Jo Swinson

Sorry, that is nonsense, the bombs dropped on Japan were not in response to a nuclear attack by Japan.
There was no way the Japanese would surrender, none at all, the threat was ignored, bombs were dropped,
war over.
The Russians are making regular incursions into British air and sea space, why is that do you think?
If they decided, for example, to occupy a part of British territory, do you think our forces are sufficient to remove them?


The Americans then and now widely admit there was no need to nuke Japan twice as their blockage had left Japan on the verge of surrendering within days and is now seen more as an unecessary act than a useful endevour.
 
Sorry, that is nonsense, the bombs dropped on Japan were not in response to a nuclear attack by Japan.
There was no way the Japanese would surrender, none at all, the threat was ignored, bombs were dropped,
war over.
The Russians are making regular incursions into British air and sea space, why is that do you think?
If they decided, for example, to occupy a part of British territory, do you think our forces are sufficient to remove them?

If they did it would hardly get a mention let alone a response. Tory funds have to come from somewhere.

On a more serious note Hong Kong is in meltdown and a British U.K. consular official was illegally detained and tortured by the Chinese Govt and I have yet to hear a peep from the Foreign Sec. Our ability to notice anything beyond our shores has atrophied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat
The Americans then and now widely admit there was no need to nuke Japan twice as their blockage had left Japan on the verge of surrendering within days and is now seen more as an unecessary act than a useful endevour.
It ended the war, an invasion of all the islands would cost over a million more soldiers.
The point is, nobody will invade if you possess, and confirm, that you will use, nuclear weapons, it's
patently obvious. Corbyn's stance on this, like everything else, is to ignore this reality, yet he's supposed to be our PM.
If you're in with the crackpots from CND, like him, they'll never get it, no politician here in his right mind would put
scrapping our deterrent in a manifesto.
 
Why what try quoting me directly when you mention me or tagging me in it?

They’re not my party, I’ve only ever voted for them once and did so only in the Euro elections to make a point.

I don’t actually like them but I’m defending them because your arguments against them are unfair and ridiculous, and well to be honest I can’t stand the hard left these days. There’s a fucking tsunami of arrogant and stuck up socialist cunts who think that anyone who disagrees with them is right wing and immoral.

It’s been said before but I’ll reiterate, the LibDems joined the government as a junior partner and had to drop key policies. Had they won a majority they would have abolished tuition fees but when you go into a coalition, even as a the larger party, you will have to drop stuff.

That’s politics but something you do not seem to get.

Policies flow from ideology, that is true of all political parties. Your middle ground, pragmatic dirge, is just the voice of power and privilege telling the great unwashed that nothing can change, that the power structures in society are inviolable, that this is common sense politics, and anyone who believes differently is a dangerous radical.

New Labour, Lib Dems, Tories, all peddle the same no change agenda, they might hang different baubles on the establishment tree, but with all of them the power structures remain the same, the gap between rich and poor widens, social mobility grinds to a halt, the gulf between the north and south grows, and workers rights? Nothing more than an hindrance for the "wealth creators".

You irritate me because your idea of politics is corner shop petty, all about money and nothing about people, your view of the future is nothing more than a constant repetition of the now, no change now, no change for the future, no change ever.
 
The Americans then and now widely admit there was no need to nuke Japan twice as their blockage had left Japan on the verge of surrendering within days and is now seen more as an unecessary act than a useful endevour.

The real reason why they used them was Russia declared war on Japan and was pushing their forces out of Indo China. Truman did not want to have them involved in the end game and used the weapons to end Japan and to show the Russians who had the power in what would be the post war dynamics.
 
Policies flow from ideology, that is true of all political parties. Your middle ground, pragmatic dirge, is just the voice of power and privilege telling the great unwashed that nothing can change, that the power structures in society are inviolable, that this is common sense politics, and anyone who believes differently is a dangerous radical.

New Labour, Lib Dems, Tories, all peddle the same no change agenda, they might hang different baubles on the establishment tree, but with all of them the power structures remain the same, the gap between rich and poor widens, social mobility grinds to a halt, the gulf between the north and south grows, and workers rights? Nothing more than an hindrance for the "wealth creators".

You irritate me because your idea of politics is corner shop petty, all about money and nothing about people, your view of the future is nothing more than a constant repetition of the now, no change now, no change for the future, no change ever.

Absolute bollocks.

I enjoy listening to all kinds of political positions, even those on the fringes. “My middle” ground is actually not very middle ground in a lot of areas, I just look at each policy specifically and form an opinion on what is best on that policy. I’m further right than the Tories on law and order, as an example and there are plenty of Corbyn policies I agree with.

The difference between you and I is that I accept people will disagree with my positions and I accept that being a Tory is just as legitimate a position as being the current Labour Party. You actively dislike and don’t accept anyone right of Corbyn. This clouds your judgement and means that any shit Corbyn does and says is merely a right wing smear campaign and the LibDems, New Labour Tories are all scumbags.

Some of it is of course a smear campaign but some of it, such as the antisemitism disgrace, is his fault and that of his hardcore supporters.

