Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Turn up for the books.............The hard left guy gets on the ballot for the Labour leadership !!....Managed to bag 35 nominations although some were chucked at him by Burnham who will no doubt pick up many of his second preferences...........

Corbyn has no chance....

However it means one of the other three is likely to get hurt in the first round..........Corbyn no doubt will hoover up the extreme nutty left of which there are no doubt plenty in the Labour party and will probably get enough to take him through the first round !!...

(Cruddas finished top in the 2007 Deputy leader race after the first round (He was the "left" candidate)...Of course Harman and Johnson did better as the rounds progresses with second prefs...)

That means one of the three favorites is likely to be eliminated first..................

Latest odds............

Burnham 10/11
Kendall 5/2
Cooper 3/1
Corbyn 66/1 .................

Duty281 wrote:Yep, Labour are in terminal decline. Which is great news for anyone who actually believes in the great and the good of this country, along with our heritage and values.

Haven't those been banned from the airwaves now lest they offend believers of other heritages and values or those that have no belief in heritage and values at all?

Duty281 wrote:Yep, Labour are in terminal decline. Which is great news for anyone who actually believes in the great and the good of this country, along with our heritage and values.

From a UKIP voter...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Yep, Labour are in terminal decline. Which is great news for anyone who actually believes in the great and the good of this country, along with our heritage and values.

From a UKIP voter...

Indeed, the only major political party in this country who believes that this fair land can flourish as an independent, self-governing nation.

You're right..I can't see these Countries staying in Europe and pumping billions in...minding If Britain enjoy the fruits of it while offering nothing in return...

50% of Britain's exports go to EU partners...and Britain won't have a say as to how future trading rules will be drawn up !!.

I imagine all these flag waving, rich politicians won't pay the price if and when it goes t*ts up...

Still small price to pay to say you're independent though, hey !!!.

Yeah, that trade deficit we have with the European Union is really going to screw over an independent, self-governing Britain, isn't it?

It's estimated 3m jobs depend on EU membership...

A statistic from 15 years ago that has been long refuted as absolute drivel.

Like.... Romanians are responsible for 92% of ATM crime on London..

You mean ??

UK election
-------------

Comres - Con 42.....Lab 27......UKIP 15....Lib 7....

Icm - Con 39.....Lab 33.......UKIP 12...Lib 7....

Liberals are polling worse now than under Clegg !!

Iraq
------

Are you in favor of sending ground troops in to fight Isis ??

Yes 43%................No 37%...

EU question
--------------

Survation - Stay 47%..................Leave 53%

USA presidential election
------------------------------

RCL - Trump 32.......Carson 22......Rubio 11...Cruz 8.....Bush 6

RCL - Clinton 60......Sanders 34......

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:UK election
-------------

Comres - Con 42.....Lab 27......UKIP 15....Lib 7....

Icm      - Con 39.....Lab 33.......UKIP 12...Lib 7....

Liberals are polling worse now than under Clegg !!

Not that surprising, considering the SNP get all the media time they used to get as the third largest Westminster party. EU referendum is probably their best chance to launch some sort of comeback.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:USA presidential election
------------------------------

RCL - Trump 32.......Carson 22......Rubio 11...Cruz 8.....Bush 6

RCL - Clinton 60......Sanders 34......

Trump's holding on in the polls, but looking ever more unhinged the longer things go on. Think the length of the process might end up doing him in.

Trump has surprised us all......Of course once the establishment candidates drop out their votes will go to the others........

Trump has to hope he nails some of Carson's voters when he drops out.... and that more than one establishment candidate stays in the race until super Tuesday so as to dilute the GOP vote..

Either way, the Democrats will be begging for either Trump or Carson to win.

Trump or Carson would be a cake walk for Dems.

Pr4wn wrote:Either way, the Democrats will be begging for either Trump or Carson to win.

Clinton's email gate saga means that it isn't a done deal should Trump win.....

All about floating voters........Clinton isn't polling well with those at the moment....

Rubio would win according to the polls should he get the GOP nod.....My guess is he will...

Toppy has Osborne bummed you again?

