On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving
>>> some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or
>>> over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a
>>> massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it
>>> took them more than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition
>>> party. If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same
>>> boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result
>>> in one of the longest Labour governments in history.
>>
>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>> situation now?
>
> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them that
> helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.
>
>
Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 01/03/2024 10:36, Colin Bignell wrote:
> Irrelevant, if the opposition is too divided to win an election, which
> is all that Reform UK is likely to achieve.

It looks like the Left is fracturing into the British Racist Islamic
Party and The Islington Slimy Cunts.

The times they are a changing, and the old coalitions of interest are
fracturing.

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get
>>>> a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and
>>>> the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for
>>>> giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of
>>>> 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That
>>>> was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However,
>>>> it took them more than 20 years simply to become the largest
>>>> opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get
>>>> the same boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely
>>>> to result in one of the longest Labour governments in history.
>>>
>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>> situation now?
>>
>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them that
>> helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.
>>
>>
> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>

He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.

--
Colin Bignell

On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get
>>>>> a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and
>>>>> the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for
>>>>> giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age
>>>>> of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War.
>>>>> That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them.
>>>>> However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become the
>>>>> largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support and
>>>>> won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it
>>>>> is likely to result in one of the longest Labour governments in
>>>>> history.
>>>>
>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>> situation now?
>>>
>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>
>
> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>
And why was that, then?

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
>>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
>>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
>>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
>>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
>>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
>>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support
>>>>>> and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
>>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>>>>>> governments in history.
>>>>>
>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>>> situation now?
>>>>
>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
>>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>> opposition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>
>>
>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>
> And why was that, then?
>

You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year by-election
with a turnout of under 40%.

--
Colin Bignell

On 01/03/2024 13:37, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
>>>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
>>>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
>>>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
>>>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
>>>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
>>>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less
>>>>>>> support and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
>>>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>>>>>>> governments in history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>>>> situation now?
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>> party trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for
>>>>> them that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>>> opposition.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>
>>>
>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>
>> And why was that, then?
>>
>
> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year by-election
> with a turnout of under 40%.
>
Honestly your capacity for self deception and cognitive dissonance is
unparalleled.

George Galloway won the seat from Labour, from a position of zero votes
historically, on a frankly racist islamic and anti-semitic platform

And yet you say that radical change will not happen overnight. In the
case of Reform.

--
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to
rule.
– H. L. Mencken, American journalist, 1880-1956

In article <-72dnekbPa7VRHz4nZ2dnZeNn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> > On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
> >> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> >>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
> >>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> >>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
> >>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
> >>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
> >>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
> >>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
> >>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
> >>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
> >>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
> >>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support
> >>>>>> and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
> >>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
> >>>>>> governments in history.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
> >>>>> situation now?
> >>>>
> >>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
> >>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
> >>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
> >>>> opposition.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
> >>>
> >>
> >> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
> >>
> > And why was that, then?
> >

> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year by-election
> with a turnout of under 40%.

They had one, but he was Anti-semitic, so dropped, but too late to put up
another candidate.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 01/03/2024 13:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 13:37, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade
>>>>>>>> Unions and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better
>>>>>>>> remembered for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all
>>>>>>>> men over the age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought
>>>>>>>> in the Great War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely
>>>>>>>> to vote for them. However, it took them more than 20 years
>>>>>>>> simply to become the largest opposition party. If Reform UK,
>>>>>>>> which has less support and won't get the same boost in voters,
>>>>>>>> takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of the
>>>>>>>> longest Labour governments in history.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with
>>>>>>> the situation now?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>>> party trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for
>>>>>> them that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>>>> opposition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>
>>> And why was that, then?
>>>
>>
>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year
>> by-election with a turnout of under 40%.
>>
> Honestly your capacity for self deception and cognitive dissonance is
> unparalleled.
>
> George Galloway won the seat from Labour, from a position of zero votes
> historically, on a frankly racist islamic and anti-semitic platform

It will be interesting to see how he fares at the general election, when
he will be up against a Labour candidate and the turnout is likely to be
higher.

>
> And yet you say that radical change will not happen overnight. In the
> case of Reform.

I am not saying that they can't take a few seats, but I don't see them
translating a support level of 11% into a significant number of seats at
this election, nor for several more elections to come, if they can do it
at all. As I said before, all they are really doing is ensuring that the
Conservatives can't beat Labour.

--
Colin Bignell

On 01/03/2024 14:08, charles wrote:
>
> In article <-72dnekbPa7VRHz4nZ2dnZeNn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
>>>>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
>>>>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
>>>>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
>>>>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
>>>>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
>>>>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support
>>>>>>>> and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
>>>>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>>>>>>>> governments in history.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>>>>> situation now?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>>>>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
>>>>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>>>> opposition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>
>>> And why was that, then?
>>>
>
>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year by-election
>> with a turnout of under 40%.
>
> They had one, but he was Anti-semitic, so dropped, but too late to put up
> another candidate.
>

Thank you, that explains a lot.

--
Colin Bignell

On 01/03/2024 14:55, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 14:08, charles wrote:
>>
>> In article <-72dnekbPa7VRHz4nZ2dnZeNn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>     Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
>>>>>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
>>>>>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
>>>>>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
>>>>>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
>>>>>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
>>>>>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less support
>>>>>>>>> and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
>>>>>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>>>>>>>>> governments in history.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>>>>>> situation now?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>>>>>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
>>>>>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>>>>> opposition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>>
>>>> And why was that, then?
>>>>
>>
>>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year by-election
>>> with a turnout of under 40%.
>>
>> They had one, but he was Anti-semitic, so dropped, but too late to put up
>> another candidate.
>>
>
> Thank you, that explains a lot.
>

The anti-semites got over 50% of the vote.
Call me Adolf...

--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

On 01/03/2024 14:55, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 13:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 13:37, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade
>>>>>>>>> Unions and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better
>>>>>>>>> remembered for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all
>>>>>>>>> men over the age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had
>>>>>>>>> fought in the Great War. That was a massive boost in the
>>>>>>>>> numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took them more
>>>>>>>>> than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party. If
>>>>>>>>> Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same boost
>>>>>>>>> in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result
>>>>>>>>> in one of the longest Labour governments in history.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with
>>>>>>>> the situation now?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>>>> party trying to gain power, they have none of the things going
>>>>>>> for them that helped Labour eventually to become the largest
>>>>>>> party in opposition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>>
>>>> And why was that, then?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year
>>> by-election with a turnout of under 40%.
>>>
>> Honestly your capacity for self deception and cognitive dissonance is
>> unparalleled.
>>
>> George Galloway won the seat from Labour, from a position of zero
>> votes historically, on a frankly racist islamic and anti-semitic platform
>
> It will be interesting to see how he fares at the general election, when
> he will be up against a Labour candidate and the turnout is likely to be
> higher.

George Galloway and Boris johnson share a common theme.
Both are only interested in getting into power (expenses,
freebies, salary, pension, slurp, slurp) and both have
demonstrated how determined they are to tell whatever lies
the electorate want to hear in order to achieve that ambition.

On 01/03/2024 03:56 pm, Andrew wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 14:55, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 13:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 13:37, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is
>>>>>>>>>> to get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade
>>>>>>>>>> Unions and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better
>>>>>>>>>> remembered for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to
>>>>>>>>>> all men over the age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had
>>>>>>>>>> fought in the Great War. That was a massive boost in the
>>>>>>>>>> numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took them more
>>>>>>>>>> than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>>>>>>>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same
>>>>>>>>>> boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to
>>>>>>>>>> result in one of the longest Labour governments in history.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with
>>>>>>>>> the situation now?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>>>>> party trying to gain power, they have none of the things going
>>>>>>>> for them that helped Labour eventually to become the largest
>>>>>>>> party in opposition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>>>
>>>>> And why was that, then?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>>>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year
>>>> by-election with a turnout of under 40%.
>>>>
>>> Honestly your capacity for self deception and cognitive dissonance is
>>> unparalleled.
>>>
>>> George Galloway won the seat from Labour, from a position of zero
>>> votes historically, on a frankly racist islamic and anti-semitic
>>> platform
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how he fares at the general election,
>> when he will be up against a Labour candidate and the turnout is
>> likely to be higher.
>
> George Galloway and Boris johnson share a common theme.
> Both are only interested in getting into power (expenses,
> freebies, salary, pension, slurp, slurp) and both have
> demonstrated how determined they are to tell whatever lies
> the electorate want to hear in order to achieve that ambition.

You do a disservice to both gentlemen.

Boris has long been able to earn more in the real world than in elected
office and this has been common knowledge.

I assume the same to be true of Gorgeous George. In any case, his MP
earnings between now and the General Election will be limited.

On 01/03/2024 15:56, Andrew wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 14:55, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 13:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 13:37, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is
>>>>>>>>>> to get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade
>>>>>>>>>> Unions and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better
>>>>>>>>>> remembered for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to
>>>>>>>>>> all men over the age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had
>>>>>>>>>> fought in the Great War. That was a massive boost in the
>>>>>>>>>> numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took them more
>>>>>>>>>> than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>>>>>>>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same
>>>>>>>>>> boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to
>>>>>>>>>> result in one of the longest Labour governments in history.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with
>>>>>>>>> the situation now?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>>>>> party trying to gain power, they have none of the things going
>>>>>>>> for them that helped Labour eventually to become the largest
>>>>>>>> party in opposition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>>>
>>>>> And why was that, then?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>>>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year
>>>> by-election with a turnout of under 40%.
>>>>
>>> Honestly your capacity for self deception and cognitive dissonance is
>>> unparalleled.
>>>
>>> George Galloway won the seat from Labour, from a position of zero
>>> votes historically, on a frankly racist islamic and anti-semitic
>>> platform
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how he fares at the general election,
>> when he will be up against a Labour candidate and the turnout is
>> likely to be higher.
>
> George Galloway and Boris johnson share a common theme.
> Both are only interested in getting into power (expenses,
> freebies, salary, pension, slurp, slurp) and both have
> demonstrated how determined they are to tell whatever lies
> the electorate want to hear in order to achieve that ambition.
>
>
Oh dear. Colin Bigot speaks out.

--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:32:49 +0000, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:

>On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving
>>> some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or
>>> over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a
>>> massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took
>>> them more than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same boost in
>>> voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of
>>> the longest Labour governments in history.
>>
>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>> situation now?
>
>That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them that
>helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.

The same thing will happen to Reform that happened to UKIP in the 2015
election. UKIP took 14.1% of the popular vote and only one seat to
show for it. Thank FPTP for that.

The fact is that votes not going to Labour or Nasty simply don't count
because they will always be the parties with the numbers sufficient to
form a government. Thank FPTP for that.

Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote
> The Natural Philosopher wrote
>> Colin Bignell wrote

>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving
>>> some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or
>>> over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a
>>> massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took
>>> them more than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same boost in
>>> voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of
>>> the longest Labour governments in history.

>> And what about the situation then, is remotelycomparable with the
>> situation now?

> That is the problem for Reform UK.

Nope.

> Apart from also being a new party trying to gain power,they have none
> of the things going for them that helpedLabour eventually to become the
> largest party in opposition.

There is never any possibility of Reform doing that, but
that was true of UKIP too and they still got Brexit done.

There was never any possibility of the LImpDims ever
forming govt, but they still managed to monster the
Torys into implementing some of what they wanted.

/Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

>>>>>>> We're talking about Doom, who lives outside the UK and avoidsUK
>>>>>>> taxes, not a theoretical foreigner working in the UK.

>>>>>> Still true of Doom who clearly would return to
>>>>>> the UK if things changed in a way that suits him.

>>>>> That won't happen, thank goodness.

>>>> Not convinced. Brexit did happen.

>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for
>>> givingsome women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of
>>> 21 orover the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That
>>> was amassive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However,
>>> it tookthem more than 20 years simply to become the largest
>>> opposition party.

>> UKIP didnt need anything like that to get Brexit.

> Scaring the party in power into fearing a back benchrevolt is quite
> different from trying to take power.

Yes, but Reform will never take power and they don't
need to to get some of what they want done by govt,
particularly when the Torys know that they have fuck
all chance of retaining govt in the next GE with so
many of the stupid voters royally pissed off about
what has happened to their real standard of living
and are too stupid to even manage to work out that
Labour won't be able to anything about that and in
fact will do much worse.

>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same
>>> boost in voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to
>>> result in one of the longest Labour governments in history.

>> It won't take that long for Labour to fuck up as
>> spectacularly as Blair and Brown did, you watch.

> Irrelevant,

Nope, you watch. Starmer has already fucked up
spectacularly kicking those he doesnt like out of
the party and lost the byelection as a result.

Gaza will still be massively divisive by the time
of the GE and Starmer may well have stupidly
kicked lots of rabid anti semites out of the
party by then and may even manage to see lots
of Reforms elected that way, who form a
coalition with the Torys and get stuff they
want done.

> if the opposition is too divided to win an election,

That remains to be seen given how spectacularly
Starmer is fucking up due to his mindless
obsession with kicking out anti semites.

> which is all that Reform UK is likely to achieve.

They may well be able to form govt in
coalition with the Torys, just like the
LimpDims did give how divisive Gaza is.

