Donald I, emperor of the world.

[Shortfall]

We've discussed the issues you mention but I seem to remember being in a small minority of people who were critical of Graham Linehans arrest and of the length of sentences handed down to people for their social media posts. My observation is that this particular corner of the internet is too forgiving of Labour's many failings. People here are quick to point at Trump for his worst excesses whilst at the same time looking the other way when Labour want to severely limit jury trial on the grounds of cost whilst at the same time they're putting taxes up for working people to pay for their client state on welfare

 

[matticus]

People here are quick to point at Trump ...

Look; I just don't like the guy. OK?

Is that a crime now??

 

[Rusty Nails]

A lot of people on this forum have been critical of Starmer's performance as leader but, if they are too forgiving of Labour's failings, in your example the rise in taxes, it is because they can see it in the context of the significant rise in taxes under the Tories during the previous fifteen years with the overall tax burden rising to the highest for 70 years.

I am not sure that the Jury system does not need a complete overhaul, but I hope that there will be opportunity for debate about how to best meet the needs of the people in this matter as the sort of things that are now crimes have changed a lot over the past 800 years. Nothing lasts forever and I am not convinced that the system used by the UK and, mostly, its former colonies is inherently better than those in other countries. Even some of those former colonies such as Canada have changed their system so that Juries are used only for the most serious cases, and the less said about the current US President's politicising and weaponising of the judicial system the better.

 

[secretsqirrel]

and the less said about the current US President's politicising and weaponising of the judicial system the better.

unless it’s on the Trump thread……..oh.

 

[CXRAndy]

Look; I just don't like the guy. OK?

Is that a crime now??

Its irrational, he's not bothering you, except your hyper sensitive liberal ego

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Its irrational, he's not bothering you, except your hyper sensitive liberal ego

Do you realise how stupid this, off the cuff comment is?

 

[Shortfall]

Look; I just don't like the guy. OK?

Is that a crime now??

No it's fine!

 

[matticus]

Do you realise how stupid this, off the cuff comment is?

Thanks; I was really hurt by Andy's post.

 

[Shortfall]

A lot of people on this forum have been critical of Starmer's performance as leader but, if they are too forgiving of Labour's failings, in your example the rise in taxes, it is because they can see it in the context of the significant rise in taxes under the Tories during the previous fifteen years with the overall tax burden rising to the highest for 70 years.

I am not sure that the Jury system does not need a complete overhaul, but I hope that there will be opportunity for debate about how to best meet the needs of the people in this matter as the sort of things that are now crimes have changed a lot over the past 800 years. Nothing lasts forever and I am not convinced that the system used by the UK and, mostly, its former colonies is inherently better than those in other countries. Even some of those former colonies such as Canada have changed their system so that Juries are used only for the most serious cases, and the less said about the current US President's politicising and weaponising of the judicial system the better.

I just happen to think they should put something like that in their manifesto with it being such an enormous and highly contentious change. As it is they're just trying to sneak it in on the grounds of cost when they know long suffering tax payers will be more open to the idea that fixing the system will cost money and this "might" save money. I'm sure it's something they have wanted to do all along and this is just a dishonest way of approaching it (see also the ID cards idea that they're pretending is about controlling immigration and which they'd also "forgotten" to put in their manifesto)

 

[AndyRM]

Do you realise how stupid this, off the cuff comment is?

I genuinely laughed at it, which I suppose wasn't the intention.

Trump is peak hyper-sensitivity, as are a lot of his MAGAlytes from what I can tell.

FFS, the guy came up with his own social media platform (which is a failure) because the big boys kicked him out of their club.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I just happen to think they should put something like that in their manifesto with it being such an enormous and highly contentious change. As it is they're just trying to sneak it in on the grounds of cost when they know long suffering tax payers will be more open to the idea that fixing the system will cost money and this "might" save money. I'm sure it's something they have wanted to do all along and this is just a dishonest way of approaching it (see also the ID cards idea that they're pretending is about controlling immigration and which they'd also "forgotten" to put in their manifesto)

I have less concern, probably stemming from my cynicism about politicians of all parties, about doing something that’s not in a manifesto than not doing something that is.

 

[Ian H]

I have less concern, probably stemming from my cynicism about politicians of all parties, about doing something that’s not in a manifesto than not doing something that is.

You don't even need cynicism - a manifesto is aspirational, subject to change once the party's in power and has sight of the books.

 

[Pblakeney]

You don't even need cynicism - a manifesto is aspirational, subject to change once the party's in power and has sight of the books.

This is an opinion bourne from decades old experience of elections and let downs, from all parties.
Eventually you lose confidence, if not to give up completely.

 

[Pinno718]

We've discussed the issues you mention but I seem to remember being in a small minority of people who were critical of Graham Linehans arrest and of the length of sentences handed down to people for their social media posts. My observation is that this particular corner of the internet is too forgiving of Labour's many failings. People here are quick to point at Trump for his worst excesses whilst at the same time looking the other way when Labour want to severely limit jury trial on the grounds of cost whilst at the same time they're putting taxes up for working people to pay for their client state on welfare

This is the Donald Trump thread.
Who's looking the other way?

 

[secretsqirrel]

You don't even need cynicism - a manifesto is aspirational, subject to change once the party's in power and has sight of the books.

I agree. It is fair enough to criticise something that was in the manifesto not being done, I get that. But to complain about things added that were not mentioned sounds a bit unrealistic.
I don’t recall Lockdown being in the Tory manifesto, or the need to support Ukraine but sh*t happens and I appreciate that something had to be done.

Needs must when the devil vomits in your kettle.