National Politics 🟣 Reform UK

Would you vote for Reform under Nigel Farage?

  • Yes

    Votes: 37 20.1%

  • Maybe/Undecided

    Votes: 17 9.2%

  • No

    Votes: 130 70.7%
  • Total voters
    184
  • Poll closed .
chuckbert said:
That’s not what’s reprehensible about that post.
Click to expand...
It's one of the many, many things that are reprehensible about the post.

People who vote for them know exactly what they think they will get.

The sad thing is twofold. Firstly that they want it in the first place and secondly that they can't see through the absolute bunch of grifters saying they'll deliver it.

I guess they deserve each other. The rest of us don't though.
 
Sheik Djibouti said:
It's one of the many, many things that are reprehensible about the post.

People who vote for them know exactly what they think they will get.

The sad thing is twofold. Firstly that they want it in the first place and secondly that they can't see through the absolute bunch of grifters saying they'll deliver it.

I guess they deserve each other. The rest of us don't though.
Click to expand...
Sadly the politicians in each and every party are grifters
 
Disgusting. Just appalling. On so so many levels.

Honestly it sickens me. I tend to avoid these threads on here because I like to keep football away from my politics. But I just felt so utterly sickened today. It is repulsive, repellent, hideous, grotesque politicking.

Shame on those who support it.
 
ubermeistervonmeat said:
Sadly the politicians in each and every party are grifters
Click to expand...
Not all in every party, though. Many enter politics to make things better for people other than themselves and their chums. Many also find that actually delivering stuff is much harder in reality. That does not make them grifters. Unfortunately politics and trying to get elected is (and always has been) an arms race of utter bullshit. Nobody will get elected by saying "what we'd like to do/we're going to try and do is x IF the conditions allow, but it might not be achievable"

I don't know who the bigger fools are, the parties for proliferation of the bullshit arms race or the sucker electorate for believing it.

I do reckon that most in Reform ARE in it for themselves and their mates. They are driven by their own often personal, often petty grievances, prejudices and outright paranoia. It's populism 101....give people a reason to have a grievance and then tell them you have the answers....

As I said, I don't know who the bigger fools are.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Djibouti said:
Not all in every party, though. Many enter politics to make things better for people other than themselves and their chums. Many also find that actually delivering stuff is much harder in reality. That does not make them grifters. Unfortunately politics and trying to get elected is (and always has been) an arms race of utter bullshit. Nobody will get elected by saying "what we'd like to do/we're going to try and do is x IF the conditions allow, but it might not be achievable"

I don't know who the bigger fools are, the parties for proliferation of the bullshit arms race or the sucker electorate for believing it.

I do reckon that most in Reform ARE in it for themselves and their mates. They are driven by their own often personal, often petty grievances, prejudices and outright paranoia. It's populism 101....give people a reason to have a grievance and then tell them you have the answers....

As I said, I don't know who the bigger fools are.
Click to expand...
Clare Raynor
 
ubermeistervonmeat said:
Sadly the politicians in each and every party are grifters
Click to expand...
They aren’t all. Find the ones who aren’t and vote for them. Tarring them all with the same brush is the tactic Reform, maga etc push so that voting for them is palatable. That post by Zia is not an individual grift, it is a corrupt party policy. The whole lot of them should be ashamed.
 
Symp59 said:
🤣🤣🤣 angela Raynor busy day at work
Click to expand...
Yes because what Raynor did is exactly the same as Farage accepting £5 million from a shady non-dom crypto-spiv.....and then in some massive coincidence start extolling the virtues of crypto.

And has anyone properly investigated how his missus miraculously came into £800,000 to buy a house in Clacton.

It's right out of the Reform (and ex -Tory) playbook to bleat that "they're all as bad as each other" in an attempt to find false equivalence between the incomparable. It's brainless and lazy and you're being duped.
 
And Angela Raynor getting paid for after dinner speeches to pay off her tax bill which I don't think she's paid yet is acceptable, when she's being touted as our next Chancellor politics has gone mad.
 
Symp59 said:
And Angela Raynor getting paid for after dinner speeches to pay off her tax bill which I don't think she's paid yet is acceptable, when she's being touted as our next Chancellor politics has gone mad.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, having googled "Angela Raynor after dinner speeches to pay off tax bill" The first two results are the Daily Express and The Sun, and a few right wing twitter twats who seem to be reporting it in those terms. In other words it's hysterical nonsense designed to trigger...and it looks like it's worked.

Remind us all how much Nigel earns from his extra curricular activities🤔
 
Last edited:
Sheik Djibouti said:
Funnily enough, having googled "Angela Raynor after dinner speeches to pay off tax bill" The first two results are the Daily Express and The Sun, and a few right wing twitter twats who seem to be reporting it in those terms. In other words it's hysterical nonsense designed to trigger...and it looks like it's worked.

