Margaret Thatcher split off topic

[Good old]

No it doesn't many a Tory, voted remain, many of those had the guts to follow conscience on the issue in the house.

The majority of those in the house got voted out for it . what are you on about now?

You do realise there was an election last december and the remainers in parliament got a kicking dont you?

How the hell do you think Labour implement the winner of an election, by opposing that winner throughout.

Your desperate now. Where did i say labour?

It worries me that you characters of no real allegiance

No real allegiance?

You just spent the thread accusng me of being a nasty snp supporting scottish nationalist whose country is rife with nationalism , now you accuse me of no allegiance?

LMFAO 

pretend to not understand that no election ,no referendum, is so sacrosanct in our democracy it becomes beyond criticism

I never ever said that at all. I said you had to implement the result of the ref  before campaigning to stop it. Which you and yours wouldnt do with predictable results .

Answer1  There you go interfere with the context again. Millions of Tories voted in the referendum against Brexit , almost to a man they  voted Tory at the election.
Answer 2 "Same as YOU implement the winner of a referendum." Who the hell is YOU then?
Answer3 Well that's the problem isn't it. You have denied all allegiances . Because SNP are very obviously a socialist leaning outfit . And low and behold you ain't a frigging socialist  or so you have wanted us to believe. LoL
Answer 4 And that's another of your problems .It was never the case that the referendum had to be implemented without delay If you had ever had a full grasp of our democratic practises no referendum result could ever over ride the rights of parliament. It was a mistake of parliament to ever allow that to be in doubt . But never the less you are wrong to believe otherwise.

[Good old]

Oh here we go another f—king translation .If you actually raised some actual new points a direct answer might be needed.

Raised new points?

You are the one constantly bringing out the tired old tropes that labour have been spouting for generations that have been answered time and again both online and at the ballot box.

You should try a novel Thomas, as you rely so often on Invented fiction

I deal in fact , labour deal in fantasy and make believe never never land of cuddly socialism and only respecting democracy when it goes in your favour.

Never have I sneered , you do enough of that for the whole bloody site

I do indeed , sometimes , but im not trying to win english voters votes , you on the other hand are and sneer at them every time they vote the wrong way and then can't understand why they resent you the next time you want electing. Seems a stupid way of dealing politically sneering at the very people you want to vote for you , but thats the brit left and labour.

What I promote is the  rejection of the idea that the electorate will fall under the spell of Tory rule for ever more,

Where has anyone said forevermore?

and that the Labour movement is capable of evolving to a position where by it becomes a viable alternative to the Tory dream of ruling unopposed.

You are incapable of thinking beyond your comfortable two party politics.

How do you know labour will remain the only viable alterantive to the tories in england?

You havent been the only viable alternative in scotland now for at least the last decade , and you hate being in fourth place in scotland more than being in oppositon in  england.

And beyond that I promote the idea that to speak against  the blind acceptance of Brexit,

please quote where anyone has said this?

Speaking out against brexit isnt the same as criticising westmisnter and for example labour for trying to stop england leaving and respecting a referendum result as you have done.

Answer 1.  As the only thing new the Tories offer, is Brexit . Then finding anything actually new in any other area has only a remote chance.
Answer 2. So you think your the one with all the facts . Well what's new.
Answer 3 The Tories have been sneering at the general population for so long it's become acceptable in certain quarters it would seem.  I try hard to avoid doing it. I have noticed how a lot of brexiteers, equate rejection of their cause as something in the way of a sneer. The imagined sneer seems  to warm their Passion for the cause. Not you of course Thomas.
Answer 4 If they are not removed they or a variation of them rule for ever more. That's obvious.
Answer 5 No I am not ,another total underestimation on your part. But another party outside of dictatorship ,will always carry the traits of one or the other  of those prominent right now. Nationalism won't alter that if it came about . Look at Scotland.
Answer6 Mostly inferred I agree. Don't talk crap Thomas, Every parliamentarian which ever party ,including the Scots Nats  And many Libs,and enough Tories to alter the face of that party had a perfect right to interfere with the course of Brexit , and did. It's another example your denial of the facts . Wrong on all counts . The MPs  were well within their rights . The MPs were of all parties . not just Labour. The result is fact , it will be enacted , that doesn't mean those that don't agree with it shut up for ever more. Do you know why Thomas , ? You should. But you chose to ignore how the game actually works in our ,that is my , maybe not yours, democracy.

[Sheepy]

The 8 symptoms of labour party groupthink

    Illusion of invulnerability – Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking extreme risks.

    Collective rationalization – Members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions.

