• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

AND HERE WE GO - THE 2019 GENERAL ELECTION THREAD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 18645
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
which if course is part of why he won't be subjected to scrutiny - all he would do would double down on his existing deceits and create more. And it seems that - Trump-like - his core vote doesn't care about his deceits - they've decided to vote for him (via their Tory Party Candidate) on the basis of his Getting Brexit Done promise regardless of what we might now understand about what that actually means and what Tory Paty policies might mean for them individually :(
Click to expand...
You are so right about his core voters...….similar to Trump supporters when he said ...'I could shoot someone and they would still vote for me'
Scary situation where a once sensible middle England seem to be sleepwalking the UK into a serious crisis with a pretty obvious outcome.
I hope sanity will prevail but I have my doubts.:(
 
Doon frae Troon said:
You are so right about his core voters...….similar to Trump supporters when he said ...'I could shoot someone and they would still vote for me'
Scary situation where a once sensible middle England seem to be sleepwalking the UK into a serious crisis with a pretty obvious outcome.
I hope sanity will prevail but I have my doubts.:(
Click to expand...

If your definition of sanity includes the words "Corbyn or Sturgeon" then I'd rather be sectioned under the mental health act.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The increase in homelessness since 2010 was under the Conservative Party government and was not helped by cuts in services made by the government. The Labour PArty did not make the cuts. The Conservative Party chose where to make the cuts (and they could have increased tax to compensate - but didn't). Javid said the increase in homelessness was the fault of the Labour Party - that is simply not true.
Click to expand...

i am not specifically talking about homelessness but that cuts since 2009 have been fundamentally needed. We had the worst budget deficit in the developed world and risked a signifcant deterioration in our credit rating, which would have been very serious to the cost of servicing our huge budget deficit that we inherited from Labour, who mismanaged the good times in the huge economic expansion to 2008. Now if Gordon Brown would have been sensible and created budget surpluses in many of those years and made a big cut in the country's debt, the mess the torries inherited in 2010 could have been manged with a much lower reduction in government spending

1575629710481.png

That there was only two years of budget surplus under Labour until the 2008 Crisis is a disgrace (as was selling half our gold reserves in 1999 at $282/oz - a 20yr low - and the price rallied 7 fold over the next decade). The torries inherited a 10% budget defecit in 2010 - and the fact that we have done better in GDP than nearly all of Europe since the crisis despite a much worse fiscal situation starting point is testament to a decent job by a government in very challenging times. We are still borrowing money although substantially less - the more this goes on the more trouble for future generations. So i have no time for all this insesant ranting about Tory austerity as it was the only game in town. We are now in a different situation. We kept a good (AA) credit rating although we were inevitably downgraded from AAA. There is now scope to add a bit more borrowing for infrastructure-related growth initiates at very low rates and hopefully this will help drive growth and enable us to push borrowing into the black over the next few years. Personally, I would love the see us become the world leader in tdal power and support the schemes in Swansea and then the bigger one in Cardiff. We have a unique asset to leverage in tidal power that could spur growth and eventually lower energy prices. Anyway, that is digressing!

1575630074995.png
 
chrisd said:
We all know you think of Boris and on a golf forum with about 20 regular contributors to a thread, I dont think any of our opinions matter one jot to any of the others, and certainly I for one cant be arsed to argue with you. As far as I'm concerned you will never be swayed so there is little point in trying wheras at least Paul , Wolf and others have something of an open mind and will at least be convinced if a point is well made.

I for one will be very happy if Boris wins with a decent majority and we leave the EU on the 31st just to change your emphasis to the trade deal which, of course, will all be negative but will at least be something new to winge about
Click to expand...

No need for any negative discussion about the great comprehensive and deep deal that Javid, again, told us about yesterday - and that every government minister will given any chance tell us is within our grasp - just before they tell us to vote for them to Get Brexit Done.
 
PNWokingham said:
i am not specifically talking about homelessness but that cuts since 2009 have been fundamentally needed
Click to expand...

Yes - indeed - but I am talking about Javid claiming that it was Labour who are responsible for the homelessness. And that is simply not true.

Whatever other reasons there might be for the increase in homelessness since 2010 - it could not be anything but exacerbated by Conservative Party cuts due to their austerity programme. I am not arguing whether the austerity programme was required or not - but cuts were made as a result of it - and at the same time homelessness has increased.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
No need for any negative discussion about the great comprehensive and deep deal that Javid, again, told us about yesterday - and that every government minister will given any chance tell us is within our grasp - just before they tell us to vote for them to Get Brexit Done.
Click to expand...