Remind us all how much Nigel earns from his extra curricular activities🤔
Click to expand...
Some of your comments about people who are not left wing are quite frankly unacceptable .
 
Sheik Djibouti said:
Funnily enough, having googled "Angela Raynor after dinner speeches to pay off tax bill" The first two results are the Daily Express and The Sun, and a few right wing twitter twats who seem to be reporting it in those terms. In other words it's hysterical nonsense designed to trigger...and it looks like it's worked.

Remind us all how much Nigel earns from his extra curricular activities🤔
Click to expand...
Boris was an absolute tart when it came to after dinner speeches etc. for wads of cash.

I don't know where I stand on that kind of gig for a politician (is it also a bit of a bribe in some ways?) but it's always funny that when a tory government is in this kind of thing happens constantly and the right wing press couldn't give a toss but then when it's a labour government the same behaviour is painted as a p**s take.
 
I won’t be voting reform and I don’t like Nigel Farage, but I don’t really understand why the idea of a detention centre for migrants who enter illegally on small boats is such a bad idea.

They currently are housed in hotels across the country where they are free to leave at any time, unmonitored. Many do, and never come back, disappearing into society.

Not only is the cost of the hotels prohibitive, but there’s no oversight on people (SOME of whom, not all, but some of whom are fleeing justice for crimes committed in their home countries) who have arrived here and are awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim.

It seems to me entirely fair and reasonable to have them stay in a secure, pleasant facility while their claim is processed, before either welcoming them with open arms or sending them back, depending on what the outcome is. Try getting that deal from the Nazis.
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
I won’t be voting reform and I don’t like Nigel Farage, but I don’t really understand why the idea of a detention centre for migrants who enter illegally on small boats is such a bad idea.

They currently are housed in hotels across the country where they are free to leave at any time, unmonitored. Many do, and never come back, disappearing into society.

Not only is the cost of the hotels prohibitive, but there’s no oversight on people (SOME of whom, not all, but some of whom are fleeing justice for crimes committed in their home countries) who have arrived here and are awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim.

It seems to me entirely fair and reasonable to have them stay in a secure, pleasant facility while their claim is processed, before either welcoming them with open arms or sending them back, depending on what the outcome is. Try getting that deal from the Nazis.
Click to expand...
The first question to answer is surely, are there currently enough LEGAL routes by which to enter the country and make a claim?

Given that ~7% of people entering the country are doing so "illegally" (the legality of any individual claiming asylum has been debated at length on here), that means we're happy with the overwhelming majority who come here to live work and study. Would another 7% really "break the country" as some would like us to believe?

And yes we've had the arguments in the past about opening the floodgates to legal migrants too. It was only 10(ish) years ago that Nigel Farage swore blind that 50 million Turks were coming here to take our jobs and homes and take over our village fetes (or something).

If we assume for one moment that we've got it just about right on the ways to legally enter the UK AND the numbers we admit (although I am sure many will think the legal routes are too high), then the effort and expense must be directed to preventing those from coming here AND detaining those that do. I agree that hotels are an awful (and expensive, and temporary) way to do it. It was a ill thought out sticking plaster from the previous government to ham-fistedly deal with a problem THEY helped exacerbate in the first place.

So more work with other countries to prevent people coming in the first place (not cheap, as we have already seen in recent years) secure, monitored (and pleasant) facilities with restricted movement WHILST claims are being processed for those that do come here through unconventional routes, and a return/deportation system for those whose claims fail. It is the only thing that is going to work, but it will come at a very hefty price that will absolutely dwarf the current cost of hotels. Doing this properly is going to coast an awful lot of money, but I don't expect Nigel and his crew have really thought, let alone care about that aspect amongst their political gimmickery.

And whilst people are getting triggered about "the illegals", I'm not sure they've really thought about what the population age profile is going to look like over the next 50 years and who, exactly is going to do all those jobs that will need doing. Probably praying for robots at a guess🤷‍♂️
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
I won’t be voting reform and I don’t like Nigel Farage, but I don’t really understand why the idea of a detention centre for migrants who enter illegally on small boats is such a bad idea.

They currently are housed in hotels across the country where they are free to leave at any time, unmonitored. Many do, and never come back, disappearing into society.

Not only is the cost of the hotels prohibitive, but there’s no oversight on people (SOME of whom, not all, but some of whom are fleeing justice for crimes committed in their home countries) who have arrived here and are awaiting the outcome of their asylum claim.

It seems to me entirely fair and reasonable to have them stay in a secure, pleasant facility while their claim is processed, before either welcoming them with open arms or sending them back, depending on what the outcome is. Try getting that deal from the Nazis.
Click to expand...
How about the threat that areas that vote reform will be rewarded by not having detention centres built in their constituencies, but areas that vote for other parties, especially the greens will get them. It’s that kind of s**t that sets reform apart.
 
Sheik Djibouti said:
The first question to answer is surely, are there currently enough LEGAL routes by which to enter the country and make a claim?

