Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Oh this has been a s**tshow over here in the UK for the past few days. Basically one of the Tory MPs was called out by the Standards committee for “egregious paid advocacy” - basically getting paid by private companies by using his MP credentials - and was facing a 30-day suspension from Parliament.

But instead of taking in on the chin and copping it, the whole Tory government passed a motion to not only amend the suspension but to throw out the whole Standards committee and process, to the point where Boris Johnson essentially forced his MPs to vote with the motion. It caused such a ruckus in the media and online that the government had to fully backtrack the following day.

And the worst thing is, the MP who was implicated ended up resigning anyway as a result of the whole debacle!

This article explains it well: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/04/the-guardian-view-on-the-paterson-case-enough-is-enough?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Edited by OzFrog
  • Replies 46.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6849

  • DRW50

    6016

  • DramatistDreamer

    5524

  • Khan

    3500

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members
Posted

I don't think they can on Afghanistan, bc the public doesn't buy it. I do think the public is often fickle, which is part of what led to the VA Governor's race and what often leads to brutal turnover against the incumbent in most midterms. But not always. I think what will matter a year from now is a big open question, but I do think this bill - and BBB - will have an impact with the base, among other things, as well as trickling down (haha) to the squishy middle for other advantages. There's so much to do between then and now that I am not going to assume anything, even though the media is absolutely gagging to see a revitalized, 'sensible' GOP run rampant.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

 

I actually agree that Tuesday's election results don't necessarily spell doom for the Democrats in 2022. That said, the result in New Jersey was horrendous for the Dems. While a win is a win, the fact of the matter is that Phil Murphy won a very close race against a little known (and underfunded) opponent in a state with over one million more registered Democrats than Republicans. IMO, the result in New Jersey is a lot more embarrassing for Democrats than Virginia considering the former state is much bluer than the latter. (I also realize that Murphy defied the historical "curse" in becoming the first Democratic New Jersey governor to win re-election since 1977, but it's also important to consider that the state is more Democratic than when Jon Corzine lost re-election in 2009 and a lot more Democratic than when Jim Florio lost in 1993.)

And once again, we have another election in which the polling was absolute garbage. The final Real Clear Politics polling average gave Murphy a 7.8% lead, while the "respected" Monmouth University poll had Murphy up 11 points. Given the supposed "hopelessness" of the race, part of me figured that showing up to vote for Republican Jack Ciattarelli was a total waste of time. But now, I'm so glad I cast that vote for Ciattarelli, as I feel that my vote really meant something in spite of the fact that Murphy still won.

Edited by Max
  • Members
Posted

I have to ask...why do Democrats NOT turn out for off year elections?  I have voted in every year since I turned 21 (that was the age limit then) and can't conceive anyone NOT wanting to vote.

  • Members
Posted

Good Question but they did when Trump was in office. One thing FEAR. The GOP keeps their base in a perpetual state of fear - 24 by 7 365 days a year. Notice how democrats did turn out when Trump was in office in all elections. FEAR.  

IMO January 6th needs to be focused on a lot more. They need to be talking about it regularly and the danger the GOP is to our democracy. The fact that republicans don't believe in it anymore and keep pounding it EVERY DAY. Thats what the GOP has done for 40 years. Willie Horton, Welfare Queens, Immigrants an array of people they have brainwashed their followers in to fear. Now they have moved it to democrats as the enemy not just opponents. Im shocked we as of yet haven't seen more attacks and shootings this year.

  • Members
Posted

Polling has been problematic for a while across the board. 

Last thing I read was democratic turnout in NJ was down.  As I mentioned to someone else, democrats sadly don't turn out generally as well because that party doesn't work to keep it's base in a constant state of fear as the GOP has done for years. Murphy did a lot of things democrats wanted. Min wage, pot legalization, family leave. Overall dems need to do better to support people who are delivering. Frankly I am not sure why a principled republican should be opposed to these things.

I also must say I am surprised you voted for Ciattarelli. The guy is refusing to concede even though he's behind by 65,000 votes. What's next a claim of voter fraud. Is that the playbook you support because that's the playbook the GOP seems to run for every race they lose. They were talking about potential voter fraud in Virginia before election day probably not confident they were going to win. Somehow there was none now since Youngkin won.  

  • Members
Posted (edited)

 

I believe that Terry McAullife received more votes in VA than even in Ralph Northan received in his victorious 2017 bid, so that goes against your narrative that Democrats just didn't bother to show up on Tuesday. Maybe a lot of voters--even in a dark blue state such as New Jersey--wanted a change because the state is a very unaffordable place in which to live and do business. But you're so incredibly partisan that you have to tell yourself that whenever the GOP wins, it's because of fear. So thank goodness the Democrats always run such rosy, uplifting campaigs, right? Like when the Democrats trashed John McCain for being a war monger in 2008. Or when all sorts of very ugly, anti-Mormon smears were hurled at Mitt Romney in 2012. Or when age became a major issue against Reagan, McCain, and Dole, even though they were all a good four-plus years younger when they ran than when Biden got elected. (And don't even get me started about how Democrats always seem to "forgive" or "forget" any racism on the part of their own, whether it's Ralph Northam's infamous photo, Hillary's very racially charged 2008 primary campaign, Howard Dean's statement that he wanted to get the votes of "guys with Confederate flags on their pickup trucks," or the anti-Semitism of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.)

