I’m going to assume it’s Labour telling fibs again! As i can’t see the bookies having their prices that wrong on a 3 horse raceLots of leaflets today, from all parties.
Labour's seem to have gone the Lib Dem route with their 'can't win here' tactic regarding the Greens.
They claim Reform are at 34%, Labour 32% and Greens are on 20%.
Greens leaflet are saying Reform are at 39%, Greens are at 34% and Labour 'are in free fall' at 21%.
Somebody is telling fibbies!
Reforms' doesn't say shit like that; though it is baffling they state that 'even if you don't like Farage, you should vote Reform'. So...the candidate doesn't even support the leader of their own party? Odd tactic.
I'm fascinated by how out of kilt the betting is with the polls. The Greens, in the betting, are heavy favorites and shortening all the time but the polls show Reform in the lead. Labour are competitive in the polls but 'dead in the water' in the betting.I’m going to assume it’s Labour telling fibs again! As i can’t see the bookies having their prices that wrong on a 3 horse race
I'm going to believe the bookies on this one. It's in their financial interest not to get these numbers wrong, so there's the least chance of bias.I’m going to assume it’s Labour telling fibs again! As i can’t see the bookies having their prices that wrong on a 3 horse race
I'm kind of erring on the side of the bookies too. It's weird that those 2 polls are out of kilter with the current odds - even the leaflet from the Greens understates what the bookies think of their chances! - unless the polls that are out of date?I'm going to believe the bookies on this one. It's in their financial interest not to get these numbers wrong, so there's the least chance of bias.
I remember not so long ago you could do that a lot but it’s pretty rare these days. Tempted to do that and gamble by doing it without LabourI'm kind of erring on the side of the bookies too. It's weird that those 2 polls are out of kilter with the current odds - even the leaflet from the Greens understates their chances with the bookies! - unless they're polls that are out of date?
Just on the topic of the bookies odds, if Oddschecker is up to date then it's possible to make a guaranteed profit taking the best current odds for each of the 3 main frontrunners for the seat and dutching them
There's nothing eco-friendly or green about the Green Party, if there were I'd be the first to vote for them.@jacko74
The brick would be nothing to do with politics, but to do with racism. We live in a very multi cultural area and the Reform candidate is on record as essentially saying that if you're not white you're not english, so fuck having that bullshit round us. It would be an anti-racist brick, not an eco-friendly green brick. Big difference.
They still have plenty of Green policies but have also recognised that at the moment there are what voters would consider more important issues like growing inequality to tackle. Plus a racist bell to take on who’s got a very good chance of becoming the next PM. If they were still just continuing to talk about climate issues they wouldn’t be doing so well in the polls. That doesn’t mean they’ve abandoned it.There's nothing eco-friendly or green about the Green Party, if there were I'd be the first to vote for them.
They've been co-opted by radical Marxists and their ideology and policies hold no environmental credentials whatsoever, in fact just the opposite.
Please can you provide the link for where the Reform candidate stated that if you're not wiite you're not English, that would be really interesting to read, thanks.
They have no green credentials or policies whatsoever, if you consider their commitment to the established net zero wealth transfer scam to be a "green" policy then you really need to educate yourself.They still have plenty of Green policies but have also recognised that at the moment there are what voters would consider more important issues like growing inequality to tackle. Plus a racist bell to take on who’s got a very good chance of becoming the next PM. If they were still just continuing to talk about climate issues they wouldn’t be doing so well in the polls. That doesn’t mean they’ve abandoned it.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...oodwin-gorton-and-denton-reform-uk-minoritiesThere's nothing eco-friendly or green about the Green Party, if there were I'd be the first to vote for them.
They've been co-opted by radical Marxists and their ideology and policies hold no environmental credentials whatsoever, in fact just the opposite.
Please can you provide the link for where the Reform candidate stated that if you're not wiite you're not English, that would be really interesting to read, thanks.
Thanks.
Exactly what i said in my original post. He's a fucking ****.Thanks.
What is about what he apparently said according to that article that you dispute?
You risk coming across as someone of very low intellect if you're incapable of forming a reasoned and coherent counterpoint to his position beyond calling him a fucking ****.Exactly what i said in my original post. He's a fucking ****.
You asked for evidence, I gave you the article. You're just mithering now.You risk coming across as someone of very low intellect if you're incapable of forming a reasoned and coherent counterpoint to his position beyond calling him a fucking ****.
You want green policies so you're voting for Reform. HmmThere's nothing eco-friendly or green about the Green Party, if there were I'd be the first to vote for them.
They've been co-opted by radical Marxists and their ideology and policies hold no environmental credentials whatsoever, in fact just the opposite.
Please can you provide the link for where the Reform candidate stated that if you're not wiite you're not English, that would be really interesting to read, thanks.
Many an inteligent man/woman has found it simpler to get a point across in few words, and for goodwin **** is all you needYou risk coming across as someone of very low intellect if you're incapable of forming a reasoned and coherent counterpoint to his position beyond calling him a fucking ****.
I'd say it is a pretty accurate and succinct summary of the man. For a more detailed counterpoint to Goodwins claim:You risk coming across as someone of very low intellect if you're incapable of forming a reasoned and coherent counterpoint to his position beyond calling him a fucking ****.
I'd say it is a pretty accurate and succinct summary of the man. For a more detailed counterpoint to Goodwins claim:
When he says a passport is “just a piece of paper” and that those who commit atrocities are “not really British,” he’s making a moral claim that quickly unravels.
If murdering civilians makes someone “not British,” then that logic must apply to Dunblane, Cumbria, Hungerford, IRA attacks, the London Nail Bombings, the murder of Jo Cox, and every other atrocity committed by white British citizens. You can’t apply the standard only when it suits a narrative.
And once you start defining “true” Englishness or Britishness, history gets awkward pretty fast. For centuries, Catholics were treated as not fully English, politically suspect, excluded from office, seen as loyal to Rome over the Crown. Yet at the time of the Reformation, Catholicism was the traditional religion of England. You could just as easily argue that breaking from Rome was the radical, anti-traditional, anti-English move. Was Henry VIII a traitor to England and its cultural values? Was Guy Fawkes actually the hero of the story? Which version is truly English?
Medieval Catholic England? Tudor Protestant England? Victorian imperial Britain? Modern liberal democracy?
There isn’t a single, timeless identity. It has shifted repeatedly. That’s why the only stable definition is civic: if you are a British citizen, you are British. Crimes don’t retroactively erase nationality, they represent a betrayal of shared values. Once you start deciding who is really British based on their behaviour, religion, or culture, you’re not defending national identity you’re redefining it case by case. And history shows how dangerous and inconsistent that becomes.
Not an equivalence, but a reminder that the suffragettes were at the time denounced as extremists, a threat to the nation, and un-British. The likes of Goodwin that draw hard cultural lines today would have drawn them then, too.
We're not talking purely about examples of extremism so I'm not sure why you're trying to steer the discussion in that direction.
There's plenty of evidence that huge numbers of British born people of foreign descent fail to adopt any aspect of British or even Western cultural values and societal norms.