I’ve seen it so much on this board, the rhetoric towards the LibDems that’s essentially saying “how dare they campaign to try and win, we deserve it, not them”, it’s not democracy and it’s repulsive arrogance.

You need to get into your head, whilst you’re telling moderates to fuck off, that most people don’t want Corbyn and socialism.
 
The real reason why they used them was Russia declared war on Japan and was pushing their forces out of Indo China. Truman did not want to have them involved in the end game and used the weapons to end Japan and to show the Russians who had the power in what would be the post war dynamics.

Yeah I know that, still it was unecessary to do it and especially not twice
 
The more people see of her the less they like what they see - according to the polls. May syndrome I belive it's called.
The Times view on Jo Swinson’s election hopes: Lib Dem Limbo
Jo Swinson is struggling to win the confidence of centrist voters

methode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fcf339fbc-0bd1-11ea-96a6-b8ef146759ed.jpg


The Liberal Democrats are in the process of missing an open goal. Centrists and Europhiles are tempted to desert the two main parties and are looking for a new home. Remainers feel they have been abandoned by the Tories yet cannot trust a Labour leader who continues to equivocate over his support for Brexit.

The Lib Dems entered this election season flushed with success from gains made in the local and European elections earlier this year, and their numbers have been swollen by nine defecting MPs from other parties along with a swathe of new members. Yet momentum is slipping. A YouGov poll for The Times puts their support at 15 per cent, down from a peak of 24 per cent in May. Ms Swinson needs her manifesto, released yesterday, to give her a fillip.

Of course Lib Dem fortunes could still change. It’s early in the campaign and there are 21 days in which to turn matters around. There are some reports that their voters are more concentrated than in past years. If so, a lower share of the vote could still deliver a greater number of seats. And parts of the manifesto may help. It includes ambitious green targets that will appeal to the young, including making the UK carbon neutral by 2045, adopting electric cars and investing in public transport.

Like everyone else the Lib Dems are offering juicy state handouts, including 35 hours a week of free childcare, 20,000 new teachers and an extra £7 billion a year for the NHS and social care. And their plans to fund this are more credible than Labour’s. The main source of income would be a £50 billion “Remain bonus”, a claim that the Institute for Fiscal Studies called “within the range of plausible estimates” for the extra growth resulting from remaining in the EU.

They have, however, a lot of ground to make up. A large part of the problem lies with their leader, who they have placed at the centre of their campaign, much as Theresa May was at the front of the Tories 2017 campaign.


Ms Swinson is now far better known since becoming leader in July but according to polls, the more voters see of her the less they like her. In mid November only about a quarter had a positive view while half had a negative one. By contrast, 43 per cent were favourable towards Boris Johnson and half unfavourable. Ms Swinson is doing better than Jeremy Corbyn, who was favoured by a quarter of voters and disliked by two thirds. But as the smaller party, Lib Dem chances depend far more on their leader capturing public imagination.

Even had Ms Swinson participated in the ITV debate there are few signs she would have sparked an equivalent to the “Cleggmania” after Nick Clegg’s performances in 2010. The main result of her interview, which followed the main debate on Tuesday evening, was criticism over her “glib” and unconvincing assertion that she was ready to use nuclear weapons.

It may also be true that the party is suffering from its policy to revoke Article 50. While clearly making it a Remainer party, some voters will understandably see this as undemocratic. Another problem is her refusal to be clear about what she would do in the case of a hung parliament.

Ms Swinson claims she can become prime minister but much more likely is that she could prop up a government led by Jeremy Corbyn and the Scottish Nationalists, however much she denies it. That way she could at least get another referendum. The truth is that the Lib Dems have a long way to go to recover the confidence of the nation.
 
Absolute bollocks.

I enjoy listening to all kinds of political positions, even those on the fringes. “My middle” ground is actually not very middle ground in a lot of areas, I just look at each policy specifically and form an opinion on what is best on that policy. I’m further right than the Tories on law and order, as an example and there are plenty of Corbyn policies I agree with.

The difference between you and I is that I accept people will disagree with my positions and I accept that being a Tory is just as legitimate a position as being the current Labour Party. You actively dislike and don’t accept anyone right of Corbyn. This clouds your judgement and means that any shit Corbyn does and says is merely a right wing smear campaign and the LibDems, New Labour Tories are all scumbags.

Some of it is of course a smear campaign but some of it, such as the antisemitism disgrace, is his fault and that of his hardcore supporters.

I’ve seen it so much on this board, the rhetoric towards the LibDems that’s essentially saying “how dare they campaign to try and win, we deserve it, not them”, it’s not democracy and it’s repulsive arrogance.

You need to get into your head, whilst you’re telling moderates to fuck off, that most people don’t want Corbyn and socialism.

If most people don't want Corbyn, fine, but with Corbyn you have a choice, with the rest it's all much of a muchness.

If much of a muchness is what the British electorate wants, good luck to them. But you banging on that Labour must join the much of a muchness club, so there is no choice at all other than the same old same old, makes no sense whatsoever. The Lib Dems are there for those that want much of the same with slightly fewer toffs, if you're neo liberal there's the Tories, there's the Brexit party, there's quite a bit of variety on the right, yet you get your knickers in a twist because there's an option on the left!