    Belief in inherent morality – Members believe in the rightness of their cause and therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.

    Stereotyped views of other groups – Negative views of "enemy" make effective responses to conflict seem unnecessary.

    Direct pressure on dissenters – Members are under pressure not to express arguments against any of the group's views.

    Self-censorship – Doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are not expressed.

    Illusion of unanimity – The majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.

    Self-appointed 'mindguards' – Members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic or contradictory to the group's cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.

Or in short New Labour are full of it and always have been.

[Sheepy]

LOL Thomas is in full flight mode, maybe he should buy up virgin.

[Thomas]

"Labour got disconnected from the electorate. The evidence lies in the collapse of the popular vote. People stopped trusting the party and they didn't believe what it said about foreign wars, the state of the economy, reform of Parliament and public spending.

"Labour stopped defending individual freedom. The evidence can be found all over the place. Detention without trial, courts without juries, increased police and social welfare powers, camera monitoring, the expansion of GCHQ and, of course, identity cards. This is a tricky area for Labour which has always been to some extent a paternalistic party in setting out to support the disadvantaged and the oppressed. Tony Blair didn't always help because, occasionally, his moral convictions conflicted with everyone else's personal freedoms."

"Labour has still to confront a pervasive sense that too little changed for too many people when it held power. There are pockets of deprivation all over Britain – often a stone's throw from beautifully regenerated city centres – where life never seems to change much, come boom or come bust, and not just for those at the bottom of the pile.

The party noisily champions the 'squeezed middle', but Labour is vaguer about exactly what squeezed them: wages have been flatlining for lower earners since 2003, long before the credit crunch or Osborne's austerity pay freezes.

Young couples were steadily priced out not just of buying a home but renting one – the average London rent now demands an income of £52,000 a year – not merely in the last two years, but over more than a decade of failure to prick the housing bubble. In Bradford, Labour's candidate complained that the "Tories didn't care" about rocketing unemployment – but joblessness actually began rising in the city in 2004.

So it's not enough just to apologise for failures in bank regulation, when lower earners were suffering well before the crash. And it's not enough just to jeer at posh Tories for being out of touch with ordinary folk, when many of them think that Labour had lost touch too. Life may be tougher under the Tories, but for some it was no picnic before – and where's the proof that it would get better if Labour won again?

A former Labour councillor who accused the Labour party of intimidation and bullying tactics in the midst of dramatic budget negotiations last week has said she has had no contact from the party regarding their investigation into the matter."

ffs dont mention anti semtism.

The primary socially-negative cost of groupthink is the loss of individual creativity, uniqueness, and independent reasoning. Labour has become infected with the groupthink mentality, talking amongst themselves rather than listening to the public. They fail to grasp that it's not that the public aren't listening to them – Labour's problem is that it is, and it doesn't like what it sees anymore.

[Thomas]

The 8 symptoms of labour party groupthink

    Illusion of invulnerability – Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking extreme risks.

    Collective rationalization – Members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions.

    Belief in inherent morality – Members believe in the rightness of their cause and therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.

    Stereotyped views of other groups – Negative views of "enemy" make effective responses to conflict seem unnecessary.

    Direct pressure on dissenters – Members are under pressure not to express arguments against any of the group's views.

    Self-censorship – Doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are not expressed.

    Illusion of unanimity – The majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.

    Self-appointed 'mindguards' – Members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic or contradictory to the group's cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.

[Thomas]

i think borkie summed it up earlier when he said this....

Which translates as democracy is sacrosanct as long as the electorate agree with the Labour party line

Might stick that in my signature.

[Thomas]

No it doesn't many a Tory, voted remain, many of those had the guts to follow conscience on the issue in the house.

The majority of those in the house got voted out for it . what are you on about now?

You do realise there was an election last december and the remainers in parliament got a kicking dont you?

How the hell do you think Labour implement the winner of an election, by opposing that winner throughout.

Your desperate now. Where did i say labour?

It worries me that you characters of no real allegiance

No real allegiance?

You just spent the thread accusng me of being a nasty snp supporting scottish nationalist whose country is rife with nationalism , now you accuse me of no allegiance?

LMFAO 

pretend to not understand that no election ,no referendum, is so sacrosanct in our democracy it becomes beyond criticism

I never ever said that at all. I said you had to implement the result of the ref  before campaigning to stop it. Which you and yours wouldnt do with predictable results .

[Good old]

No it doesn't need translating . It means even if there was a Labour government , every Tory , is at perfect liberty to work to bring that government down by all means legal, not always fair, it's a totally interchangeable concept. And what worries me is you lot supporting Brexit don't understand that basic principle of liberty.