Given that ~7% of people entering the country are doing so "illegally" (the legality of any individual claiming asylum has been debated at length on here), that means we're happy with the overwhelming majority who come here to live work and study. Would another 7% really "break the country" as some would like us to believe?

And yes we've had the arguments in the past about opening the floodgates to legal migrants too. It was only 10(ish) years ago that Nigel Farage swore blind that 50 million Turks were coming here to take our jobs and homes and take over our village fetes (or something).

If we assume for one moment that we've got it just about right on the ways to legally enter the UK AND the numbers we admit (although I am sure many will think the legal routes are too high), then the effort and expense must be directed to preventing those from coming here AND detaining those that do. I agree that hotels are an awful (and expensive, and temporary) way to do it. It was a ill thought out sticking plaster from the previous government to ham-fistedly deal with a problem THEY helped exacerbate in the first place.

So more work with other countries to prevent people coming in the first place (not cheap, as we have already seen in recent years) secure, monitored (and pleasant) facilities with restricted movement WHILST claims are being processed for those that do come here through unconventional routes, and a return/deportation system for those whose claims fail. It is the only thing that is going to work, but it will come at a very hefty price that will absolutely dwarf the current cost of hotels. Doing this properly is going to coast an awful lot of money, but I don't expect Nigel and his crew have really thought, let alone care about that aspect amongst their political gimmickery.

And whilst people are getting triggered about "the illegals", I'm not sure they've really thought about what the population age profile is going to look like over the next 50 years and who, exactly is going to do all those jobs that will need doing. Probably praying for robots at a guess🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
A good, interesting response, thanks.

I know this has been discussed on here repeatedly, as you alluded to, but apparently the number of arrivals on small boats since 2018 is now around 200,000 - similar to the population of Portsmouth, for example, which doesn’t feel insignificant. But that wasn’t really your point - as you say, we will probably need more than that due to declining birth rates. I don’t really have an issue with that, but my point is more that a person arriving here legally has a lot more checks and oversight than someone arriving on a boat having potentially pushed and trampled others out of the way to get on it (as has happened several times) - plus it’s a fact that some of them are murderers and rapists who’ve been shunned by their own society or are wanted by the families of their victims - this isn’t scaremongering, there are known and recorded cases of this. Or, at the very least, they’re often heavily traumatised, carrying all sorts of trauma. I absolutely believe that we have a responsibility to help and assist vulnerable people - but we’re also trying to run a society and it should at least be a consideration if any number of both groups of people (even if it’s just 5% that’s still 10,000 people) roaming freely and unmonitored around the place is a good idea.

It’s a real shame that both the cruel, ignorant racists and the point-scoring left have hijacked this issue because very little of any substance seems to get done apart from ridiculous policy promises and endless arguments about who’s racist/delusional for wanting to discuss it.
 
Isle of Wight Yellow said:
it’s a fact that some of them are murderers and rapists who’ve been shunned by their own society or are wanted by the families of their victims
Click to expand...
I suspect the proportion of these is very small and the vast majority of asylum seekers (to call them by their proper name) are innocent of any wrongdoing other than wanting to live in a safe place, which our country has a legal obligation to provide. That small minority shouldn't be used as a stick to beat the others with and collective punishment should be avoided
 
Boris said:
I suspect the proportion of these is very small and the vast majority of asylum seekers (to call them by their proper name) are innocent of any wrongdoing other than wanting to live in a safe place, which our country has a legal obligation to provide. That small minority shouldn't be used as a stick to beat the others with and collective punishment should be avoided
Click to expand...
I suspect it is a small proportion too, but that doesn’t mean it should be ignored. It’s absolutely and undeniably a non-zero percentage.

Keeping them in clean, pleasant but secure accommodation until their asylum claim is processed (as you say, they are asylum seekers; although unarguably a crime has been committed each time a small boat crossing is made, under current UK law) does NOT equal ‘a stick to beat them with’ or ‘collective punishment’ in my opinion. I agree that both of those things should be avoided, but I don’t see that secure processing centres have to be that, necessarily.
 
Reform are supposed to represent the working class, or so they tell us. But they can't even be bothered to turn up to parliament to vote on issues that affect the very people they have been elected to represent. Why does this not surprise me?

FB_IMG_1778066705727.jpg
 
I have to laugh at all this talk about Reform cutting immigration in the run to the local elections. Local councils have ZERO control over immigration policy, so if a candidate is banging on about 'tackling immigration' they are either:-

* Lying to you
* Clueless about the actual job
 
boogaloo said:
I have to laugh at all this talk about Reform cutting immigration in the run to the local elections. Local councils have ZERO control over immigration policy, so if a candidate is banging on about 'tackling immigration' they are either:-

* Lying to you
* Clueless about the actual job
Click to expand...

No different to the greens talking about Gaza then is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom