The 2024 General Election Thread

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 minutes ago, an tha said:

Same lines....same lies.

 

They do this in such regimented fashion.

 

A Treasury minister is rejecting Labour claims that Rishi Sunak lied about the party's tax plans.

 

Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Laura Trott, denies voters have been misled and insists independent analysis had identified a black hole in Labour's spending plans.

 

She tells reporters: "What is absolutely clear is that due to independent analysis Labour have a £38bn black hole in their policies.

 

"That will lead to £2,000 in extra taxes for every family up and down the United Kingdom.

 

"This is underpinned overwhelmingly by Treasury analysis so if people think Labour are going to win this election they need to start saving."

Ah, yes, the thick-even-by-Tory-standards Laura Trott. (Not to be confused with the Olympic cyclist, whose sweaty post-race gusset would be better qualified for a ministerial post.)

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Even The Spectator has turned against Sunak.

[A Red]

15 minutes ago, Carradona said:

Are you obsessed with his employment status? Feels like you've mentioned it 3 or 4 times in the last week alone. Not sure how it's relevant to anything.

Well, best not worry about it then.

[an tha]

12 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Ah, yes, the thick-even-by-Tory-standards Laura Trott. (Not to be confused with the Olympic cyclist, whose sweaty post-race gusset would be better qualified for a ministerial post.)

Oh aye!

 

The way they co-ordinate their attacks is always the same, repeat the same lines over and over, using the same phrases - and they all do it.

 

They are all well drilled in it.

 

Cunts.

[an tha]

10 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Even The Spectator has turned against Sunak.

 

Text of that:

 

 

My colleague Ross Clark has shown how the Tories cooked up that £2,000 figure. They worked out the total cost of what they think Labour will do and applied standard HM Treasury costings. Then, they divided that by the number of in-work households (18.4 million). They chose in-work households because it’s a subset of the 21.4 million total UK households, so no pensioners or workless households. By choosing a smaller denominator, you concentrate the increase and cook up a scarier figure. Then, even worse, they quadruple-count. So they took their estimate for an annual rise and then added them up over four years thereby producing £2,000.

 

But let’s apply a similar method to the published plans of the Conservative government. We don’t need to guess what the cost of government would be: the projected tax haul figures were published by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and updated in March after the Budget. It will be £1.02 trillion in the current financial year. That’s with the tax/GDP ratio at 36.5 per cent. Let’s use that as our baseline. The OBR says the Tories plan to increase taxes to 37.1 per cent of GDP by 2028/29. So the 0.6-point increase works out at £20 billion more tax raised in that year than if the tax/GDP ratio (below) had stayed flat.

 

Add up all four years (as the Tories did for their Labour calculation) and you end up with a £320 rise in year one, £620 in year two, £930 in year three and £1,150 in the final year. So a sum of £3,020 per working household. Except this would be just as misleading as the £2,000 figure that Sunak used so often in the debate last night.

 

The bottom line is a simple one: there will be tax rises whoever wins this general election. When it comes to tax rises, the Tories are in a glass house here yet are still throwing stones. For a party that genuinely does plan to lift the tax burden to a postwar high, it's a risky strategy.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

"Assault by beating" & criminal damage.

 

If there's a crowdfunder for her fine, I reckon it would be oversubscribed in minutes.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/woman-25-charged-with-assault-after-milkshake-thrown-at-nigel-farage-13148372

 

 

https://www.oblaw.co.uk/what-is-assault-by-beating/#:~:text=Assault by beating is a,about to suffer%2C immediate violence.

[lifetime fan]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Ah, yes, the thick-even-by-Tory-standards Laura Trott. (Not to be confused with the Olympic cyclist, whose sweaty post-race gusset would be better qualified for a ministerial post.)

That post being sat on my face! 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

[Bjornebye]

11 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I’d imagine 3 and 4 would fall into one category for some so it’s probably skewed the poll a bit there 

[Arniepie]

36 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

"Assault by beating" & criminal damage.

 

If there's a crowdfunder for her fine, I reckon it would be oversubscribed in minutes.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/woman-25-charged-with-assault-after-milkshake-thrown-at-nigel-farage-13148372

 

 

https://www.oblaw.co.uk/what-is-assault-by-beating/#:~:text=Assault by beating is a,about to suffer%2C immediate violence.

still think it stinks

 

how the fuck could be come up with an off the cuff remark like that?

 

The veteran Eurosceptic initially laughed off the incident, saying "my milkshake brings all the people to the rally".

[Carradona]

1 hour ago, A Red said:

Well, best not worry about it then.

It's all a bit too Tory for my liking. Mocking someone about unemployment. Just cut it out.

[an tha]

This is the way....now keep repeating it at every opportunity!

 

Keir Starmer has accused Rishi Sunak of “lying” when he claimed that a Labour government would lead to people paying £2,000 more in tax.

 

Speaking to journalists in Portsmouth, the Labour leader said the prime minister’s comments were a “flash of character” that mean “the choice at the next election is starker now than it was yesterday".

 

Asked why he didn’t refute the claim more quickly during the debate, he responded: “What matters is the facts. All of our plans are fully costed, fully funded, don’t involve tax rises for working people.