Someone tell me why I should care about London house prices? Did someone force people to live in London? Are they all prisoners?

Bye bye Tax credit policy..u turn number 50...

Pity there is no opposition to stick the boot in..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Bye bye Tax credit policy..u turn number 50...

Pity there is no opposition to stick the boot in..

Even by Labour's pitiful standards, quoting Mao is a pretty pathetic move.

I've never seen a party so desperate to destroy itself.

Not quite truss. They've still reduced the threshold from 5k to 2.5. Will still hurt some people

ShahenshahG wrote:Toppy has Osborne bummed you again?

Just as my ringhole was recovering from the Budget, he's just bent me over thrown away the lube and Frak me so hard I won't be walking for months.

Absolute clueless f***ing c*nt. Just so, what, poor unaspirational people have an outside chance, as opposed to no chance, of buying a home they probably can't afford and will lose anyway? Or so the same get a few less freebies from tax credits, equivalent to about a box of fags a week.

F***ing joke, just attacking the people who are actually driving this damn country, not just along for the ride.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Someone tell me why I should care about London house prices? Did someone force people to live in London? Are they all prisoners?

No, they're not, they're just greedy bell end tw@ts who demand to be housed in the best areas of the country without wanting to have to do the leg work to actually afford it.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:Toppy has Osborne bummed you again?

Just as my ringhole was recovering from the Budget, he's just bent me over thrown away the lube and Frak me so hard I won't be walking for months.

Absolute clueless f***ing c*nt.  Just so, what, poor unaspirational people have an outside chance, as opposed to no chance, of buying a home they probably can't afford and will lose anyway? Or so the same get a few less freebies from tax credits, equivalent to about a box of fags a week.

F***ing joke, just attacking the people who are actually driving this damn country, not just along for the ride.

He cut too hard and too fast at the beginning and now he's back pedaling a little bit. Camerons fault for announcing his not standing for a third term so early in the game. Boris looked like you felt after you determined the impact of the budget.

Quite refreshing to see a government actually reactive for once. What do people want?

As for London prices, if you work in London your wages reflect that. I could get maybe £10k a year more doing my job in London but much of that would be swallowed up by travel and living costs.

Stupid..sweeping statement.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Stupid..sweeping statement.

Explain?

London wages comment is bollox and you know it..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:London wages comment is bollox and you know it..

It is absolutley not, especially in terms of skilled professions. The company I work for adds a £4.5k 'london' allowance for client services staff (PA's to the financial adviser earn about £23k) working in the London office.

Living up north I appreciate you wouldn't be looking for london jobs or come across london weighting but I can guarantee it exists. My ex would have dropped £20k to do the job she does outside London.

In some cases I agree...but you intimated it was across the board...

Just not true..

seanmichaels wrote:Quite refreshing to see a government actually reactive for once. What do people want?

As for London prices, if you work in London your wages reflect that. I could get maybe £10k a year more doing my job in London but much of that would be swallowed up by travel and living costs.

Good point. The greatest f*ckwittery though is from the people who don't get the best improved weightings and are still on good, albeit in a London context modest, wages but demand to be able to live in the best and most expensive areas.

Papers tried to carry a big boohoo article a while back about teachers who were on standard London state teacher salaries for new/juniors of £27-35k and struggling to pay their rent.

Ended up widely slated because it was just a few stupid girls that were trying to live in Clapham and Balham etc when they could have quite easily rented in London elsewhere.

It's the same old story of people refusing to live within their means.

Wonder how many fulltime blue collar workers who's wives work fulltime too..... own their own homes in London...

Bet it's not many..

UKIP 2/1 to win in Oldham.

It could be the end of Corbyn if UKIP topple Labour in one of the latter's 'heartlands'.

Corbyn has 50 percent of the membership unfortunately..

UKIP won't win..

It's within 1,000 votes, apparently. Labour are in such a panic that they've had to start getting activists in from London, Birmingham and Sheffield, and Mr. McDonnell has had to resort to hysterical ranting.

Hell of a lot of effort for a 'safe seat'.

I'm backing my instinct - £100 on UKIP at 5/2.

