistically (promising not very much, it has to be said) and promising things they are likely to be able to deliver, in part at least. The rest. Hmmmm.

 

[El Presidente]

 

[Bodian]

Bodian- is "whomever" a word? Whomsoever is I think, but no sure.

Yes, yes it is.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/whomever

 

[Stato]

But what actually is a proper manifesto? I'm not sure they exist anymore. I worry labours manifesto doesn't add up just like everyone else's. I am now wobbling on my vote and may not bother at all.

Reform does have a manifesto. They just don't talk very much about it. Were they to do so, they would have to explain why 'man of the people' Farage is so keen to spend so much money on:

supporting private health care that working class people can't afford;
and private education that working class people can't afford;
and helping pay to view broadcasters end the BBC;
and protecting the wealthy from multiple forms of taxation;
and dismantling legislation that protects those who can't afford to buy and are living in rented accommodation;
and freeing developers from having to make contributions that help councils fund the infrastructure that their developments make necessary.

People might want to ask about the practicality of imprisoning anyone convicted of dealing for life!
They might even want them to explain how they plan to fund their proposals without using the old get out clauses of growth and government waste that are the only funding proposals mentioned in the document.

Most pertinently, they might want them to explain that, if they are so anti-immigration, why they are so against efforts to combat the effects of climate change that are estimated to displace 1.2 billion people in the next two and a half decades: https://www.zurich.com/en/media/mag...refugees-by-2050-here-s-what-you-need-to-know

Actually I could answer the last question using their manifesto. They have taken the 'head in the sand' approach that has proven so successful for so many metaphorical dead ostriches. They are arrogant, dishonest or just plain stupid enough to refuse to accept that 97% of the world scientists know more about the causes and impacts of climate change than they do. They actually write:

"Climate change has happened for millions of years, before man made CO2 emissions, and will always change. We are better to adapt to warming, rather than pretend we can stop it."

The refugees moving into Europe are just adapting to the warming Nigel. Surely that's what you want.

Reform UK supporters are all generally from my generation or older. They didn't care about the negative impact Brexit would have on future generations and they don't care about the devastation that will be caused by climate change because we won't be here. In their remaining time on earth they are interested only in ensuring that the problems of the world don't impose upon their cul de sacs. This fear of change is the only thing they have in common with a section of Britain's poor who are so beaten down that they think that, although they have next to nothing, they don't deserve anything better and should just worry about protecting what they have from those poor sods who have even less.

In truth, you're right that none of the party's calculations add up. They're all trying to sell us a best case scenario. However, the reasons to vote are simple: Even if we suspect that the new lot may not have the solutions, we have absolute proof that the current lot definitely didn't. Even if we think that the new lot may end up being corrupt, incompetent or self serving, we have absolute proof that the current lot definitely are.

To be honest Starmer or Davey could be elected as PM, serve for five years without doing a single thing and working people would be in a better place than they would have been if they had continued to be ruled by a group of people that has proven time and time again over the last few years that it makes things actively worse for us all with every self-serving decision it makes and just doesn't care.

You don't need to believe in the opposition at all to go and vote this lot out, you just have to remember the faces of those people, including the bloody queen, who weren't able to kiss goodbye to their loved ones and remind yourself what the current lot were up to at the exact time that these multiple tragedies were happening.

 

[Napper]

But what actually is a proper manifesto? I'm not sure they exist anymore. I worry labours manifesto doesn't add up just like everyone else's. I am now wobbling on my vote and may not bother at all.

Don’t let the media and Tory lies make you doubt the right thing to do

 

[TomandJerry]

Nigel Farage has declared himself the real “leader of the opposition” and predicted his Reform UK party will gain more than 6m votes, after polling ahead of the Conservatives for the first time.

At an impromptu press conference in Westminster, the Reform leader said there was a momentum behind his party, and he “absolutely” believes that he will gain more votes than the Tories.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

I like Farage's idea of raising the tax free allowance to over £20k. It's just a shame its even more unfunded than if Truss and Kwateng were doing the sums.

Earlier, his response to funding gaps was very much like his Brexit promises. All pie in the sky, wishes and hopes and unicorns farts. Hats off to him, he keeps making this grift work and pay.

 

[A1X]

8 years after the referendum it’s quite disappointing that people still see this twat peddling easy answers and shouting everyone else down and think he’s actually in any way a credible politician

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Rishi’s national service plan and their lack of specifying what the sanctions would be has pushed my mother and father in law to reform from conservative- Rishi is a f***ing idiot.

So out of sheer interest - is it the NS idea they don't like or just that the penalties for refusing to do NS not being published ?

For the record I think it's a fvcking stupid idea regardless of penalties.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Well the Reform party political broadcast on BBC1 is completely buggered.