Please let's not talk about the deal in advance, lets savour the moment 10 seconds after we leave ??
 
Hacker Khan said:
Apparently the spin is he said 'people of talent'. Although even if he did say colour which it sounds like to me, we are now in Trump territory where he could say mostly anything and it would not make a blind bit of difference to 99.99% of Tory voters. As he's not Jeremy Corbyn and that is the standard he is mostly held to now it seems.
Click to expand...

I've just listened again and of course he said 'colour'...jeez - we have truly gone down the Trump rabbit-hole now that we are being told that what we heard is not what we heard.

But I listened again in case I got it wrong...and on a re-listen he may well have said 'talent'
 
Last edited:
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I've just listened again and of course he said 'colour'...jeez - we have truly gone down the Trump rabbit-hole now that we are being told that what we heard is not what we heard.
Click to expand...

Don't know, suppose you can hear both talent and colour if you want to. Probably an interesting experiment in that if you see the word colour before, you hear colour, and if you see the word talent before you'd hear talent.

But I suppose it deflects from other statements he was making such as that we can now legislate to take away cruelty to animals, inferring that the EU legislates to be cruel to animals???
 
pauldj42 said:
Since 2015 up until now, 100% tory responsibility.

The facts are indisputable:
Cameron promises vote to stop ukip vote in GE.
Cameron calls vote.
Cameron loses - legs it.
Pause for tory leadership election.
TM wins, calls another GE for vanity purposes. - loses overall majority.
Propped up by bribing DUP
2 years of negotiations with no cross party involvement.
Loses vote on her deal 3 times, Tories (incl boris jrm etc vote against it)
She runs away
Another pause for tory leadership election.
boris gets deal, passes through 1st stage of parliament - won’t budge on 3 days discussion.
Calls GE.

Please explain how any other party controlled that.

And I voted Leave.
Click to expand...
Paul please don't misquote me.. You've conveniently hightlighted only one part of a full sentence to suit your argument. Which ironically you call everyone out on when they say anything against Corbyn but have done exactly the same thing to others each time they don't slate Tory or Boris.

Lets be quite clear on the full context of the sentence you conveniently only highlight the part which you wish you to jump on.

Is it Boris or Tory fault we havent left yet, not entirely as it was cross parliament decisions that have left us in this sorry state its a collective responsibility for all parties but again its easy to blame the ones in power with a blind lack of looking at facts
Click to expand...

That clearly states its not entirely Boris or Tory fault, it does not state they dont have to bare some of the blame which of course they do any fool can see that, so don't treat me like one with your only high lighting part to suit you best.

To answer the rest of your post Cameron called the vote because people wanted it and he wrongly assumed he'd get a remain majority so there is a fault in his logic, as for running off sorry but the man stood down because he felt it was wrong decision for the country so stuck to his belief and for that alone its actually commendable because for all his faults he was acknowledging he can't see it working and wasnt man for the job.

2 years of negotiations, what did you expect that it would happen quickly, we were warned in advance it will be long and drawn out. Thats just naive to pretend not to know or ignore it, should it have been quicker of course it should so yes there is a fault of the Tory party but with hindsight its easy to say that.

As for no other parliamentary responsibility who do you think was for voting for or against the deals put forward, that wasnt the Tory party alone it was the entire house of commons all parties. Every deal put forward was voted down across the board as was no deal.

Then theres the Boris situation did he get a deal yes he did, what happens then, the HOC across all parties vote to bring in the Ben act so if Boris leaves he's breaking the law what did you expect the man to do.

All of the above is why the Tory Party isn't entirley responsible, do they have to accept their failures and larger part of it of course they do but ultimately for a deal to get done all of Parliament have to vote on it and every time something gets put forward it gets shut down. So again next time you quote something do it properly with actual context and not to suit your own agenda as that makes you no different to the JLM who you defend Corbyn against for twisting facts and words to suit personal agenda. Personally having debated things you previously I thought better of you but in this you've done nothing but suit your own bias without reading and commenting on something in its entirety.
 
Hacker Khan said:
Don't know, suppose you can hear both talent and colour if you want to. Probably an interesting experiment in that if you see the word colour before, you hear colour, and if you see the word talent before you'd hear talent.

But I suppose it deflects from other statements he was making such as that we can now legislate to take away cruelty to animals, inferring that the EU legislates to be cruel to animals???
Click to expand...