Aye it does. It means labour can't accept democracy when it goes against them.

You implement the referendum result first , then you campaign to change  it  , not before.

Same as you implement the winner of an election  ,then , and only then do you oppose them once they are in government.

It worries me you anti democrats in labour dont understand the basic priniciples of how this game works , which is may be why starmers stop brexit election gameplan backfired so spectacularly on him and the pro remain blairite faction in labour.

Maybe that why you have been out in the wilderness for ten years and counting , with this sneering attitude of we know best.

No it doesn't many a Tory, voted remain, many of those had the guts to follow conscience on the issue in the house.
How the hell do you think Labour implement the winner of an election, by opposing that winner throughout. Look I am really trying not to sneer now.
It worries me that you characters of no real allegiance , pretend to not understand that no election ,no referendum, is so sacrosanct in our democracy it becomes beyond criticism , by anyone of any political persuasion. That looks to me that you are the anti-democrats , you deny the well tried workings of our own democracy.

[Thomas]

Oh here we go another f—king translation .If you actually raised some actual new points a direct answer might be needed.

Raised new points?

You are the one constantly bringing out the tired old tropes that labour have been spouting for generations that have been answered time and again both online and at the ballot box.

You should try a novel Thomas, as you rely so often on Invented fiction

I deal in fact , labour deal in fantasy and make believe never never land of cuddly socialism and only respecting democracy when it goes in your favour.

Never have I sneered , you do enough of that for the whole bloody site

I do indeed , sometimes , but im not trying to win english voters votes , you on the other hand are and sneer at them every time they vote the wrong way and then can't understand why they resent you the next time you want electing. Seems a stupid way of dealing politically sneering at the very people you want to vote for you , but thats the brit left and labour.

What I promote is the  rejection of the idea that the electorate will fall under the spell of Tory rule for ever more,

Where has anyone said forevermore?

and that the Labour movement is capable of evolving to a position where by it becomes a viable alternative to the Tory dream of ruling unopposed.

You are incapable of thinking beyond your comfortable two party politics.

How do you know labour will remain the only viable alterantive to the tories in england?

You havent been the only viable alternative in scotland now for at least the last decade , and you hate being in fourth place in scotland more than being in oppositon in  england.

And beyond that I promote the idea that to speak against  the blind acceptance of Brexit,

please quote where anyone has said this?

Speaking out against brexit isnt the same as criticising westmisnter and for example labour for trying to stop england leaving and respecting a referendum result as you have done.

[Good old]

Thomas, I must admit that is one of the best examples of taking every word from multiple texts and repeating them out of context  conveniently applying  your own interpretation  to be seen anywhere. You obviously enjoy going to any length in time, and imagination to make your point multiple times, even at the expense of ignoring  the complete context of the various statements you use were intended to convey. You focus on what you see as contradiction at times as if the contradictions are all mine, when the contradictions , are easy to see in the whole political process in the last ten years. Thomas I really could not be bothered to go through that load of repeated nonsense, repeating the same old points for you to take in any context  you can dream up next.  Contradiction is telling people to stick with Tories, when you wouldn't, there have been others, That is you Thomas, No need for pages of minute inspection to point that out ,and you know there is more.

That seems to translate as nothing more than boohoo , i can't answers thomas points , have contradicted what i said to thomas time and again , and why oh why wont anyone listen and start voting labour again?

Once you diagnose the problem mate , instead of sneering at everyones elses politics , then and only then might you find a cure that allows labour to start winning at politics once more.

Oh here we go another f—king translation .If you actually raised some actual new points a direct answer might be needed.  You should try a novel Thomas, as you rely so often on Invented fiction . Not once have I denied there has been a problem in Labours  approach in recent years . It's bloody obvious that there has been. Never have I sneered , you do enough of that for the whole bloody site. What I promote is the  rejection of the idea that the electorate will fall under the spell of Tory rule for ever more, and that the Labour movement is capable of evolving to a position where by it becomes a viable alternative to the Tory dream of ruling unopposed. And beyond that I promote the idea that to speak against  the blind acceptance of Brexit, is  to be accepted as it is every mans right to do so. Or indeed to speak against being ruled by those you naturally reject.

[Thomas]

Hows old keir starmer doing anyway in terms of favourability ratings ?

Net favourability ratings:

Nicola Sturgeon (SNP)  +36
Rishi Sunak (Conservative)  +7
Sir Keir Starmer (Labour)  +1
Richard Leonard (Labour)  -28
Jackson Carlaw (Conservative)  -32
Matt Hancock (Conservative)  -38
Dominic Raab (Conservative)  -38
Priti Patel (Conservative)  -48
Boris Johnson (Conservative)  -51
Michael Gove (Conservative)  -57
Dominic Cummings (SAGE)  -69

I know some will say that this is mildly encouraging for Sir Keir Starmer, but given that he hasn't had much time or opportunity to get on anyone's nerves yet, I'm not sure a neutral rating is much to write home about.

apart from pissing off the folk in his own ranks who arent blairites, knight of the realm and another london champagne socialist sir keir really just appears to be yet another labour party nobody , that underwhelms the vast majority of people.

Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:

SNP 55% (+2)
Conservatives 20% (-1)
Labour 15% (-1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (n/c)
Greens 3% (n/c)

Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:

SNP 50% (+2)
Conservatives 18% (-1)
Labour 15% (-1)
Greens 8% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-2)

Seats projection: SNP 74, Conservatives 24, Labour 17, Greens 9, Liberal Democrats 5

[Thomas]

No it doesn't need translating . It means even if there was a Labour government , every Tory , is at perfect liberty to work to bring that government down by all means legal, not always fair, it's a totally interchangeable concept. And what worries me is you lot supporting Brexit don't understand that basic principle of liberty.

Aye it does. It means labour can't accept democracy when it goes against them.

You implement the referendum result first , then you campaign to change  it  , not before.

Same as you implement the winner of an election  ,then , and only then do you oppose them once they are in government.

It worries me you anti democrats in labour dont understand the basic priniciples of how this game works , which is may be why starmers stop brexit election gameplan backfired so spectacularly on him and the pro remain blairite faction in labour.

Maybe that why you have been out in the wilderness for ten years and counting , with this sneering attitude of we know best.

[Thomas]

Thomas, I must admit that is one of the best examples of taking every word from multiple texts and repeating them out of context  conveniently applying  your own interpretation  to be seen anywhere. You obviously enjoy going to any length in time, and imagination to make your point multiple times, even at the expense of ignoring  the complete context of the various statements you use were intended to convey. You focus on what you see as contradiction at times as if the contradictions are all mine, when the contradictions , are easy to see in the whole political process in the last ten years. Thomas I really could not be bothered to go through that load of repeated nonsense, repeating the same old points for you to take in any context  you can dream up next.  Contradiction is telling people to stick with Tories, when you wouldn't, there have been others, That is you Thomas, No need for pages of minute inspection to point that out ,and you know there is more.

That seems to translate as nothing more than boohoo , i cant answers thomas points , have contradicted what i said to thomas time and again , and why oh why wont anyone listen and start voting labour again?

Once you diagnose the problem mate , instead of sneering at everyones elses politics , then and only then might you find a cure that allows labour to start winning at politics once more.

[Good old]

I have addressed the Nationalist bit elsewhere  we are all nationalists . So you being one is only a problem when your ideas for our country oppose mine.
In our democracy ,democratic decisions do not preclude the right of every citizen the right to continue to voice opposition to the product of that decision. If you don%u2019t understand that , then your understanding is wrong.

Ok. So what if your ideas for our country oppose mine? Is that a problem too, or is there only a problem when you say there is? Not hard to see where that discussion leads, is it?

Im not saying you don't have the right to disagree with or oppose decisions. What I was obliquely suggesting was that deliberately obstructing or attempting to subvert democratic decisions because you don't agree with them is not democracy, and there has been plenty of that from the liberal remain camp in relation to Brexit.

Yes it has to be a problem, if  you don't understand that our democracy insists that opposition is protected from the demand that all opposition to a decision ends there.  And that any original objection one has to the subject can still be voiced. It's the very notion our British ideas of Liberty are based on.
  As far as the parliamentary situation was concerned ,Parliament always had the right to question the implementation of Brexit. The mistake ,I will agree was parliament allowing the notion it didn't ,to take root.
If you think our democracy is not democracy as you want it. That's another thing, unless it contains the clause,  thou salt not oppose Democratic decisions as they are never the wrong decision. It's a ridiculous notion that pure democracy can be accepted as pure in every other respect.

Which translates as democracy is sacrosanct as long as the electorate agree with the Labour party line. And if it does not it is just another example of the people being duped by Tory fascists.

No it doesn't need translating . It means even if there was a Labour government , every Tory , is at perfect liberty to work to bring that government down by all means legal, not always fair, it's a totally interchangeable concept. And what worries me is you lot supporting Brexit don't understand that basic principle of liberty.