Quelle surprise.
 
If most people don't want Corbyn, fine, but with Corbyn you have a choice, with the rest it's all much of a muchness.

If much of a muchness is what the British electorate wants, good luck to them. But you banging on that Labour must join the much of a muchness club, so there is no choice at all other than the same old same old, makes no sense whatsoever. The Lib Dems are there for those that want much of the same with slightly fewer toffs, if you're neo liberal there's the Tories, there's the Brexit party, there's quite a bit of variety on the right, yet you get your knickers in a twist because there's an option on the left!

Quelle surprise.

Where have I said Labour should join the mug of a muchness? They can go as far left as they want but reading from them this week has guaranteed I won’t be voting for them as this huge change is too much and will bankrupt the economy.

I’m happy for them to go full on socialist and fair play but demonising everyone else as being the same, just because that’s the hill you wish to die on is naive and ignorant.
 
Where have I said Labour should join the mug of a muchness? They can go as far left as they want but reading from them this week has guaranteed I won’t be voting for them as this huge change is too much and will bankrupt the economy.

I’m happy for them to go full on socialist and fair play but demonising everyone else as being the same, just because that’s the hill you wish to die on is naive and ignorant.

You don't like Labour, then don't vote for them.

If you think Labour will bankrupt the country, don't vote for them.

Fascinating as your posts are, banging on, over and over, about how you're not going vote Labour got tired a long time ago.

As for demonising other parties, you need to give your head a wobble. Socialists believe in a different economic order to the one that prevails now, all the other main parties are happy with the prevailing order, pointing this out is not demonising these parties, it is a fact.

You're happy with the prevailing order, great! Good for you! But other flavours are available, it's irritating how you bang on that socialist flavour isn't to your liking, we know that, we get it, that doesn't mean it should be scratched off the menu.
 
You don't like Labour, then don't vote for them.

If you think Labour will bankrupt the country, don't vote for them.

Fascinating as your posts are, banging on, over and over, about how you're not going vote Labour got tired a long time ago.

As for demonising other parties, you need to give your head a wobble. Socialists believe in a different economic order to the one that prevails now, all the other main parties are happy with the prevailing order, pointing this out is not demonising these parties, it is a fact.

You're happy with the prevailing order, great! Good for you! But other flavours are available, it's irritating how you bang on that socialist flavour isn't to your liking, we know that, we get it, that doesn't mean it should be scratched off the menu.

I won’t be voting for Labour, not after this week, don’t worry.

I perfectly understand socialists have a completely different view of the whole system and I actually respect that, whilst not agreeing.

My point is the demonisation and the cult like behaviour by supporters of this. You may actually be able to lend some votes from moderates/centre ground voters and instead you attack them as enemies.

Its poison politics and it’s why Corbyn won’t get in.
 
My point is the demonisation and the cult like behaviour by supporters of his.

This is the reason you're a laughing stock in here.

You think Corbyn and his supporters are doing the demonising!

Do your feelings get hurt if the occasional poster drops an all Tories are bastards reference? That drop is in stark contrast to the tsunami of shit that comes the other way out in the real world.

Grow a pair.
 
This is the reason you're a laughing stock in here.

You think Corbyn and his supporters are doing the demonising!

Do your feelings get hurt if the occasional poster drops an all Tories are bastards reference? That drop is in stark contrast to the tsunami of shit that comes the other way out in the real world.

Grow a pair.

I don’t really care mate, it’s a tad rich coming from you pal but hey ho whatever.

Yes I think they demonise a lot, especially towards more centre ground members of the party, who they’ve practically driven out as traitors to the cause.

They also get demonised but that doesn’t warrant doing it to others.

I’m not a Tory so no, I wouldn’t. As if to prove my point you’re calling me a Tory for merely having another view about the hard left.

I even said recently that I liked a lot of Corbyn’s policies, this week has gone too far and I think he’s becoming crazier and crazier but 8 weeks ago I was on here defending him.

You’re just too blinkered.
 
He rules out working with labour but does say he would work with the tories.

That is hiw most percueve the comments and as cobfirmation they are willing to co-operate with a tory minority.

Lib-dems are cunts always have been always will be, at least with tories you know your opposition , unlike these shifty orange wankers.

I understand if a vote for them removes a tory, but still if it doesn't then no one should vote for this rabble

It’s not, it’s how labour are trying to frame it. They’ve ruled out a coalition with the tories multiple times.
 
It’s not, it’s how labour are trying to frame it. They’ve ruled out a coalition with the tories multiple times.

It isn't labour who have framed it as a clear change for the lib dems to be open to proping up a minoroty tory gov though, it was the media

 
That’s still nothing to do with propping up a minority government or going into a coalition though, which is what I mean about the reframing.

That is about if Johnson gets a minority government again, what their best chance of stopping Brexit is, which is allowing any deal through with the caveat of a referendum.
 
And it is labour that are equating that to a coalition. Well, not even labour, but labour supporters.

I get it, but let’s not pretend it’s any less disingenuous than when someone else does it (and they’ve all been shocking for it this election)
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top