On re-listen I am pretty sure he said 'talent'

...and his stuff about controlling immigration as we have not been able to control it before...well yes - but maybe
 
Wolf said:
Paul please don't misquote me.. You've conveniently hightlighted only one part of a full sentence to suit your argument. Which ironically you call everyone out on when they say anything against Corbyn but have done exactly the same thing to others each time they don't slate Tory or Boris.

Lets be quite clear on the full context of the sentence you conveniently only highlight the part which you wish you to jump on.



That clearly states its not entirely Boris or Tory fault, it does not state they dont have to bare some of the blame which of course they do any fool can see that, so don't treat me like one with your only high lighting part to suit you best.

To answer the rest of your post Cameron called the vote because people wanted it and he wrongly assumed he'd get a remain majority so there is a fault in his logic, as for running off sorry but the man stood down because he felt it was wrong decision for the country so stuck to his belief and for that alone its actually commendable because for all his faults he was acknowledging he can't see it working and wasnt man for the job.

2 years of negotiations, what did you expect that it would happen quickly, we weere warned in advance it will be ling and drawn out. Thats just naive to pretend not to know or ignore it, should it have been quicker of course it should so yes there is a fault of the Tory party but with hindsight its easy to say that.

As for no other parliamentary responsibility who do you think was for voting for or against the deals put forward, that wasnt the Tory party alone it was the entire house of commons all parties. Every deal put forward was voted down across the board as was no deal.

Then theres the Boris situation did he get a deal yes he did, what happens then, the HOC across all parties vote to bring in the Ben act so if Boris leaves he's breaking the law what did you expect the man to do.

All of the above is why the Tory Party isn't entirley responsible, do they have to accept their failures and large oart of it of course they do but ultimately for a deal to get done all of Parliament have to vote on it and every time something gets put forward it gets shut down. So again next time you quote something do it properly with actual context and not to suit your own agenda as that makes you no different to the JLM who you defend Corbyn against for twisting facts and words to suit personal agenda. Personally having debated things you previously I thought better of you but in this you've done nothing but suit your own bias without reading and commenting on something in its entirety.
Click to expand...
First off I didn’t misquote you, I highlighted that exact bit intentionally as that is bit I believe people are wrong on.
It’s also not an argument, I believe it was a discussion or a debate.

As for your response to my points:
Cameron/the tory party put it in their manifesto, no other party agreed we needed a referendum, it was self protection.

2 years to do the deal, you missed the point, I don’t care if it took 20 years, it’s the fact she acted alone, she never invited any other party to get their input, she lost negotiators through resignation etc it was a tory negotiation and the first time the rest of parliament got involved was when the deal appeared.

The tory party had a majority, if they’d of got their act together with the dup and voted as one, no other party mattered, their vote was irrelevant.

Point of clarity for you: boris’s deal passed stage 1 after the Benn act had happened, he’d asked for the extension, it was supported by mp’s from other parties.

Don’t accuse me of looking for an argument, I have spun nothing and just stated facts, if you don’t wish to discuss anything in future just be respectful and ask me not to reply to your posts.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Yes - indeed - but I am talking about Javid claiming that it was Labour who are responsible for the homelessness. And that is simply not true.

Whatever other reasons there might be for the increase in homelessness since 2010 - it could not be anything but exacerbated by Conservative Party cuts due to their austerity programme. I am not arguing whether the austerity programme was required or not - but cuts were made as a result of it - and at the same time homelessness has increased.
Click to expand...

Enjoy your belief that everything is caused by the party in power at the time. IMO you need to think rationally rather than emotionally about the time-lag between policies and their manifested effect - in terms of housing its about 5-10 years. Developers are hanging onto land; the number of single person homes has increased, population density. etc.etc.

The unavoidable fact is the previous Labour administration damaged the UK economy, the impact on housing started impacting well after they had been replaced. You can see evidence of this lag when the USA sub-prime lending caused their property prices to fall dramatically; the irresponsible 'lending and trading of loans' had started about 8 years earlier.
 
pauldj42 said:
First off I didn’t misquote you, I highlighted that exact bit intentionally as that is bit I believe people are wrong on.
It’s also not an argument, I believe it was a discussion or a debate.

As for your response to my points:
Cameron/the tory party put it in their manifesto, no other party agreed we needed a referendum, it was self protection.