 

[AlbionBro]

Ah, you are concerned that Labour will be similar to the Tories, right of centre. You are not buying the Tory line that Labour have a secret hard left agenda, then. That's something.

By and large both the main parties have tried to do what they have 'promised' over the years, when they got in. I would cut them both a bit of slack on delivery. They can only do what is possible.

The difference is the intent.

The two main parties have had a clear difference of intent since Thatcher defended her first term. That was when the 'post war consensus' ended. Both parties have danced around between moderate and extreme promises since then. Blair was moderate. Corbyn was extreme. Call me Dave was moderate. Michael 'man of the pipple' Howard was extreme. Ironically Dave wrote Howard's manifesto. Then he switched to mini Blair mode. That was the first time I remember a party flying a false flag. But Dave did actually stick to his new guns so the flag turned out to not be false after all. But it was cynical and opportunistic. And we ended up leaving the EU, with Dave resigning.

My recommendation is don't fret about it. Trust your gut. Just decide which manifesto suits your preferences. And consider the weft of the promisers.

I suspect Sunk is over-promising (out of desperation). Farage has no chance of delivering his promises were he to get in so he can promise anything. No Net Migration. OK Nige. Ditto Liberals and Greens. You can promise unrealistically when you know you won't win. That, now it seems, encompasses the Tories, perhaps the first time ever. Which is yet another reason they need to be crushed. Then they can find themselves some grown ups to revitalize the party.

From what I can see, there is only one party promising realistically (promising not very much, it has to be said) and promising things they are likely to be able to deliver, in part at least. The rest. Hmmmm.

Reform does have a manifesto. They just don't talk very much about it. Were they to do so, they would have to explain why 'man of the people' Farage is so keen to spend so much money on:

supporting private health care that working class people can't afford;
and private education that working class people can't afford;
and helping pay to view broadcasters end the BBC;
and protecting the wealthy from multiple forms of taxation;
and dismantling legislation that protects those who can't afford to buy and are living in rented accommodation;
and freeing developers from having to make contributions that help councils fund the infrastructure that their developments make necessary.

People might want to ask about the practicality of imprisoning anyone convicted of dealing for life!
They might even want them to explain how they plan to fund their proposals without using the old get out clauses of growth and government waste that are the only funding proposals mentioned in the document.

Most pertinently, they might want them to explain that, if they are so anti-immigration, why they are so against efforts to combat the effects of climate change that are estimated to displace 1.2 billion people in the next two and a half decades: https://www.zurich.com/en/media/mag...refugees-by-2050-here-s-what-you-need-to-know

Actually I could answer the last question using their manifesto. They have taken the 'head in the sand' approach that has proven so successful for so many metaphorical dead ostriches. They are arrogant, dishonest or just plain stupid enough to refuse to accept that 97% of the world scientists know more about the causes and impacts of climate change than they do. They actually write:

"Climate change has happened for millions of years, before man made CO2 emissions, and will always change. We are better to adapt to warming, rather than pretend we can stop it."

The refugees moving into Europe are just adapting to the warming Nigel. Surely that's what you want.

Reform UK supporters are all generally from my generation or older. They didn't care about the negative impact Brexit would have on future generations and they don't care about the devastation that will be caused by climate change because we won't be here. In their remaining time on earth they are interested only in ensuring that the problems of the world don't impose upon their cul de sacs. This fear of change is the only thing they have in common with a section of Britain's poor who are so beaten down that they think that, although they have next to nothing, they don't deserve anything better and should just worry about protecting what they have from those poor sods who have even less.

In truth, you're right that none of the party's calculations add up. They're all trying to sell us a best case scenario. However, the reasons to vote are simple: Even if we suspect that the new lot may not have the solutions, we have absolute proof that the current lot definitely didn't. Even if we think that the new lot may end up being corrupt, incompetent or self serving, we have absolute proof that the current lot definitely are.

To be honest Starmer or Davey could be elected as PM, serve for five years without doing a single thing and working people would be in a better place than they would have been if they had continued to be ruled by a group of people that has proven time and time again over the last few years that it makes things actively worse for us all with every self-serving decision it makes and just doesn't care.

You don't need to believe in the opposition at all to go and vote this lot out, you just have to remember the faces of those people, including the bloody queen, who weren't able to kiss goodbye to their loved ones and remind yourself what the current lot were up to at the exact time that these multiple tragedies were happening.

Don’t let the media and Tory lies make you doubt the right thing to do

Okay thank you gentleman, I will give it some more thought until polling day and see how I feel on the morning, whether I feel I can contribute to changing our country back to when our services were good and things looked prosperous, for young and old. Here's hoping.

 

[HalfaSeatOn]

Well the Reform party political broadcast on BBC1 is completely buggered.

Lazy effort on the things are broken theme?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Lazy effort on the things are broken theme?

Could be. It was very boring.