Politics Thread 6

Fed up talking videogames? Why?

Who will you vote for at the next General Election?

Conservative
10
11%
Labour
27
31%
Liberal Democrat
24
28%
Green
18
21%
SNP
6
7%
Brexit Party
0
No votes
UKIP
0
No votes
Plaid Cymru
0
No votes
DUP
0
No votes
Sinn Fein
2
2%
The Independent Group for Change
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 87
User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6 - Boris says “porn for everyone!”
by Tafdolphin » Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:04 pm

I don't know if this is politics per se but it did make me feel slightly less as if society is ending.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-gl ... gn=bbcnews


A so-called pick-up artist who targeted "young and vulnerable" women has been jailed for two years.

Adnan Ahmed - who called himself Addy A-game - secretly filmed himself approaching dozens of women in Glasgow and Lanarkshire.

Ahmed, 38, was convicted last month of threatening and abusive behaviour towards five women.

He has also been placed on the sex offenders register for 10 years.

Police launched an investigation after his actions were revealed by the BBC's The Social earlier this year.

Five young women, aged between 16 and 21, gave evidence about how they had been alarmed and intimidated by his approaches in Glasgow city centre and Uddingston.

In September he was found guilty at Glasgow Sheriff Court of threatening and abusive behaviour.


Someone posted a video of this dude on here I think, and I remember coming away from it absolutely raging. Now he's in jail. lol etc

EDIT: This one

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06xlh9z

Night Call: a game what I worked on. Out now!
t: @Tafdolphin | Twitch: Tafdolphin
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6 - Boris says “porn for everyone!”
by KK » Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:18 pm

Tabloids not covering themselves in glory again, though it has now been reported everywhere:

BBC News wrote:Former EastEnders actress Katy Jarvis says she felt "degraded" and "hurt" after a newspaper splashed pictures of her working as a shop security guard.

On Sunday, the Daily Star revealed the actress, who played Hayley Slater, was now working at a B&M store in Romford.

It prompted an outpouring of empathy on social media, as many actors noted the uncertain nature of the profession.

Speaking to the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire Show, Jarvis said the tone of the story was "really quite nasty".

"To be honest, on Sunday morning I woke up really embarrassed and made to feel quite ashamed," said the 28-year-old, who now works alongside her sister.

"Over my career I've done by best to try and stay away from social gatherings, get-togethers and celebrity things, to keep my private life as private as possible.

"So to wake up with my kids and see myself on the front of the pages just for simply having a job in between my acting, it really did hurt me."

She added: "It took me a day or so to let it all digest and realise I had nothing to be ashamed about."

Jarvis first made her name starring as Mia Williams in the 2009 British drama film Fish Tank, before heading to Albert Square for a year-long stint which ended in February 2019. The east Londoner explained she's worked in a range of jobs to support her acting career - including as a waitress and for a credit card company.

She admitted she's been "overwhelmed" by the support she's received from her acting colleagues, like Kathy Burke, who comically re-interpreted the headline of the tabloid story - or non-story, as she saw it.

More: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50125396

You can see why the Daily Star Sunday would run it though, as it's a 'big' exclusive by their standards, for what is a rapidly failing newspaper (sales of just 176,949).

Image
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6 - Boris says “porn for everyone!”
by Lex-Man » Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:59 pm

Is it that much of a big deal. It must be annoying when you're trying to do your job and people keep coming to talk to you, but there shouldn't be any shame in doing a job.

It's totally not in the public interest to know and shouldn't have really been printed.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Garth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Norn Iron

PostRe: Politics Thread 6 - Boris says “porn for everyone!”
by Garth » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:31 pm



The article - British journalists have become part of Johnson’s fake news machine:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... s-machine/

User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6 - Boris says “porn for everyone!”
by KK » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:42 pm

Peston responded to that yesterday: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... er-oborne/

Image
User avatar
Samuel_1
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Samuel_1 » Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:16 pm

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

Supporting My Local Mule Sanctuary Since 11/11/2014.

Donations welcome, please PM me to prevent unwarranted mule kicking.
User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Tomous » Thu Oct 24, 2019 6:59 am

Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM


Wouldn’t have swung it but why would they abstain?

Image
User avatar
Errkal
Member
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Errkal » Thu Oct 24, 2019 7:07 am

Because if they voted against it they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

Or if they voted for it they would burn a bridge with labour that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Tomous » Thu Oct 24, 2019 7:10 am

Errkal wrote:Because if they did they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.


And instead burn bridges with voters concerned over the Tories destroying key principles of the NHS.

Image
User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Knoyleo » Thu Oct 24, 2019 7:13 am

Errkal wrote:Because if they voted against it they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

Or if they voted for it they would burn a bridge with labour that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

The motion called for the withdrawl of the 2012 Health And Social Care Act, which they helped implement, and they're still too cowardly to even admit to their past deeds, let alone attempt to undo them.

Wow, who knew the Lib Dems were a terrible party nobody should vote for?

User avatar
Errkal
Member
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Errkal » Thu Oct 24, 2019 7:17 am

Tomous wrote:
Errkal wrote:Because if they did they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.


And instead burn bridges with voters concerned over the Tories destroying key principles of the NHS.


Calculated risk I guess, I assume they figured it will go mostly unnoticed and so the people that will vote lib because of Tories and Corbyn will still do so.

User avatar
Garth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Norn Iron

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Garth » Thu Oct 24, 2019 12:02 pm

https://constitution-unit.com/2019/10/2 ... of-brexit/


User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Thu Oct 24, 2019 6:09 pm

KK has gone too far this time.


User avatar
Drumstick
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Drumstick » Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:36 pm

Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

One man should not have this much power in this game. Luckily I'm not an ordinary man.
Image Image
"economically unviable"
-Oblomov Boblomov
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:45 pm

Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy. :roll:

Image
User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: 40 light-years outside of the buttermilk nebula

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Jenuall » Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:08 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:
Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy. :roll:

It was an amendment about existing regret, effectively designed to put pressure on the government around this issue - there was no benefit in abstaining from such a vote other than to reinforce the viewpoint that not enough people care about it.

Image
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:13 pm

Jenuall wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:
Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy. :roll:

It was an amendment about existing regret, effectively designed to put pressure on the government around this issue - there was no benefit in abstaining from such a vote other than to reinforce the viewpoint that not enough people care about it.

Yeah I do still agree they should have voted for it. I wrote to them a few days ago to express my concern (I am a paid up member) but haven't had anything back yet...

Image
User avatar
Samuel_1
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Samuel_1 » Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:16 pm

Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.


This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?

Supporting My Local Mule Sanctuary Since 11/11/2014.

Donations welcome, please PM me to prevent unwarranted mule kicking.
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:49 pm

Samuel_1 wrote:
Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.


This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?


I don't think anyone's arguing that the Lib Dems were wrong to vote against it, just that the way it's being reported is overstating what the bill would have done.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Samuel_1
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Samuel_1 » Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:45 pm

Lex-Man wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:
Drumstick wrote:
Samuel_1 wrote:All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems :x

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.


This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?


I don't think anyone's arguing that the Lib Dems were wrong to vote against it, just that the way it's being reported is overstating what the bill would have done.

Sure, but it's another indication of what the party stands for. Their new leader's voting record is awful. Even though they may be the "party of remain" I don't think they're deserving of any votes from people who
view themselves as progressive.

Supporting My Local Mule Sanctuary Since 11/11/2014.

Donations welcome, please PM me to prevent unwarranted mule kicking.

Return to “Stuff”