We are all in it together - Aye Right!

[ManinBlack]

I do with agree with some of what you say, however the reason Milliband D was beaten by his bother was because of the unions. If it had been one member one vote and no union block votes, our political history would in all likelyhood be very different....much as if John Smith hadn't been lost so early in his life.

The point is that if Ed Milliband had put the interests of his party before his own interests he would have seen quite plainly that his brother was head & shoulders above anyone else as the person most likely to lead the party to a victory in a General Election. But, no, he sniffed a chance of being the leader & couldn't resist. What a prat.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

The point is that if Ed Milliband had put the interests of his party before his own interests he would have seen quite plainly that his brother was head & shoulders above anyone else as the person most likely to lead the party to a victory in a General Election. But, no, he sniffed a chance of being the leader & couldn't resist. What a prat.

I am quite enjoying all the former shadow ministers who derided Corbyn in the most awful way now complaining that he won't give them their old jobs back. Good for you Jezza, you sort them out.:lol:
....and whilst you are about it you really do need to do something about the Scottish Labour leader. SNP lose 500,000 votes and SLAB gain 10,000. says it all.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

The point is that if Ed Milliband had put the interests of his party before his own interests he would have seen quite plainly that his brother was head & shoulders above anyone else as the person most likely to lead the party to a victory in a General Election. But, no, he sniffed a chance of being the leader & couldn't resist. What a prat.

I don't disagree, but he was bolstered and emboldened by the unions who have too much say in the labour party and it's leadership. To me, Ed Milliband is as unelectable as J Corbyn.

 

[drdel]

Both Hogan and Socket have been asked to take a break from political threads for a few days and then to limit their posts in those same threads.

There, now you know, so can we stop the speculation and gnashing of teeth and get back to saving the world

Temporary 'red card' really !!!

Surely if they both can take the stick for what they post there's no harm done. I thought the UK supported free expression, while I think some of the language might have been more diplomatic on occasion this is only an on-line Forum. We all know politics and religion can be very controversial topics with heated debate - just watch the HoC broadcasts for a few minutes.

Its the Internet- we're all sad adults behind a keyboard and behaving like kids - so what? as long as there's nothing illegal. If some readers are upset by a post; big deal, don't read it anymore there's is no compulsion.

We do not know an individual's reasons for posting and I suspect some may find a release from certain stresses so in my book we should be able to exercise our own filters and 'bans' could be more diplomatically replaced by a quiet word in a PM!

 

[bluewolf]

Temporary 'red card' really !!!

Surely if they both can take the stick for what they post there's no harm done. I thought the UK supported free expression, while I think some of the language might have been more diplomatic on occasion this is only an on-line Forum. We all know politics and religion can be very controversial topics with heated debate - just watch the HoC broadcasts for a few minutes.

Its the Internet- we're all sad adults behind a keyboard and behaving like kids - so what? as long as there's nothing illegal. If some readers are upset by a post; big deal, don't read it anymore there's is no compulsion.

We do not know an individual's reasons for posting and I suspect some may find a release from certain stresses so in my book we should be able to exercise our own filters and 'bans' could be more diplomatically replaced by a quiet word in a PM!

100% agree. Whilst I found their constant prattling totally tiresome, I could quite easily skip through their posts. People complaining is a poor show really 😠

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Temporary 'red card' really !!!

Surely if they both can take the stick for what they post there's no harm done. I thought the UK supported free expression, while I think some of the language might have been more diplomatic on occasion this is only an on-line Forum. We all know politics and religion can be very controversial topics with heated debate - just watch the HoC broadcasts for a few minutes.

Its the Internet- we're all sad adults behind a keyboard and behaving like kids - so what? as long as there's nothing illegal. If some readers are upset by a post; big deal, don't read it anymore there's is no compulsion.

We do not know an individual's reasons for posting and I suspect some may find a release from certain stresses so in my book we should be able to exercise our own filters and 'bans' could be more diplomatically replaced by a quiet word in a PM!

Absolutely great post, agree with every word and your posts drive me mad, so even more respect for this one, it's how we should all behave.

 

[Fish]

Temporary 'red card' really !!!

Surely if they both can take the stick for what they post there's no harm done. I thought the UK supported free expression, while I think some of the language might have been more diplomatic on occasion this is only an on-line Forum. We all know politics and religion can be very controversial topics with heated debate - just watch the HoC broadcasts for a few minutes.

Its the Internet- we're all sad adults behind a keyboard and behaving like kids - so what? as long as there's nothing illegal. If some readers are upset by a post; big deal, don't read it anymore there's is no compulsion.

We do not know an individual's reasons for posting and I suspect some may find a release from certain stresses so in my book we should be able to exercise our own filters and 'bans' could be more diplomatically replaced by a quiet word in a PM!

I think for some that may have complained (not me by the way) it may be that they wanted to contribute to some of the political threads and didn't feel they could or sometimes did but either had their post and opinion totally ignored because of the swamp of posts by some individuals engrossed between themselves or got answered in some derogatory way or long winded rammel.

The football thread went this way for a while until certain individuals were restricted and warned, now people that we're staying away from that are back posting, which can only be a good thing.

There is no suppression of free speech or suppressing people's opinions, but when the potential enjoyment of other forum users becomes an issue then something has to change.

IMHO 😎

 

[Tashyboy]

100% agree. Whilst I found their constant prattling totally tiresome, I could quite easily skip through their posts. People complaining is a poor show really 

And that is me, There are some posters on here whose posts I will just not read, I don't count Hogie and socket in those. There are some proper wind up merchants on here and quite frankly it is far simpler to just ignore there comments and trolling.

 

[Wilson]

I don't disagree, but he was bolstered and emboldened by the unions who have too much say in the labour party and it's leadership. To me, Ed Milliband is as unelectable as J Corbyn.

Wasn't D Milliband going to reduce the union power, hence they voted for E Milliband? David Milliband was, and probably still is, a highly electable PM to me.

 

[Tashyboy]

Wasn't D Milliband going to reduce the union power, hence they voted for E Milliband? David Milliband was, and probably still is, a highly electable PM to me.

Whats David Milliband doin now a a days. Unfortunately he would probably stil want to reduce Union power, and rightly so. Which is why he would not get to be labour leader. For me, when he disappeared as soon as he lost the labour leadership was enough to say he should not have it. He should of stuck around and he could well of took over from his brother and shown how it should of been done, instead of having the plonker we now have.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Whats David Milliband doin now a a days. Unfortunately he would probably stil want to reduce Union power, and rightly so. Which is why he would not get to be labour leader. For me, when he disappeared as soon as he lost the labour leadership was enough to say he should not have it. He should of stuck around and he could well of took over from his brother and shown how it should of been done, instead of having the plonker we now have.

He's president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee. I don'thim blame for walking away after his brother beat him for the leadership, at least it stopped his shadow from being an excuse for the poor performance given by his brother.

 

[Jates12]

I was brought up in a family and society where you didn't discuss who you voted for. You can by all means discuss politics but you also must understand that people have a difference in opinion and are going to vote how they want to vote regardless of what people say to them or how much they argue.

My Family all pretty much vote for one party as does my partner, but her parents vote for another. This doesnt stop us discussing politics it means that we can have a calm debate about who/what benefits each party has and then when it may get out of hand, terminate the conversation, agree to disagree and move on.

Why cant we do that on here, it makes no sense. Full blow arguments over internet forums? You may as well load up a game of call of duty and have a slanging match with some 12 year olds, its the same behaviour.