Jump to content

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Chindie said:

Looking to bring in US style voter suppression laws.

**** these words removed.

It's a weird one this. It's almost like they were looking at the GOP, and thought to themselves, 'huh, they're doing voter suppression, maybe we should be doing that here', but it's not completely clear they've thought it through.

The study and the trial runs of this system found that in fact *older voters* are roughly twice as likely as younger voters to not have photo ID. This makes sense, because when you get really quite old you might let your passport expire and return your driving licence, and then what photo ID do you have? Clearly this has become a concern in the government, because when Johnson was asked about it yesterday in his press conference, he insisted it was only for first-time voters. The problems with that are a] it says nothing about that in the primary legislation, and b] that would almost certainly fall foul of equalities law.

So I don't know exactly what they're going to do to try to square this circle.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

It's a weird one this. It's almost like they were looking at the GOP, and thought to themselves, 'huh, they're doing voter suppression, maybe we should be doing that here', but it's not completely clear they've thought it through.

The study and the trial runs of this system found that in fact *older voters* are roughly twice as likely as younger voters to not have photo ID. This makes sense, because when you get really quite old you might let your passport expire and return your driving licence, and then what photo ID do you have? Clearly this has become a concern in the government, because when Johnson was asked about it yesterday in his press conference, he insisted it was only for first-time voters. The problems with that are a] it says nothing about that in the primary legislation, and b] that would almost certainly fall foul of equalities law.

So I don't know exactly what they're going to do to try to square this circle.

How do they know if someone’s voted before or not, without verifying it with ID?

Edited by a m ole
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, a m ole said:

How do they know if someone’s voted before or not, without verifying it with ID?

I don't know. I mean, they tick off your name when you vote, so I suppose we could have a national effort to go back through every previous election to find who has voted before and who hasn't, but that seems like a vast national effort for a non-problem.

As I say, the first-time voter thing almost certainly isn't happening (they would have to change the primary legislation) but it's indicative of what's going on behind the scenes.

One possibility is that he was being briefed intensively before the press conference, and his advisors were saying things like 'we'll find ways to make sure if affects first-time voters' and he just blurted it out during the press conference, which wouldn't be the first time; I'm thinking back to his time before the Liaison Committee when he was blurting off-script about 'no recourse to public funds'.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

 

Guess that would explain why he has to get all his cash from anonymous donors.

How did he get credit for his wallpaper loan?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
26 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

The Boris lion speech was good at PMQ's. 

Even Labour were laughing at it.

Even Carrie looked up from a freshly killed antelope to have a chortle.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite nicely makes the point that VIPs like Cameron are only employed for their access, not for any knowledge or understanding.

Which we knew already of course, but it's useful for Cameron to stress so vigorously that he had no idea what he was talking about.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
9 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:
I wonder if he'll get raked over the coals for this open racism?

Don't be silly, it's right out of the johnson playbook

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

Hancock’s in the news again, thinks it’s perfectly okay to award a contract to an ex-Tory Minister (who ‘resigned’ following a sexting scandal) for something upwards of £150M.

This guy wasn’t providing anything as far as I can tell from the story, he’d just set up a PPE ‘brokerage’ firm, hastily, upon seeing that he/they could make money out of the pandemic.

Why would this be necessary? Are they telling us that the British govt are not capable of procuring PPE without involving a middle man? It stinks, as per, and as per, nothing will happen, Hancock et al will make some noise about not feeling guilty for trying to save lives and the general public will suck it up and/or not care.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
8 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Hancock’s in the news again, thinks it’s perfectly okay to award a contract to an ex-Tory Minister (who ‘resigned’ following a sexting scandal) for something upwards of £150M.

This guy wasn’t providing anything as far as I can tell from the story, he’d just set up a PPE ‘brokerage’ firm, hastily, upon seeing that he/they could make money out of the pandemic.

Why would this be necessary? Are they telling us that the British govt are not capable of procuring PPE without involving a middle man? It stinks, as per, and as per, nothing will happen, Hancock et al will make some noise about not feeling guilty for trying to save lives and the general public will suck it up and/or not care.

There’s so many scandals it just feels like normal business to the general public.

The opposition are non existent so it’s open season for the Tories to line the pockets of their buddies in return for lucrative “consultancy” work down the line.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

For Sheikh Shariful Amin, a young businessman from Bangladesh, the moment of disbelief came on 5 February 2015, in the back of an Immigration Enforcement van. Amin had just been arrested in a dawn raid on his east London home. Enforcement officers told him that he was accused of cheating on an English language test. Amin was terrified and humiliated – he had needed the toilet before he was led out of his house, and had to go while a female officer looked on – but he was also baffled. Why would anyone think he had cheated on a test he had taken as a mere formality when he applied for a new visa? He had lived in the UK for nearly a decade, he had a degree from an English university, he spoke English fluently. Surely they knew they’d made a mistake?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/13/cruel-paranoid-failing-priti-patel-inside-the-home-office

A dawn raid for (a false accusation of) cheating on a language test. Totally normal.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Priti Patel has suddenly decided that she needs to see the report into Daniel Morgan's murder before it is published. The reasons that have been given are absolutely spurious:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
5 hours ago, bickster said:

 

I don’t think ‘fraudsters’ is the correct term here......I think it’s ‘co-conspirators’ they meant to write.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â