To be starting to worry that Reform will win next GE?

[TortoiseMantle]

The polls have shown a consistent lead. Is there any realistic chance of Reform actually winning the next election?

I vote Labour, but it’s hard to see how they’ve managed to throw away such a lead in just a year, and it’s hard to see how their polling improves. The Tories maybe have more opportunity for improving, but we’re going to see a Reform government, aren’t we? Nigel Farage is going to be our next PM.

That’s not a “blind spot,” it’s compassion. Choosing to be more concerned about refugees being harassed, attacked, and set on fire than about which schools 6–7% of children go to isn’t bias — it’s basic humanity. Pretending those two things are equal isn’t clever, it just flattens the difference between a policy debate and violence against vulnerable people.

OK 😳

We are giving Reform way too much airtime. Read their manifesto and spot all the holes. More than in your average colander.

lol
Anti immigrant posts are SYSTEMATICALLY left to stand. I'm only on here nowadays because I think giving up the ground to that rhetoric unchallenged is a terrible idea.

Brilliant idea @StandFirm

Here it is in all it's absurdity ReformUKOurContractwith_You.pdf

Let's all have a look - my favorite part is pulling the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights. That's for everyone, not just those pesky brown people that are stealing all your universal credit and houses and the rest. That's you too, Reform supporters.

Nobody is denying he made incitements of violence though,

I don’t think you read the article. The jury did deny it, so if calling for a group of people’s ‘throats to be cut’ (direct quote from article) is not inciting violence then neither is speculating on the identity of a suspect.

I keep telling you that this self righteous authoritarian hypocrisy drives people up the wall, you’re not doing your cause any favours.

If Labour want to retain power then they need to reduce the size of the state and the welfare bill, then reduce the tax burden. It needs to be transactional, emotionless and treated like a business model. Work should be rewarded.

Kindness and compassion are overrated. They can also be weakness. People often take the piss out of those who show kindness. Providing a much better than average welcome to migrants has encouraged more to arrive, at their own personal risk, paying thousands of pounds to be on the end of British tax payer kindness.

When it comes to the welfare state, compassion means more people can choose not to work. People with depression for example, stuck in their homes getting no better, not reaping the social and financial benefits of work, because of the states ‘compassion’.

Again, like the 'de coupling" from ECHR suggested by Jack Straw?
You all clutch pearls at this but the Overton window is decidedly moving to the right and this discussion about ECHR is happening on all political sides.

I did read the article. Seeing as you're SO obsessed with semantics and want concrete evidence that Farage instructed people to riot, why don't you show me the exact wording where the jurors deny it? You can't.

They found him not guilty. It doesn't say they denied what he did.

A court of law is more than the jury. It's the defence, the judge, come on, I think you are a lot smarter than that.

This "self-righteous authoritarian hypocrisy", also known as being credible, doing research, and arguing coherently, only drives "people" (YOU) up the wall because you are failing to argue your point and becoming frustrated. You'll defend blatant racists to the ends of the earth and throw a tantrum, and accuse people of being patronising. Being fair, inclusive and coherent is not patronising.

Channel your frustration into really looking into what you're defending when you defend Farage and his merry band of xenophobic no-hopers.

You seem to be implying education tax is necessary if you have compassion for refugees? What is the relationship? Again, this self righteous authoritarian hypocrisy does your cause no favours.

My point which you seem to keep trying to twist (and now to imply I don’t have ‘basic humanity’ 🤷‍♀️) is that moaning about Reform ‘weaponising ignorance’ when Labours main policy is a very clear example of this is hypocritical.

How did being in the ECHR help the hundreds of thousands of girls who were victims of the rape gangs?

How can it be used by ordinary people who are not entitled to legal aid but can't afford an expensive lawyer?

It provides the legal framework and bill of rights any lawyer can use in a case.

Are you confusing it with a court or something ?

you must be joking - that is not what ECHR is for. please come back with a better question

Farage instructed people to riot

Do you have an example of this or is it just basic libel? Your comments are getting zapped before I can read them, try and limit the legal issues,

He was found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder, are you saying the jury said he was guilty but they found him not guilty anyway? You’re making no sense,

We don’t need it. We have The Human Rights Act.

You keep twisting this into something it isn’t.

Nobody said “if you care about refugees you must support a VAT on private schools.”

that is nowhere implied - you have made that up.

That’s your straw man. The point is that a tax on private education is a policy debate about privilege – it doesn’t demonise children, it doesn’t tell lies about them, and it hasn’t led to mobs attacking schools.

Refugees, on the other hand, have been relentlessly scapegoated as criminals, invaders and parasites. That rhetoric has directly led to violence, arson attempts and harassment of families. To equate the two is not just wrong, it’s reckless.
Calling that distinction “self-righteous hypocrisy” is a way of dodging the obvious: there is no comparison between a tax policy and the dehumanisation that fuels riots. One is about money. The other is about people’s safety. If you can’t tell the difference, it isn’t me lacking humanity.

4 years is a long time. Anything could happen. Currently for me, its none of them. Its amazing that in a country of nearly 70 million people, no party has people we could actually vote for.

Apparently we don’t need to worry our pretty little heads about policies until a general election is announced. 🙄

Yes you sum it up better than me. They were a One Issue party - Brexit. Now the One Issue is race. They don't have a scooby about how to run a nation of 70 million.

I’ll make it simple. I didn’t realise my posts were being zapped — that’s frustrating.
If you’re saying the jury “denied” Ricky Jones’s incitement, then you need to show the actual wording. A not guilty verdict doesn’t mean they denied it happened, only that it wasn’t proven beyond reasonable doubt.
By the same logic, pointing out that Farage called the Southport killer a Muslim migrant doesn’t automatically prove he personally instigated the riots — but it does show he spread false claims that fuelled them.

You either need to insist it's all semantically clear, or not. otherwise, that is in fact the hypocrisy and bias you're accusing me of.

Nobody said “if you care about refugees you must support a VAT on private schools.”
that is nowhere implied - you have made that up.

You wrote the below;

Choosing to be more concerned about refugees being harassed, attacked, and set on fire than about which schools 6–7% of children go to isn’t bias

You're quite clearly not engaging honestly and it’s obvious why. Thank you for the chat, have a good weekend.

My bloke’s currently receiving cancer treatment which has been excellent. It couldn’t have been better if it had cost us £££££. Thank you for asking.

JFC. The HRA is the British legal framework which allows ECHR rights to be enforced through British courts, which is the first port of call. Previously you would have needed to go to Strasbourg, taking the case to the European courts. Having ECHR and having access to a European court is secondary, but I for one am very glad to have it in case I need to defend myself against a rogue government. Any party wanting to remove it is literally wanting to deny you third party protection from whatever abuse and exploitation they’re planning to unleash on YOU.

You’ve not only misread what niffler said, you’re now misquoting it. Niffler hasn’t argued in black-and-white terms — they are quite clearly saying you can care about both issues, but one is far more urgent and serious than the other. That’s not hypocrisy, it’s prioritising compassion.

If you can’t grasp that, then it’s you who isn’t engaging honestly here. In fact, they made some pretty strong points, and rather than address them, you’ve decided to walk away because you can’t back up your own argument. Once again, you’ve misread, misrepresented, and misinterpreted her words and it’s frankly a bit embarrassing.You didn’t win this debate you just tapped out

That's genuinely good to hear, but it's not the same for everyone sadly. Different postcode, different cancers.