Reform UK going from strength to strength.

[coprolite]

42 minutes ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I suspect, given the nature of this board, that both ‘toxic’ and ‘mainstream’ mean different things to us.

Not everyone sees the world through Patrick Harvie tinted specs.

I do indeed want the Tories to become less toxic and more mainstream, and support Reform’s policies in general.

If anyone has issues with the policies of Reform then I’d be interested to hear them, but I’m afraid screaming ‘RACISTS!’ just harms your cause.

I don't think everyone who likes "Reform" is necessarily a racist, but they are an undeniably xenophobic "party" whose main "policies" seem to be restricting immigration and promoting "Christian values". Alongside Trussonomics, brexit, climate denial and culture warrism.

I'd expect that there's a larger proportion of racists that like reform than there are in the Tories as a whole, and in the Tories than in the general population. 

The whole thing is not serious though. It's an excuse for gobshites to get on telly and in the papers. More like a think tank than a party, but with way less thinking. 

[GHF-23]

1 hour ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I suspect, given the nature of this board, that both ‘toxic’ and ‘mainstream’ mean different things to us.

 

Can you tell us what they mean to you then, in contrast to what you see as the prevailing opinion of the site, because you often say things like this but don't elaborate. 

Also, it's clearly upsetting to you when Reform are described as racists. But how can you dismiss that criticism so easily when the party has made the decision to accept an MP suspended from the Conservative party for comments which I believe any reasonably-minded person would consider racist? Do you consider those comments acceptable? Do they fit within your definition of mainstream and outside your definition of toxic? Again, I'm just keen to pin down some of your statements to something a bit more specific

Edited March 13 by GHF-23

[BFTD]

There's a really odd wee coterie of posters who express their dislike of this site regularly, yet continue posting, even opening up new accounts when punted.

Presumably they also have accounts on AVForums and Mumsnet (the #1 and #3 top matches for 'politics forum' on Google) where they do the same thing.

[Fullerene]

2 hours ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I suspect, given the nature of this board, that both ‘toxic’ and ‘mainstream’ mean different things to us.

Not everyone sees the world through Patrick Harvie tinted specs.

I do indeed want the Tories to become less toxic and more mainstream, and support Reform’s policies in general.

If anyone has issues with the policies of Reform then I’d be interested to hear them, but I’m afraid screaming ‘RACISTS!’ just harms your cause.

When John Major speaks, I am perfectly happy to hear what he has to say.  I might not agree with him but I know he is capable of expressing his opinion without trying to provoke anyone.  Similarly Chris Patten, Michael Heseltine and many others.  I regard them as "mainstream" Tories who are genuinely trying to address the issues of the day albeit with Conservative solutions.

This is in stark contrast to the current garbage that are always provocative, trying to whip up the mob, blame "others" and divert attention away from themselves.  That is what I call "Toxic".

Not all Tories are toxic but a lot are.  The Reform Party is even worse.  

[Fullerene]

26 minutes ago, BFTD said:

There's a really odd wee coterie of posters who express their dislike of this site regularly, yet continue posting, even opening up new accounts when punted.

Presumably they also have accounts on AVForums and Mumsnet (the #1 and #3 top matches for 'politics forum' on Google) where they do the same thing.

They also go on to Star Trek forums to say they prefer Star Wars.

[DublinMagyar]

14 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

They also go on to Star Trek forums to say they prefer Star Wars.

So they are not all bad?

[BFTD]

59 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

They also go on to Star Trek forums to say they prefer Star Wars.

Ooh, that's almost as bad as the SNAPE KILLS PALPATINE trolls!

[Highlandmagar]

47 minutes ago, DublinMagyar said:

So they are not all bad?

I feel the force young padawan.

[HTG]

1 hour ago, Fullerene said:

When John Major speaks, I am perfectly happy to hear what he has to say.  I might not agree with him but I know he is capable of expressing his opinion without trying to provoke anyone.  Similarly Chris Patten, Michael Heseltine and many others.  I regard them as "mainstream" Tories who are genuinely trying to address the issues of the day albeit with Conservative solutions.

This is in stark contrast to the current garbage that are always provocative, trying to whip up the mob, blame "others" and divert attention away from themselves.  That is what I call "Toxic".

Not all Tories are toxic but a lot are.  The Reform Party is even worse.  

Part of this issue for the Tory party may be that the Labour party has swallowed up much of the ground previously occupied by the likes of Major, Patten or Clarke. The shift to the right by Labour - particularly under Starmer but started by Blair - has pushed the Tories further right to remain in some way relevant. Of course it leaves the electorate without a left or even centre-left option to vote for. 

[Fullerene]

2 minutes ago, HTG said:

Part of this issue for the Tory party may be that the Labour party has swallowed up much of the ground previously occupied by the likes of Major, Patten or Clarke. The shift to the right by Labour - particularly under Starmer but started by Blair - has pushed the Tories further right to remain in some way relevant. Of course it leaves the electorate without a left or even centre-left option to vote for. 

That is one way to look at it.  I still think the Tory Party is the natural home for Major, Patten, Clarke, Heseltine and so on.

I think Labour are being opportunistic.  Similar to why Vodafone and 02 have their stores next door to each other, Labour are man marking the Tories to scoop up anyone is just a sliver to the left of the Tories. Unfortunately that leads to the entire Overton window moving to the right and right-wing issues and positions dominating the headlines. 

[CarrbridgeSaintee]

3 hours ago, Fullerene said:

They also go on to Star Trek forums to say they prefer Star Wars.

Rather amusing to see that particular poster still desperate for attention.  Every so often, when quoted (as you’ve done) I unwittingly stumble across one of his posts.

Keeping the exact same shtick for such a long time must take effort, so in a weird way he actually deserves a wee bit of respect.

Edited March 13 by CarrbridgeSaintee

[Jacksgranda]

How many seats are they liable to win? I'll go for 0.

[CarrbridgeSaintee]

4 hours ago, GHF-23 said:

Can you tell us what they mean to you then, in contrast to what you see as the prevailing opinion of the site, because you often say things like this but don't elaborate. 

Also, it's clearly upsetting to you when Reform are described as racists. But how can you dismiss that criticism so easily when the party has made the decision to accept an MP suspended from the Conservative party for comments which I believe any reasonably-minded person would consider racist? Do you consider those comments acceptable? Do they fit within your definition of mainstream and outside your definition of toxic? Again, I'm just keen to pin down some of your statements to something a bit more specific

Toxicity is in the eye of the beholder.

In politics I don’t find much toxic other than the acts of demonising and/or denying free speech to others.  I found the BNP to be toxic in their day and would certainly apply the term to today’s Scottish Greens.

As for ‘mainstream’, I see it as meaning in line with public opinion.  I don’t see ‘populism’ as a dirty word, and It’s undeniable that Reform espouse populist policies.

I’m not upset at Reform being called racists though.  Where did you get that from?

I don’t think Anderson’s comments about Khan and Islamic extremists were racist at all.  I don’t agree with them, as I think they were factually untrue, but they weren’t racist.  To answer your question, the remarks were neither toxic nor mainstream.

Edited March 13 by CarrbridgeSaintee

[BFTD]

Wait, has Oaksoft started referring to himself in the third person now?  

Edit: this is his fourth political party - originally claimed to be Labour, drooled all over the Tories' persecution of paupers, switched to SNP briefly because...well, f**k knows, and has now lined up with the fascists.

Edited March 13 by BFTD

[coprolite]

3 hours ago, Fullerene said:

When John Major speaks, I am perfectly happy to hear what he has to say.  I might not agree with him but I know he is capable of expressing his opinion without trying to provoke anyone.  Similarly Chris Patten, Michael Heseltine and many others.  I regard them as "mainstream" Tories who are genuinely trying to address the issues of the day albeit with Conservative solutions.

This is in stark contrast to the current garbage that are always provocative, trying to whip up the mob, blame "others" and divert attention away from themselves.  That is what I call "Toxic".

Not all Tories are toxic but a lot are.  The Reform Party is even worse.  

Major sounds plausible and read when he speaks nowadays, but in power he presided over the OG culture war government, going “Back to Basics” in response to “political correctness gone mad”. Which translated somehow into cutting benefits for the most vulnerable.

Hesseltine was always up to the eyeballs in dodgy money and corruption. He’s basically Boris Johnson who can keep a straight face.
 

The main difference between today’s tories and thirty five years ago is social media, so we can all see in almost real time what they think. They used to sing a song in support of Botha and Pinochet ffs.

[GHF-23]

1 hour ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I don’t think Anderson’s comments about Khan and Islamic extremists were racist at all.  I don’t agree with them, as I think they were factually untrue, but they weren’t racist.  To answer your question, the remarks were neither toxic nor mainstream.

Sorry you are mental 

[carpetmonster]

4 hours ago, BFTD said:

There's a really odd wee coterie of posters who express their dislike of this site regularly, yet continue posting, even opening up new accounts when punted.

Presumably they also have accounts on AVForums and Mumsnet (the #1 and #3 top matches for 'politics forum' on Google) where they do the same thing.

Although to tie it in nicely, the easiest way to have lots of anonymous members of the public roll their eyes and switch off whenever you appear would be to run as a Reform candidate, which is probably viable; if they’re standing in every constituency I can’t imagine they’ll be too choosy about who they’re putting out there. 

[BFTD]

Just now, carpetmonster said:

Although to tie it in nicely, the easiest way to have lots of anonymous members of the public roll their eyes and switch off whenever you appear would be to run as a Reform candidate, which is probably viable; if they’re standing in every constituency I can’t imagine they’ll be too choosy about who they’re putting out there. 

Exciting times! It's been fun seeing what parties like UKIP and Alba were willing to pin a rosette on over the years. Labour and the SNP pale by comparison.

I wonder who'll be this election's David Coburn - boasting about being within touching distance of victory, before losing their deposit with Monster Raving Loony levels of support.

[carpetmonster]

5 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Exciting times! It's been fun seeing what parties like UKIP and Alba were willing to pin a rosette on over the years. Labour and the SNP pale by comparison.

I wonder who'll be this election's David Coburn - boasting about being within touching distance of victory, before losing their deposit with Monster Raving Loony levels of support.

Maybe Coburn again - could add weight to their differentiation from the Tories, given that Carlaw of the fallen madonna with ze big boobies KBd him when he tried to join them. 

[BFTD]

2 hours ago, carpetmonster said:

Maybe Coburn again - could add weight to their differentiation from the Tories, given that Carlaw of the fallen madonna with ze big boobies KBd him when he tried to join them. 

I'd just noticed that - being turned down for Conservative Party membership would send anyone into a spiralling depression. They're basically saying you're either too much of a pauper or don't qualify as human (not sure which would have hurt him more).