2 years to do the deal, you missed the point, I don’t care if it took 20 years, it’s the fact she acted alone, she never invited any other party to get their input, she lost negotiators through resignation etc it was a tory negotiation and the first time the rest of parliament got involved was when the deal appeared.

The tory party had a majority, if they’d of got their act together with the dup and voted as one, no other party mattered, their vote was irrelevant.

Point of clarity for you: boris’s deal passed stage 1 after the Benn act had happened, he’d asked for the extension, it was supported by mp’s from other parties.

Don’t accuse me of looking for an argument, I have spun nothing and just stated facts, if you don’t wish to discuss anything in future just be respectful and ask me not to reply to your posts.
Click to expand...
You say highlighted bit you think oeiole are wrong on but thats change the fact only highlighting oart of a sentence doesn't give the context it was written in.

I havent missed the point of any part of your post I've answered exactly what you wrote.

Did i accuse you of looking for an argunent no i said you highlighting only part suits your argument. By that i meant your stance in all this but if you read it as accusation then I can't accept fault for how you read it only for perhaps I could have used a better word.

I also never stated i didnt wish to discuss things in future i merely asked you quote in entirety as that would have been factual and not open to your own side of debate. I've not been disrespectful in what I wrote either, i merely responded to your post and that I felt only highlighting a fragment of a sentence showed lack of acknowledgement of what was actually written which youve pointed out to others on occasion.
 
drdel said:
Enjoy your belief that everything is caused by the party in power at the time. IMO you need to think rationally rather than emotionally about the time-lag between policies and their manifested effect - in terms of housing its about 5-10 years. Developers are hanging onto land; the number of single person homes has increased, population density. etc.etc.

The unavoidable fact is the previous Labour administration damaged the UK economy, the impact on housing started impacting well after they had been replaced. You can see evidence of this lag when the USA sub-prime lending caused their property prices to fall dramatically; the irresponsible 'lending and trading of loans' had started about 8 years earlier.
Click to expand...

Yes I know - but the homelessness was not simply the fault of Labour. There might be some joint responsibility - but that is not what Javid said - he blamed it all on Labour - no recognition and acceptance at all that Tory Party austerity measures may have exacerbated things.

Meanwhile Johnson on NI/rUK border controls. Yes Prime Minster - we shouldn't listen to your NI Secretary; your Brexit Secretary, or the Treasury analysis revealed today - we should simply believe what you say. You have nothing it seems, to back up your assertions as everyone else who might actually know disagrees. No - we must believe you - the rest is Fake News - where's the rabbit hole?
 
Wolf said:
You say highlighted bit you think oeiole are wrong on but thats change the fact only highlighting oart of a sentence doesn't give the context it was written in.

I havent missed the point of any part of your post I've answered exactly what you wrote.

Did i accuse you of looking for an argunent no i said you highlighting only part suits your argument. By that i meant your stance in all this but if you read it as accusation then I can't accept fault for how you read it only for perhaps I could have used a better word.

I also never stated i didnt wish to discuss things in future i merely asked you quote in entirety as that would have been factual and not open to your own side of debate. I've not been disrespectful in what I wrote either, i merely responded to your post and that I felt only highlighting a fragment of a sentence showed lack of acknowledgement of what was actually written
Click to expand...
The context was my reply, I was trying to show why I believe we’ve been fed a pack lies covered by a smoke screen, an example of that is the Benn Act, he’d already got the extension when his deal was voted on.

Plenty of times words can be misunderstood when written down.
I had no intention of misquoting you or taken your words out of context.
I was highlighting one line that in my opinion the tory party have fed the media and the country to absolve themselves of any responsibility from why we had the referendum until the time the deal cane to the hoc.
 
pauldj42 said:
The context was my reply, I was trying to show why I believe we’ve been fed a pack lies covered by a smoke screen, an example of that is the Benn Act, he’d already got the extension when his deal was voted on.

Plenty of times words can be misunderstood when written down.
I had no intention of misquoting you or taken your words out of context.
I was highlighting one line that in my opinion the tory party have fed the media and the country to absolve themselves of any responsibility from why we had the referendum until the time the deal cane to the hoc.
Click to expand...
Then clearly we've both been guilty of misinterpretation in this case.

However that part there in bold sums up why i think you were wrong in only highlighting part of my sentence. You there in your own words state about them and one line to absolve themselves, because the rest of my sentence wasn't that one line nor did it absolve them of any guilt.

Like i say we both clearly misinterpreted each other in some way, these things happen and we move on to the next debate as adults who are both happy to discuss this subject matter ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top