If I were Ciattarelli, I would have conceded by now. But there's quite a bit of Democratic hypocrisy on this matter, since the Democratic State Senate President, Steve Sweeney, lost by a margin that can't be overcome, and Governor Murphy has indicated Sweeney can concede on his own timetable. (I want to make clear that I am in no way supportive of the very bigoted GOP candidate who defeated Sweeney. I merely mentioned this race because I wanted to point out Democratic hypocrisy on this matter.)

Some liberals--and here I am not referring to you, as you specifically did not address this matter--seem to be shocked and under the impression that a person cannot be genuinely anti-Trump without voting Democratic up and down the ballot. Life is a hell of a lot more complicated than that, and as somebody who is on the center-right of the political spectrum, I'm not about to relinquish my political beliefs and instead give Democrats my unconditional and undying support simply because I despise Trump and the MAGA cult. I will evaluate each election and choose the person whom I genuinely believe is best for the job, and that doesn't make me an evil person.

Edited by Max

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Listen, I am all for Laura Wright wearing silly wigs and glasses if there was a point.  So far she's just been nice to Brennan and made out with him.  How evil lol!!  Even though I have been told Brennan loves her the writing was never there.  It's so low stakes.  Carly should maybe talk to her daughter and have an adult conversation instead. Laura and Anna look foolish.  I really don't have an issue with either being friendly or at least having some affection for Sonny.  I don't get both of them wanting to have a parade to announce how much they love him and how valuable the friendship is.  C'mon, Laura basically tolerated Sonny because of Luke until Lulu/Dante got together.  Anna likes Sonny because Robin did?  There really isn't much more of a reason for Anna to give him the time of day besides that.  They aren't lifelong buddies.
    • It is so dumb and is dragging on already after a couple weeks. By the time Carly wraps this up Joss will be running the local branch office. And yes, Laura deserves better. It's like they tripled down on this Sonny apologia stuff with her and Anna after the Mulcahey saga.
    • A white twunk with no purpose?? On Days of our Lives??!!
    • It feels like the show hired Hank Northrop first and are still deciding what to do with him lol. I don't have a judgement on the character yet, but this non-story (so far) has been happening for at least a month and he's only made 2 appearances lol. Also, this may be a stupid question, but is Chad's name really Chadwick?  I can't find any evidence of that in a quick google search, so I assume it's just a silly nickname Leo calls him?  I feel like I've heard other characters (EJ?) call him that though too.
    • I know Anita mentioned that she no longer was investing in the trust, while Leslie had stated that the interest was multiplying at a decent rate... but I do have a feeling she'll wipe through the trust in a short amount of time with the amount of spending she's doing. The show always throws in tiny nuggets of foreshadowing and having Anita's remark and Eva warning her mother not to overdo the spending tells me that Leslie will be blowing through that money eventually.
    • I honestly don't care if Laura is friends with Sonny.  She's been friends with him for decades.  The way she goes about the friendship is stupid.   She has no sense of self-preservation or awareness about the optics of parading her friendship with Sonny around town.  She practically celebrates it.  There's no reason in the world she can't just keep the friendship low key and explain they share a grandchild and frame the relationship that way.  A lot of Laura's choices, like getting into a public fight with Dalton, just make her look silly and like a fairly incompetent mayor. Carly is another PC lady that's starting to look silly.  I know she's explained her plan a lot, but it's still stupid and moving at a glacial pace.  If Joss is 45 by the time her revenge plot unfolds, what's the point?  Just dump Brennen and move on please.
    • On that same note, it's astounding to have mobster Sonny in the same office with Mayor Laura chatting it up about their mutual grandson. Think about the reaction if John Gotti and Mayor Eric Adams had a friendship

      Please register in order to view this content

      ?? I guess the Logic behind Sonny & Jason acceptance is like when i saw a documentary where FBI agents said they'd rather deal with the mafia than terrorists or cartels---they're the "lesser of 3 evils". Anyway I'm about 30 years late on this convo.
    • Im confused. Does Jessica know anything about June's relation to Tyrell? At the start of the episode, it seemed like June was gonna slip that he was her son but she caught herself but later in the episode she referred to him as "my boy" and Jessica had no reaction like that wasnt a surprise to her No, Anita was putting money in the account every 6 months but we werent told how much was in it when Leslie became a beneficiary. The show has set it up that it was multiplying based off the interest so that its really worth quite alot now. I dont buy it but thats what they've told us
    • What was the point in Lori's return as Mrs. Max Hollister? That little story never made much sense to me.  Were there plans for a permanent return? Or even a new family with her as the matriarch?  
    • I guess it depends on your device.  I can watch CW shows via their website on my Windows PC.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy