Labour

[Jack]

Charming. The SNP did, of course, do it, moving Scottish Parliament elections from a four to five year cycle.

Do you think it was a good idea to have a regular clash of UK, Scottish and local elections all on the same day?

 

[hibbybilly]

Well you can't have it both ways - postpone election to save rapid fire elections or spend £63m.

Labour had it both ways, postpone elections and then unpostpone them.
Cvnts dinnae ken what the fuck they're daein.

 

[Archie]

Labour had it both ways, postpone elections and then unpostpone them.
Cvnts dinnae ken what the fuck they're daein.

I'm going to agree with you here. If you make a decision stick to it.

 

[hibbybilly]

I'm going to agree with you here. If you make a decision stick to it.

Aye, 14 times.

 

[Archie]

Do you think it was a good idea to have a regular clash of UK, Scottish and local elections all on the same day?

Different question. The tone of the discussion has been that Labour is anti democratic by proposing to postpone (not cancel) some elections due to local government reforms. Local authorities of all hues had requested this. This seemed unremarkable when the Tories and SNP did it. Added to this is the ludicrous and hyperbolic assertion that it was 'the end of democracy ' etc. That's before we get to the absurd comparison with Trump.

 

[egb_hibs]

Different question. The tone of the discussion has been that Labour is anti democratic by proposing to postpone (not cancel) some elections due to local government reforms. Local authorities of all hues had requested this. This seemed unremarkable when the Tories and SNP did it. Added to this is the ludicrous and hyperbolic assertion that it was 'the end of democracy ' etc. That's before we get to the absurd comparison with Trump.

Labour and the tories both wanted it because Reform and the Greens are going to give them a roasting. You can't just suspend elections cos youre going to lose them, then justify it with some made up excuse that has been declared illegitimate by the electoral commission and no doubt illegal too, given labour's reaction to legal advice. Also condemned by politicians of all colours and the speaker of the house.

As someone who makes such a big play on legalism and process when it suits you, this kind of thing just illustrates that's no more sincere than anything else. Black is white and up is down when it comes to The Party, which is the only thing that matters.

What's absurd about the comparison to Trump? If he follows suit do you think he's going to say its because he doesn't want to lose seats? I rather think it's more likely he will come out with an excuse that only his shills will swallow. Just like here. The biggest problem with the comparison is that as yet he hasnt done it, while Labour have.

 

[Jack]

Charming. The SNP did, of course, do it, moving Scottish Parliament elections from a four to five year cycle.

Do you think it was a good idea to have a regular clash of UK, Scottish and local elections all on the same day?

Different question. The tone of the discussion has been that Labour is anti democratic by proposing to postpone (not cancel) some elections due to local government reforms. Local authorities of all hues had requested this. This seemed unremarkable when the Tories and SNP did it. Added to this is the ludicrous and hyperbolic assertion that it was 'the end of democracy ' etc. That's before we get to the absurd comparison with Trump.

Then why mention the SNP at all if the circumstances were different?

 

[cleanyman]

We are failing young people. Leaving at record levels and being replaced with muck.

It is time for change.

 

[egb_hibs]

We are failing young people. Leaving at record levels and being replaced with muck.

It is time for change.

Steady on. You sound like a wokist there.

We are creating huge problems with parallel societies and dissolution of the West, but humans are not 'muck'.

 

[Keepitgreen]

We are failing young people. Leaving at record levels and being replaced with muck.

It is time for change.

 

[egb_hibs]

Then why mention the SNP at all if the circumstances were different?

Its just point scoring using the tools available, however inappropriate.

This isn't about the issue @Jack it's about deflecting from it.

 

[Archie]

Then why mention the SNP at all if the circumstances were different?

I didn't say the circumstances were different. I said it was a different question. Your question was about the rationale. You can debate that, just as you can debate the rationale of when the Tories did it and Labour proposed it.

I was simply pointing out that Labour was not alone in postponing elections. And when the SNP and Tories did it there didn't seem to be a big issue made.

 

[cleanyman]

Steady on. You sound like a wokist there.

We are creating huge problems with parallel societies and dissolution of the West, but humans are not 'muck'.

Of course there are humans that are muck. I worked in the prison service. What are they ?

Woke explanation incoming……

 

[Jack]

I didn't say the circumstances were different. I said it was a different question. Your question was about the rationale. You can debate that, just as you can debate the rationale of when the Tories did it and Labour proposed it.

I was simply pointing out that Labour was not alone in postponing elections. And when the SNP and Tories did it there didn't seem to be a big issue made.

That's because it was sensible and legal to do so. Unlike labour who caved in with the threat of legal action.

I still don't know why you introduced the SNP if it was a different question. The questions aren't similar in any way.

 

[egb_hibs]

Of course there are humans that are muck. I worked in the prison service. What are they ?

Woke explanation incoming……

While I would still dispute they are muck, I'm not sanctimonious enough to fail to understand why you would feel like that about some of the bams you encounter in prisons. But I don't think you can fairly compare Arabs or any other group to the self selecting group that is prison psychos

This just undermines real concerns about the total insanity that is being perpetrated on our society, on which point I think we probably agree

 

[Cavalier]

Being reported that the manifesto commitment to remove the age bands for the minimum wage band is going to be "delayed"

 

[Archie]

That's because it was sensible and legal to do so. Unlike labour who caved in with the threat of legal action.

I still don't know why you introduced the SNP if it was a different question. The questions aren't similar in any way.

It's a question of the principle of postponing elections. From the coverage of the Labour proposal you would assume no other party had done it. And that's just not true.

Your points are about the rationale, not the principle, which is a different question.

 

[egb_hibs]

Being reported that the manifesto commitment to remove the age bands for the minimum wage band is going to be "delayed"

Possibly because they have already destroyed youth employment? More young folk without a job than during lockdown ffs.

So much of this government is like watching policies rolled out by people who arrived on earth yesterday, before eventually they receive advice from someone expert in economics to O grade level.

 

[Jack]

It's a question of the principle of postponing elections. From the coverage of the Labour proposal you would assume no other party had done it. And that's just not true.

Your points are about the rationale, not the principle, which is a different question.

So what the SNP has done was legal and what Labour proposed to do was illegal given the advice they now have?

It's not even in the same ballpark

 

[egb_hibs]

Starmer threatens to jail small boat migrants.

https://archive.ph/2026.02.18-142247/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/chagos-islands-protest-starmer-jail-8tmfszgzq

For some reason it seems to be different if the corner of British territory on which you land is the Chagos islands. In which case it doesn't even matter if you are a native.

How queer, Keir.

 

[Archie]

So what the SNP has done was legal and what Labour proposed to do was illegal given the advice they now have?

It's not even in the same ballpark

Again missing the point. The issue being raised was appoint of principle. That's an on off switch. I this case whether it is undemocratic to postpone an election. You're not addressing that point as you are veering into an assessment of the postponement was processed correctly. Not the same thing .

A parallel would be the death penalty. If that is opposed as a point of principle you can't look at a case and say it was justified there. It either is or isn't.

Now I suspect your personal position is that it's ok to postpone elections in particular circumstances. That's fine. But the denunciations of UKG are that it's an attack on democracy etc. etc. So on a point of principle I'm pointing out that Labour is not alone in doing this as the Tories and SNP have.

You appear to be saying it's different because of process reasons rather than principle. But that doesn't make my comparison invalid at all.

 

[Jack]

Again missing the point. The issue being raised was appoint of principle. That's an on off switch. I this case whether it is undemocratic to postpone an election. You're not addressing that point as you are veering into an assessment of the postponement was processed correctly. Not the same thing .

A parallel would be the death penalty. If that is opposed as a point of principle you can't look at a case and say it was justified there. It either is or isn't.

Now I suspect your personal position is that it's ok to postpone elections in particular circumstances. That's fine. But the denunciations of UKG are that it's an attack on democracy etc. etc. So on a point of principle I'm pointing out that Labour is not alone in doing this as the Tories and SNP have.

You appear to be saying it's different because of process reasons rather than principle. But that doesn't make my comparison invalid at all.

It's not just a point of principle though, it's a point of Law. What the Labour party wanted to do was illegal. Had it been legal I doubt it would have caused the furore it has.

Do you have a relevant example of where any party has postponed elections illegally?

Labour brought this on themselves and deserve the flack they're getting.

If parties work within the Law there's not much to be said.

 

[Archie]

It's not just a point of principle though, it's a point of Law. What the Labour party wanted to do was illegal. Had it been legal I doubt it would have caused the furore it has.

Do you have a relevant example of where any party has postponed elections illegally?

Labour brought this on themselves and deserve the flack they're getting.

If parties work within the Law there's not much to be said.

Again missing the point. On the point of principle it was exactly the same. The process was clearly different. I'm not defending how Labour dealt with it (far from it), simply that the principle was the same.

 

[egb_hibs]

Again missing the point. On the point of principle it was exactly the same. The process was clearly different. I'm not defending how Labour dealt with it (far from it), simply that the principle was the same.

Did the SNP have councillors serving 75% of a second term without facing the ballot box?

It's illegal because its illegitimate because it doesn't have a justified reason. That is not the case with previous instances.

 

[Jack]

Again missing the point. On the point of principle it was exactly the same. The process was clearly different. I'm not defending how Labour dealt with it (far from it), simply that the principle was the same.

On a point of principle no it wasn't. One was legal, Labour was illegal.

In principle do you consider it OK to break the law?

 

[Archie]

On a point of principle no it wasn't. One was legal, Labour was illegal.

In principle do you consider it OK to break the law?

This is great deflection.

But a simple question: do you accept the Reform position that it is anti democratic to postpone elections? Yes or no.

 

[Jack]

This is great deflection.

But a simple question: do you accept the Reform position that it is anti democratic to postpone elections? Yes or no.

The deflection, as usual, is all yours!

I thought it was wrong before reform chipped in. I thought to myself 'How TF do they think they can get away with that? They're just like the torys!'

Even simpler question. Do you think political parties should break the law?

 

[Archie]

The deflection, as usual, is all yours!

I thought it was wrong before reform chipped in. I thought to myself 'How TF do they think they can get away with that? They're just like the torys!'

Even simpler question. Do you think political parties should break the law?

Yet it's a clear question. I guess your position is that it's OK if the SNP do it.

 

[1 Mcnamara]

Why don’t they just go Boris mental and prorogue parliament. Cause that’s the standard set from the beloved Westminster.

 

[Jack]

Yet it's a clear question. I guess your position is that it's OK if the SNP do it.

If it's legal then yes.

I can assume your position is that Labour can break the law if it doesn't suit.

 

[Archie]

If it's legal then yes.

I can assume your position is that Labour can break the law if it doesn't suit.

Don't be silly.

 

[egb_hibs]

@Archie simple question: do you think Labour's plan to suppress elections was wrong?

 

[hibbybilly]

Donald disnae agree wi the Chaos Islands deal now, he's as bad as Starmer. Talking of who, u-turn number 15 coming up?

 

[egb_hibs]

The archive thing isn't working for me so paywalled link I am afraid.

But a bleak wee illustration of parallel communities and thus rising sectarian politics

Deprivation and segregation: Gorton and Denton is a dismal preview of the future of broken Britain

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/21/gorton-and-denton-broken-britain/

 

[Keepitgreen]

The archive thing isn't working for me so paywalled link I am afraid.

But a bleak wee illustration of parallel communities and thus rising sectarian politics

Deprivation and segregation: Gorton and Denton is a dismal preview of the future of broken Britain

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/21/gorton-and-denton-broken-britain/

Here you go:

https://archive.is/20260221125626/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/21/gorton-and-denton-broken-britain/

Torygraph articles like this do my tits in. You have to dig through the race-baiting parts to get to where there is actual analysis of what's been going wrong in deprived communities. Cos its in there. Lack of investment and opportunities for a long, long time.

Its like, the answers are there but they're not quite getting it. They'd much rather devote chunks of the page talking about how many white people are in a community ffs.

Where working class folk begin to look around and target other skin colours instead of where the power lies and is responsible, do these media arseholes help or hinder it?

 

[egb_hibs]

Here you go:

https://archive.is/20260221125626/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/21/gorton-and-denton-broken-britain/

Torygraph articles like this do my tits in. You have to dig through the race-baiting parts to get to where there is actual analysis of what's been going wrong in deprived communities. Cos its in there. Lack of investment and opportunities for a long, long time.

Its like, the answers are there but they're not quite getting it. They'd much rather devote chunks of the page talking about how many white people are in a community ffs.

Where working class folk begin to look around and target other skin colours instead of where the power lies and is responsible, do these media arseholes help or hinder it?

You seem to be missing the point that the Greens are trading on sectarian politics and two parallel communities may end up competing on that basis. Uncomfortable or not that's the way it's headed. Perhaps you aren't that well versed in what these communities see as their problems?

 

[Keepitgreen]

You seem to be missing the point that the Greens are trading on sectarian politics and two parallel communities may end up competing on that basis. Uncomfortable or not that's the way it's headed. Perhaps you aren't that well versed in what these communities see as their problems?

No not missing the point that the torygraph is trying to ram home as per. Rather digging beneath it to get to the roots of the issue

 

[egb_hibs]

No not missing the point that the torygraph is trying to ram home as per. Rather digging beneath it to get to the roots of the issue

And what's the roots of the issue? What do you think has one community swinging behind the greens? A passion for renewables perhaps? Or another behind Reform for that matter?

Perhaps you understand voter concerns better than they do, but what are these roots as you see it?

And if you do indeed have a better grip on those concerns, indeed perhaps especially in that light, what is wrong with the Telegraph lamenting why they are actually swinging as they are?

 

[Keepitgreen]

And what's the roots of the issue? What do you think has one community swinging behind the greens? A passion for renewables perhaps? Or another behind Reform for that matter?

Perhaps you understand voter concerns better than they do, but what are these roots as you see it?

And if you do indeed have a better grip on those concerns, indeed perhaps especially in that light, what is wrong with the Telegraph lamenting why they are actually swinging as they are?

Ok so you try and swing the post to your point, I try to swing to mine, not much use this. But let's try again.

Normally I'd be happy to see any tory rag take an interest in some working class toons. But immediately - and call me cynical if you like - I ask the following 2 questions:

1 - How much of an interest did this tory rag take in the working class toons during the 14 years of tory rule we just endured?

2 - how much interest did the fucking tories themselves take in the working class toons during the 14 years of tory rule we just endured?

Answers to these lead you to why things are where they are now, and where you're focusing.

You right now:

 

[egb_hibs]

Ok so you try and swing the post to your point, I try to swing to mine, not much use this. But let's try again.

No KIG, that isn't it. I have referred back to the theme of the article which is borne out by party support and the themes candidates are playing too. You suggest all this is not the 'root' of things but haven't explained why.

Normally I'd be happy to see any tory rag take an interest in some working class toons. But immediately - and call me cynical if you like - I ask the following 2 questions:

1 - How much of an interest did this tory rag take in the working class toons during the 14 years of tory rule we just endured?

Lots - though thats irrelevant either way to the veracity of the article and indeed your unexplained rationale for why it's missing the point

2 - how much interest did the fucking tories themselves take in the working class toons during the 14 years of tory rule we just endured?

Far from enough despite those towns handing them a whopping majority, and that is a central part of the story here.

Answers to these lead you to why things are where there are now, and where you're focusing.

You right now:

View attachment 21051

I haven't a scooby what point you intend by that gif and I'm sorry KiG but 'tories' isn't an answer to anything, indeed makes you look like a bit of antique tbh. People are rejecting the whole uniparty charade which has presided since 1997 alongside much more sinister elements creeping in.

And that is the tale the article tells. I don't think you're very in touch with all this. You certainly aren't if you think banging on Starmer-like about the tories is any way pertinent.

The tories are finished and so are labour. Whether it is manifested in the result or not, this by election presages a britain that is moving beyond all that and increasingly formed by other things.