I hope UKIP win, purely to reinforce the point to all the smug far-left liberalistas that celebrated screwing Corbyn into place as Shadow PM that you can't win government through a minority - which is all Jezza had. An overly vocal minority that can influence an internal vote based on proportional representation but wouldn't have a hope influencing national elections under FPTP.

I see the Labour party have held another gender-segregated meeting:

http://order-order.com/2015/11/30/labour-hold-another-segregated-rally/

What a disgusting, vile party Labour are. Why isn't this on the front page of every newspaper in the land?

Far be it for me to support Labour too strongly, but ...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVDZx8KWUAAoYof.jpg:large

So, reading the rather embellished article you quoted, Labour didn't actually hold or host the meeting.

Also, one would assume that people weren't forced to sit like that?

Labour are vile though, especially when compared to the Kippers, who would just kick them all out and make things much more simple for all of us white folk.

Nothing to do with Labour, it's Islam and its followship that determine any segregated seating.

Pr4wn wrote:So, reading the rather embellished article you quoted, Labour didn't actually hold or host the meeting.

Also, one would assume that people weren't forced to sit like that?

Labour are vile though, especially when compared to the Kippers, who would just kick them all out and make things much more simple for all of us white folk.

I just wish Labour were as understanding with other cultures as UKIP....

Indeed. How dare they sit where they like. They should sit in a manner that we deem acceptable. That's true freedom.

Pr4wn wrote:Indeed. How dare they sit where they like. They should sit in a manner that we deem acceptable. That's true freedom.

Debatable.

In fairness now Jarvis has said he wants the job.....UKIP winning would probably be a good thing..

Labour need to end this nightmare..

Does anyone anywhere actually trust any of the parties anymore (not on about individuals, the parties in general)?

I honestly think they're in it for themselves and that's it

Derby has smelt the coffee..

BamBam wrote:Far be it for me to support Labour too strongly, but ...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVDZx8KWUAAoYof.jpg:large

Muslim men and women were segregated.

Pr4wn wrote:So, reading the rather embellished article you quoted, Labour didn't actually hold or host the meeting.

Also, one would assume that people weren't forced to sit like that?

It was hosted by a Labour-affiliated group and attended by several Labour MPs and officials.

It would be safe to assume, given that this is not the first time, that the Muslim women were forced to sit in that particular way.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Nothing to do with Labour, it's Islam and its followship that determine any segregated seating.

And Labour are perfectly happy to suck up to it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I just wish Labour were as understanding with other cultures as UKIP....

Hooray for multiculturalism, yay!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM

You seem to be having an orgasm over some fairly trivial crap..

When you get older you'll realise that life isn't black or white....There is plenty of grey areas too.

Duty281 wrote:It would be safe to assume, given that this is not the first time, that the Muslim women were forced to sit in that particular way.

No, it really wouldn't. You do know that many Muslim women wear the Niqab out of choice, don't you? Different customs have different ways of doing things. You just don't like it so you're making things up to support your flimsy argument and ridiculous tabloid story.

Pr4wn wrote:

Duty281 wrote:It would be safe to assume, given that this is not the first time, that the Muslim women were forced to sit in that particular way.

No, it really wouldn't. You do know that many Muslim women wear the Niqab out of choice, don't you? Different customs have different ways of doing things. You just don't like it so you're making things up to support your flimsy argument and ridiculous tabloid story.

'Choice' following actual free will or 'choice' following religious indoctrination??

They may just be concerned about skin cancer.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

Duty281 wrote:It would be safe to assume, given that this is not the first time, that the Muslim women were forced to sit in that particular way.

No, it really wouldn't. You do know that many Muslim women wear the Niqab out of choice, don't you? Different customs have different ways of doing things. You just don't like it so you're making things up to support your flimsy argument and ridiculous tabloid story.

'Choice' following actual free will or 'choice' following religious indoctrination??

It doesn't matter. We live in a free society and, seeing as there is clearly no evidence whatsoever of forced segregation, it's ridiculous to assume that anyone was forced to sit somewhere against their will.

What seems to be far more disturbing is the bullying scandal surrounding the Tories and the way they tried to whitewash it before being practically forced to have an independent inquiry.