Your 8 least favourite MPs

[backontrack]

How many jokes have I used? What is it with trainspotters not getting jokes? .

Take it from me, you need to stop getting worked up over things. I don't hate Corbyn or anything and I don't hate Labour. I have a brain so I can acknowledge their social achievements. However, I will say this once only, I don't agree with their agenda and I don't agree with quite a lot of what Corbyn says. This is a forum and we have free speech (within limits of the forum rules) and nowhere does it say that one can't make jokes about political figures. Therefore I will continue to say what I want, within limits, about Corbyn.

So:

-you accuse me of not getting humour (when I do get humour, it's just that you aren't funny)

-you now start telling me what to do

-you imply that I don't have a brain

-you decide that, by invoking free speech, you're now a hero and a freedom-fighter and that you can say anything

-you decide to continue with your pointless comments making more and more people dislike you

 

[Harbornite]

So:

-you accuse me of not getting humour (when I do get humour, it's just that you aren't funny)

-you now start telling me what to do

-you imply that I don't have a brain

-you decide that, by invoking free speech, you're now a hero and a freedom-fighter and that you can say anything

-you decide to continue with your pointless comments making more and more people dislike you

None of that actually. Well, you may not like my jokes but they are jokes, just take them at face value and don't get worked up by them.

I wasn't implying that you lacked a brain. If you did lack one, you wouldn't be reading this comment and understanding it.

No I'm not a hero or a freedom fighter. Invoking the free speech concpet doesn't make someone either of those things if free speech is already tolerated.

As for the last point, I couldn't care less and it's incorrect anyway.


This has gone off topic anyway. Why start a thread about kicking out politicians if you won't accept criticism of them?

 

[RichmondCommu]

-you now start telling me what to do

And of course you haven't "urged" to people to do things in the past have you? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Harbornite]

And of course you haven't "urged" to people to do things in the past have you? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

It's also ironic that he moans about jokes being made the expense of politicians (which apparrently means that you have a been in your bonnet) and yet he was ok with making jokes about Cameron and that pig, an allegation that was never proven. Although I personally wasn't offended or bothered, it's still hypocritical.

 

[backontrack]

deleted - I can't really be bothered

 

[yorksrob]

Not really clumsy is it. You're just getting touchy because I'm dissing your leader, who is a nice bloke but a crap leader.
.

Well, actually, I think that assuming a link between British socialism as encapsulated by Mr Corbyn's policies, (which only seem radical because for the past thirty years, we've been enthralled by Sir Keith Joseph's laissez faire attitude to the 'market') and the former Soviet Union, is the sort of hysterical claptrap that one might expect of a poorly executed sixth form review, rather than a reasonable reaction to politics.

 

[Harbornite]

Well, actually, I think that assuming a link between British socialism as encapsulated by Mr Corbyn's policies, (which only seem radical because for the past thirty years, we've been enthralled by Sir Keith Joseph's laissez faire attitude to the 'market') and the former Soviet Union, is the sort of hysterical claptrap that one might expect of a poorly executed sixth form review, rather than a reasonable reaction to politics.

Or it might be a humorous take on the matter. Are you aware of the concept of exaggeration? :roll:

No one would seriously (that's a key word) compare Corbyn's policies to those of the Soviet politburo. I suggest you learn to take a joke and get a better perspective on the matter. Not that I'm saying that I like his policies...

 

[yorksrob]

Or it might be a humorous take on the matter. Are you aware of the concept of exaggeration? :roll:

No one would seriously (that's a key word) compare Corbyn's policies to those of the Soviet politburo. I suggest you learn to take a joke and get a better perspective on the matter. Not that I'm saying that I like his policies...

I'm not saying its not a 'humorous' take on the matter. Just that it's a clumsy, not particularly funny one, as I mentioned in my earlier post.

 

[Harbornite]

I'm not saying its not a 'humorous' take on the matter. Just that it's a clumsy, not particularly funny one, as I mentioned in my earlier post.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I don't really care what you think.

 

[yorksrob]

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I don't really care what you think.

Well, good for you.

 

[Harbornite]

Well, good for you.

Moving on...


I'll second anyone who mentions Gove, Leadsom, Corbyn and Abbot. Gove is backstabbing little git who was poor in education, Leadsom is a liar and out of touch with reality, Corbyn goes without saying and Abbot needs to stop playing the race card at unnecessary times and stop being hypocritical. Hunt is another one, he's not good for the morale of the NHS.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

My local MP, Mel Onn and 7 other traitors in the Labour party, all that resigned from the shadow cabinet supported the Welfare Bill last year and haven't done any good.

 

[me123]

But Sinn Féin voters (read: the majority in those constituencies) elect the MP knowing full well the MP will not take their seat. This is exactly the representation they voted for. The constituencies do not seem to have been harmed by the lack of MP, which tells you all you need to know about the relationship between Westminster and Northern Ireland.

As has been said, SF only have a majority in Belfast West. The majorities in the other constituencies did not vote for them. That's the way FPTP works and I'll spare you my lecture on that at the moment.

But electing an MP, even with a minority, allows that community to be represented. In three constituencies the majority voted for an MP and got nobody. In the remaining one there are still thousands

I respect the views of SF with regard to the union. But if they don't want to participate in the democratic process I don't see why they bother. Let the constituents who want to participate participate. Everyone else has the option not to vote.

 

[AlterEgo]

As has been said, SF only have a majority in Belfast West. The majorities in the other constituencies did not vote for them. That's the way FPTP works and I'll spare you my lecture on that at the moment.

But electing an MP, even with a minority, allows that community to be represented. In three constituencies the majority voted for an MP and got nobody. In the remaining one there are still thousands

I respect the views of SF with regard to the union. But if they don't want to participate in the democratic process I don't see why they bother. Let the constituents who want to participate participate. Everyone else has the option not to vote.

Do you think that those constituencies without a sitting MP are any worse off than those with one who turns up? If so, how?

 

[Steveman]

Diane Abbott - racist

 

[yorksrob]

Or it might be a humorous take on the matter. Are you aware of the concept of exaggeration? :roll:

No one would seriously (that's a key word) compare Corbyn's policies to those of the Soviet politburo. I suggest you learn to take a joke and get a better perspective on the matter. Not that I'm saying that I like his policies...

I offer my full apologies to Harbonite as I seem to have experienced a sense of humour malfunction yesterday !

 

[Harbornite]

I offer my full apologies to Harbonite as I seem to have experienced a sense of humour malfunction yesterday !

Apology accepted.

 

[Johnuk123]

Diane Abbott currently has 12 nominations, surprised it's so few.

 

[yorksrob]

Apology accepted.

Many thanks

 

[me123]

Do you think that those constituencies without a sitting MP are any worse off than those with one who turns up? If so, how?

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have MPs? After all, you seem to be implying that their work doesn't matter. I think it's important to have an active MP because, without one:

1) Your voice is not heard in parliament
2) Your region is not represented in parliament and there may be nobody else who will challenge the government on a change that would adversely impact on your area. Local issues may simply not be heard at a national level.
3) Constituents who wish to raise an issue with their MP have no channel to do so. MPs often bring concerns to the attention of the government in parliament (for example at PMQs, more commonly in there form of written questions and answers) and people in SF constituencies are denied that opportunity.
4) You cannot bring about any meaningful change.

 

[Trog]

I think you are all showing a lack of ambition. If that nice Mrs Queen asked me to run the country for her I would ship the lot of them off to the tower. They could then entertain American tourists with a historical re-enactment on tower green each day. To show my commitment to democracy the star of the next days show would be elected by his or her fellows, in a televised reality show the night before as they seem to like doing that sort of thing.

 

[AlterEgo]

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have MPs? After all, you seem to be implying that their work doesn't matter. I think it's important to have an active MP because, without one:

1) Your voice is not heard in parliament
2) Your region is not represented in parliament and there may be nobody else who will challenge the government on a change that would adversely impact on your area. Local issues may simply not be heard at a national level.
3) Constituents who wish to raise an issue with their MP have no channel to do so. MPs often bring concerns to the attention of the government in parliament (for example at PMQs, more commonly in there form of written questions and answers) and people in SF constituencies are denied that opportunity.
4) You cannot bring about any meaningful change.

1. Sinn Féin constituencies - show me how they're materially disadvantaged.

2. Nobody gives a flying toss about Northern Ireland in parliament anyway. British policy is simply to implement the institutions within the Good Friday Agreement and to leave the rest "up to the Irish people". No criticism on this approach, just stating facts. Relevant local NI issues are rarely heard in parliament.

3. See above.

4. Sinn Féin have achieved more through lobbying the government outside of parliamentary structures than they would have gained by sitting with the rest of them.


I don't agree wth SF nor am I a SF voter, but I don't believe they or their constituents have been disadvantaged through their approach to Westminster at least.

It is the opinion of many in NI that Westminster is a total irrelevance, and that includes many loyalists. Parliament has no wish to understand, or get too involved with the province. The best quality candidates in NI parties are usually selected to stand for the Assembly rather than as an MP (with the exception of the new-look UUP perhaps).

 

[phoenixcronin]

Diane Abbott (Total idiot, talks like a child)
Jeremy Corbyn (For destroying a once great party)
John McDonnell (Terrorist)
Andy Burnham (Flip-flopper, spineless, opportunist)
Andrea Loathesom (Generally reprehensible)
Nadine Dorries (No particular reason)
Andrew Bridgen (General idiot, Very Anti-HS2)
Douglas Carswell (UKIP)

 

[mikeg]

Jeremy Corbyn (For destroying a once great party)
John McDonnell (Terrorist)

What bizarre claims. I didn't start off as a cobyn supporter and still don't agree with him on a lot of things. But you can't call a doubling of membership since he became leader destruction. If anything it sounds like construction. I'll also reserve judgement on McDonnell
I can't stand his position on homeopathy but his economic policy isn't as bad or as crazy as the common sense (is unthinking) brigade or the financial world make out. And when he's killed someone or committed an act of gross sabotage maybe you can use the t word
But for now I'd like to see some justification.

 

[kegdr]

My local MP, Mel Onn and 7 other traitors in the Labour party, all that resigned from the shadow cabinet supported the Welfare Bill last year and haven't done any good.

Every Labour MP voted against the welfare bill in its third reading. http://www.publications.parliament....151027/debtext/151027-0004.htm#15102752002912

 

[DarloRich]

Every MP has been elected by their constituents and thus I would not evict any of them, no matter how tiresome I find them.

I agree - Odious as many of them are ( especially the Tories) chucking the out simply means we end up with a legislative branch that reflects our tastes and experiences rather than a cross section of society and views.

Also if we chuck out all the ones we dislike who do we complain about?

PS The Corbyinians want to go to compulsory re selction of sitting labour MP's every 5 years - which will soon turn into recall on demand and replacement with a more pliable person less inclined to divert from the agreed politically right dogma!

 

[miami]

All of this party machinations could be greatly reduced simply by not listing he party name on the ballot paper.

 

[mikeg]

Which is as it used to be. However the problem is few large democracies function well without political parties and before party names were included on the ballot paper parties would have to spend huge amounts of time and resources getting it out there who the candidate was, that they could have spent campaigning in key issues.

 

[me123]

... and you risk voters being less engaged with the political process. Most voters (rightly or wrongly) vote for candidates based on their political party. (It's not as simplistic as voting for the same party over and over - many will look at the policies of a party rather than just the issues raised locally). I bet quite a large number turn up and wouldn't know who to vote for if they just looked for the name. All that's going to do is discourage people from voting.

 

[AlterEgo]

... and you risk voters being less engaged with the political process. Most voters (rightly or wrongly) vote for candidates based on their political party. (It's not as simplistic as voting for the same party over and over - many will look at the policies of a party rather than just the issues raised locally). I bet quite a large number turn up and wouldn't know who to vote for if they just looked for the name. All that's going to do is discourage people from voting.

Very true.

But have no fear. It is a European-wide trend that voters are increasingly picking independent candidates, and this shows no sign of abating.