 

"I’ll spell that out, no income tax, no national insurance, no VAT. What you saw is the prime minister with his back against the wall desperately lashing out and resorting to lies.

 

"And he knew he was lying. I don’t say that lightly, it’s not the sort of thing that I say. He was lying, he was lying about our plans, he was lying about the boats, he was lying about waiting lists.

 

"That’s why the choice at the next election is starker now than it was yesterday. It’s a choice between chaos and confusion, the sort of thing we’ve seen now for 14 years and now lies on top of it. Or turn the page and rebuilding with Labour.”

[Arniepie]

8 minutes ago, an tha said:

This is the way....now keep repeating it at every opportunity!

 

Keir Starmer has accused Rishi Sunak of “lying” when he claimed that a Labour government would lead to people paying £2,000 more in tax.

 

Speaking to journalists in Portsmouth, the Labour leader said the prime minister’s comments were a “flash of character” that mean “the choice at the next election is starker now than it was yesterday".

 

Asked why he didn’t refute the claim more quickly during the debate, he responded: “What matters is the facts. All of our plans are fully costed, fully funded, don’t involve tax rises for working people.

 

"I’ll spell that out, no income tax, no national insurance, no VAT. What you saw is the prime minister with his back against the wall desperately lashing out and resorting to lies.

 

"And he knew he was lying. I don’t say that lightly, it’s not the sort of thing that I say. He was lying, he was lying about our plans, he was lying about the boats, he was lying about waiting lists.

 

"That’s why the choice at the next election is starker now than it was yesterday. It’s a choice between chaos and confusion, the sort of thing we’ve seen now for 14 years and now lies on top of it. Or turn the page and rebuilding with Labour.”

i still think the damage has been done.

why didnt he challenge him last night?

[Rushies tash]

3 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

i still think the damage has been done.

why didnt he challenge him last night?

 

He did, but wasn't really allowed to get a word in edgeways by a weak as fuck host.

[halewood pete]

Lessons from the past for tory party.

[an tha]

12 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

i still think the damage has been done.

why didnt he challenge him last night?

Oh there is damage - but i am encouraged by how much today the lies have been called out and by who....Even The Spectator has been on case.

 

I agree he missed a trick last night - but it was very hard for him as the presenter shut him down repeatedly after Sunak's derranged rants.

 

Thing is there is a load of time to turn this - he can spend next 4 weeks reminding people over and over how Sunak lied and of course when the manifesto is published he can ise that to solidify.

 

Sunak may think he landed landed some bombs last night - but i feel this time he has misjudged it and it is blowing up in his smug, entitled cunt face.

[A Red]

26 minutes ago, Carradona said:

It's all a bit too Tory for my liking. Mocking someone about unemployment. Just cut it out.

It's just as well that I couldn't give 2 fucks about what's to your liking.

[Megadrive Man]

Faiza Shaheen, who was blocked from representing the Labour Party in the general election, has announced she will stand as an independent.

 

 

[Arniepie]

8 minutes ago, an tha said:

Oh there is damage - but i am encouraged by how much today the lies have been called out and by who....Even The Spectator has been on case.

 

I agree he missed a trick last night - but it was very hard for him as the presenter shut him down repeatedly after Sunak's derranged rants.

 

Thing is there is a load of time to turn this - he can spend next 4 weeks reminding people over and over how Sunak lied and of course when the manifesto is published he can ise that to solidify.

 

Sunak may think he landed landed some bombs last night - but i feel this time he has misjudged it and it is blowing up in his smug, entitled cunt face.

lets home so

he needs to hammer it home in the next one 

[Megadrive Man]

If you had the misfortune of living in the Clacton constituency, would you vote for Farage to keep the Tories out, or the Tories to keep Farage out?  

[AngryOfTuebrook]

9 minutes ago, Megadrive Man said:

Faiza Shaheen, who was blocked from representing the Labour Party in the general election, has announced she will stand as an independent.

 

 

Corbyn, too.

[Fugitive]

13 minutes ago, A Red said:

It's just as well that I couldn't give 2 fucks about what's to your liking.

You defo sing ‘Sign on’ at the match.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

41 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

still think it stinks

 

how the fuck could be come up with an off the cuff remark like that?

 

The veteran Eurosceptic initially laughed off the incident, saying "my milkshake brings all the people to the rally".

He's had a few years to think of it, since he was first milkshaked.  (Milkshook?  Milkshaken?)

 

The Farridge supporter everyone thought it was was miles away, in Wolverhampton.

[Barrington Womble]

8 minutes ago, Megadrive Man said:

If you had the misfortune of living in the Clacton constituency, would you vote for Farage to keep the Tories out, or the Tories to keep Farage out?  

Or labour to keep the pair of them out. 

[Bjornebye]

18 minutes ago, Megadrive Man said:

If you had the misfortune of living in the Clacton constituency, would you vote for Farage to keep the Tories out, or the Tories to keep Farage out?  

Bastard of a question. Assuming you mean being forced to vote one way or the other. I reckon I’d take whatever the consequences were if I didn’t.