Peacehaven Wild Kids
Well-known member
#ColdWarSteve
Sadly not - she's been (pretty accurately) named as such in many places, by many people...and rightly so.I see you’ve adopted the named I coined for her in my posts on NSC - -in fact earlier today in response to this very issue!
Agree. A reasonable post. She's talking through her arse. There's nothing wrong with tents (though there is a whole lot wrong that people need to live in them). Still, this thread undoubtedly will (or has) become another place for NSC government bashing. It is what it is. It is NSC (or at least it is for a lot of NSCers).I get that you feel that a lot of these politics threads tend to be “variations on a theme” - but (assuming you’ve read the article the OP has linked to) is this not pretty breathtaking?
A serving Home Secretary of the United Kingdom has announced her intention to try and prevent/restrict the issue of tents by charities to homeless people, our most vulnerable.
I have known plenty of Conservative voters in my time, and not one of them would consider this a sane or desirable idea without first having solved the outstanding issues of housing availability and affordability.
Because you were nit-picking a stupid point. The Government wasn't mentioned in the thread title, neither were the homeless. What point are you trying to make by stupidly and pointlessly nit-picking?Cruella mentioned them - you know, the person mentioned in the thread title. Why so defensive? "Get a grip" indeed.
It almost feels as though you'd like it to become one, just so you could say, "I told you so".Agree. A reasonable post. There's nothing wrong with tents (though there is a whole lot wrong that people need to live in them). Still, this thread undoubtedly will (or has) become another place for NSC government bashing. It is what it is. It is NSC (or at least it is for a lot of NSCers).
*sigh* You were the one that brought up the 'government bashing' thing. The homeless and Braverman's comments are the subject of the thread.Because you were nit-picking a stupid point. The Government wasn't mentioned in the thread title, neither were the homeless. What point are you trying to make by stupidly and pointlessly nit-picking?
Someone hacking your agenda?
Careful now....no government bashing here.Outside of NSC I often get criticised for using the word vile when describing people, but I can't think of a better word to describe this far right oddball who has no place in public life.
That said, they are one of the major reasons the Conservatives will lose the next election very badly and paradoxically may become leader in opposition.
I really don't get them anymore and why they think a far right populist approach in the UK will win them an election.
Younger and new time voters are appalled with them
Agree. A reasonable post. She's talking through her arse. There's nothing wrong with tents (though there is a whole lot wrong that people need to live in them). Still, this thread undoubtedly will (or has) become another place for NSC government bashing. It is what it is. It is NSC (or at least it is for a lot of NSCers).
To be fair it is a strategy that has served them well in the past.Outside of NSC I often get criticised for using the word vile when describing people, but I can't think of a better word to describe this far right oddball who has no place in public life.
That said, they are one of the major reasons the Conservatives will lose the next election very badly and paradoxically may become leader in opposition.
I really don't get them anymore and why they think a far right populist approach in the UK will win them an election.
Younger and new time voters are appalled with them.
I have to disagree. They've only lurched this far to the right in opposition, so I think it's a particular odd strategy.To be fair it is a strategy that has served them well in the past.
It is essential to take up as much media space with controversial, culture wars rhetoric, rather than allow any focus on the state of the nation.It genuinely does seem she tries to say controversial things to see how far she can push it before she gets the boot. A truly horrible woman
This strategy is to stop them getting crushed in the next election, not to win it.I have to disagree. They've only lurched this far to the right in opposition, so I think it's a particular odd strategy.
Johnson for all his faults (should never have been anyway near public office) was politically quite liberal.
There is a sizeable degree of the population that will always vote Tory, I grew up in one of those areas. Any discussion of how bad how bad the government is will always get talked down with fear of Labour. The Blair era is rarely mentioned, its all about the 1970s and the excesses of the Thatcher Government didn't touch those areas.
Those sort of people are relatively irrelevant in winning the elections under our system. just as are those round me who will always vote Labour.
It's those voters who are willing to flip between the the left and right who get a party in. The Conservatives strategy appears to ignore them and they appear to mainly focussed on their core hardcore vote.
They will fail with this strategy. You them over with giving them hope, not by attempting to frighten them with the alternative if the alternative isn't actually that frightening.