[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

[Guinness Boy]

What do YOU think they should be, it's a Raquel from Accounts policy after all?

I asked you first and you clearly don’t have an answer. Therefore you’ll whinge whatever they are, because opposition is easy and governance is hard.

Which, to get back to THIS thread is why Reform are nothing more than a protest vote.

 

[Is it PotG?]

I asked you first and you clearly don’t have an answer. Therefore you’ll whinge whatever they are, because opposition is easy and governance is hard.

Which, to get back to THUS thread is why Reform are nothing more than a protest vote.

Going by the last election and future ones with our FPtP, most votes will either be tactical or protest.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Bringing back the Zia chap.

Zia left of his own accord and returned days later of his own accord.
Do keep up

 

[Guinness Boy]

Going by the last election and future ones with our FPtP, most votes will either be tactical or protest.

Does it matter when they’re “all the same”?

 

[Nobby]

What do you think they should be?

Don’t ask sensible questions ffs

 

[Pevenseagull]

Bringing back the Zia chap.

Nah, that was their major donor raking on a new DOGE role in the party. He reflected on Reform being represented in parliament by racists and decided he wanted to be a part of it .... For some reason that I can't for the life of me work our.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Does it matter when they’re “all the same”?

That's the term for when it dawns that they have backed and done something really stupid, it is now apparent that what they backed and voted for is really stupid, and they really don't want to take any responsibility for the disaster arising out of the stupid thing they've backed and done.

"Well it doesn't matter because they are all the same" apparently makes the thing they've done less stupid

 

[Is it PotG?]

Does it matter when they’re “all the same”?

They are, and we all get what no bugger wants.

Fantastic, glad you're happy mate.

 

[Is it PotG?]

That's the term for when it dawns that they have backed and done something really stupid, it is now apparent that what they backed and voted for is really stupid, and they really don't want to take any responsibility for the disaster arising out of the stupid thing they've backed and done.

"Well it doesn't matter because they are all the same" apparently makes the thing they've done less stupid

Nice edit!

 

[darkwolf666]

Yes, Starmer knows that competence and doing the right thing will never be as good as offering a chance to go back to being Bournemouth in 1970. Far easier to be on the sidelines saying " We would have done things differently " but without being specific. So, Starmer has seen the books and has to do lots of jiggereypokerey in order to rebuild the country and move forward as well as placate the media and the knuckledraggers. Tough gig..

About covers it…

 

[Bodian]

What do YOU think they should be, it's a Raquel from Accounts policy after all?

I think it's a fair question to ask of you though. You said that we'd need to see the thresholds before applauding / celebrating - so what threshold would it need to be to get your applause?

 

[Is it PotG?]

I think it's a fair question to ask of you though. You said that we'd need to see the thresholds before applauding / celebrating - so what threshold would it need to be to get your applause?

Why do YOU think Starmer and Reeves have performed such a massive U-Turn?

 

[Bodian]

Why do YOU think Starmer and Reeves have performed such a massive U-Turn?

That's a separate question altogether. Why are you avoiding the initial question?

 

[darkwolf666]

That's a separate question altogether. Why are you avoiding the initial question?

Because nobody REALLY has THE answers, on these boards OR in the House.

It's far, far easier to tell people where they are going wrong rather than either offer sensible advice as to how things could be made better, or what THEY would ACTUALLY do.

Ultimately, Party politics will NEVER allow for things to be done in the interests of the public, only the party at the end of the day!

 

[Doc Lynam]

I only learned recently that Donald Trump ran for president in 2000 as first a democrat then reform candidate. It appears that Nigel and his cabal might have rehashed an old American party in the uk, I presume to carry favour with certain Americans populists.

Donald Trump 2000 presidential campaign - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Reform Party of the United States of America - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It also goes to show just how marginalised Trump was 25 years ago. I suspect Nigel will be hoping for the same results as Donald in the Uk!

 

[DJ NOBO]

The Zia farce shows up how amateur Reform is both organisationally and in terms of policy.
It is absolutely right they are now getting a good going over. And about time.
It would be disastrous for this country, if Reform cruised to power as a negative vote party.

 

[Brian Munich]

I only learned recently that Donald Trump ran for president in 2000 as first a democrat then reform candidate. It appears that Nigel and his cabal might have rehashed an old American party in the uk, I presume to carry favour with certain Americans populists.

Donald Trump 2000 presidential campaign - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Reform Party of the United States of America - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It also goes to show just how marginalised Trump was 25 years ago. I suspect Nigel will be hoping for the same results as Donald in the Uk!

He’s quite possibly going to get the same result. With our rediculous FPTP system, Reform would get a parliamentary majority if they carried their current polling figures through to the 2029 GE.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Because nobody REALLY has THE answers, on these boards OR in the House.

It's far, far easier to tell people where they are going wrong rather than either offer sensible advice as to how things could be made better, or what THEY would ACTUALLY do.

Ultimately, Party politics will NEVER allow for things to be done in the interests of the public, only the party at the end of the day!

Absolutely.

The only reason for the U-turn IS to protect the Labour brand, nothing to do with the pensioners unable to heat their homes. They were fortunate that we had a pretty mild winter relatively speaking, the damage could have been far worse. They should say exactly how much they wish to raise with this theft then the threshold will be clear and simple....whether folk like it or not.
To backtrack a bit for a vote without explaining figures and cut-offs is a sign of panic.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

He’s quite possibly going to get the same result. With our rediculous FPTP system, Reform would get a parliamentary majority if they carried their current polling figures through to the 2029 GE.

They won votes in the May council elections but comparatively few compared to the three other main parties. Reform won hundreds compared to their thousands.

Since then, they’ve won one out of many by-elections.

The media are giving the impression they are doing well, but the media is fickle and will also broadcast every error and omission.

 

[Bozza]

Absolutely.

Loads on here said it needed done. Don’t see them flocking back to the Labour thread to say well done.

I can explain my absence if it helps...

1. Whilst any kind of u-turn is welcome, we have no specifics yet.

2. What has played out to date has been utterly dreadful. All the blatant lies about how they had to remove the benefit for poverty-stricken pensioners, how they literally had "no choice" to subject some of the poorest in our society to a winter of misery.

3. The only reason for the u-turn is ballot-box pressure and has nothing to do with simply doing the right thing.

And beyond the shameful way Labour have treated some old folk who deserve better, their inability to read the room (or, if they could read it, their refusal to react to it) has opened the door for Farage and his band of misfits.