>> Starmer is no Blair, as you lot will discover.

And Blair is the ONLY one who ever
managed more than one term for Labour.
by being a Tory in all but name only.

You lot have never liked Labour for long and Starmer is no Blair.

>>>>> So we won't have to put up withthe tax dodging git any time soon.

>>>>> Anyway, we're overrun with gammons already.

>>>> They did get Brexit happening.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 05:45:21 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Senile Rodent about himself:
"I was involved in the design of a computer OS"
MID: <g4jm5bFpavkU1@mid.individual.net>

LOL!!!

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 06:03:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Bod addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"Rod, you have a sick twisted mind. I suggest you stop your mindless
and totally irresponsible talk. Your mouth could get you into a lot of
trouble."
MID: <gfbb94Fb4a4U1@mid.individual.net>

On 01/03/2024 14:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/03/2024 14:55, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 14:08, charles wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <-72dnekbPa7VRHz4nZ2dnZeNn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>     Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 01/03/2024 12:10, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 10:32, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to
>>>>>>>>>> get a new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions
>>>>>>>>>> and the Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered
>>>>>>>>>> for giving some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the
>>>>>>>>>> age of 21 or over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great
>>>>>>>>>> War. That was a massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for
>>>>>>>>>> them. However, it took them more than 20 years simply to become
>>>>>>>>>> the largest opposition party. If Reform UK, which has less
>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>> and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no longer,
>>>>>>>>>> supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>>>>>>>>>> governments in history.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>>>>>>>> situation now?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new
>>>>>>>> party
>>>>>>>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them
>>>>>>>> that helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in
>>>>>>>> opposition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Ostrich. How about Mr Galloway then?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He took a Labour seat where Labour did not put up a candidate.
>>>>>>
>>>>> And why was that, then?
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> You would have to ask them. However, one far left swallow does not a
>>>> right wing summer make, particularly not in an election year
>>>> by-election
>>>> with a turnout of under 40%.
>>>
>>> They had one, but he was Anti-semitic, so dropped, but too late to
>>> put up
>>> another candidate.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you, that explains a lot.
>>
>
> The anti-semites got over 50% of the vote.
> Call me Adolf...
>
>
>

Mohammed is more probable in that constituency.

--
Colin Bignell

On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:14:50 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:02:02 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:20:38 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 18:21:48 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:12:59 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Here are some key things to look out for.
>>>>>
>>>>>1. A racist bastard on the stage spewing far right bile
>>>>>and promising populist policies he hasn't a hope in
>>>>>hell of delivering, simply because he has no chance
>>>>>of forming a government.
>>>>>
>>>>>2. A ghastly old boiler egging him on.
>>>>>
>>>>>3. A fawning audience consisting entirely of geriatric
>>>>>Little-Englander gammons.
>>>>>
>>>>>4. No black faces.
>>>>>
>>>>>5. A bloke going round with a mop clearing up the leaked piss.
>>>>
>>>>Good point. We can't possibly have policies that are popular with the
>>>>public, can we? I'll bet you can't imagine anything worse. Instead we
>>>>need policies that will impoverish the voters, raise their taxes in
>>>>exchange for poorer and poorer public services and swamp them with
>>>>enormous numbers of illegal immigrants who will further add to the
>>>>burden on those services. That lot's a sure-fire vote-winner (and it
>>>>demonstrably must be as people keep on voting for more of it!)
>>>>Now grab your mop and get back to cleaning up the piss.
>>>
>>>Why are you so bothered about this? You're a foreigner so it won't
>>>affect you.
>>
>>I said: "GRAB YOUR MOP AND GET BACK TO CLEANING UP THE PISS." No
>>wonder the country's in the state it is with foreigners like you who
>>just don't want to work.
>
>If it looks like a foreigner, walks like a foreigner and quacks like a
>foreigner... it's a foreigner. That's you.

You Globalist types have a very peculiar view of the world.
Fortunately, it looks like the voters have finally twigged that
Lib/Lab/Con have been putting your interests above theirs and are
switching off in droves. Richi's already got his knickers in a twist
over it judging by his comments this evening. Looks like he's going to
save democracy by banning any form of dissent and make the UK more
like Russia.

On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:34:33 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:02:02 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:20:38 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 18:21:48 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:12:59 +0000, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Here are some key things to look out for.
>>>>>
>>>>>1. A racist bastard on the stage spewing far right bile
>>>>>and promising populist policies he hasn't a hope in
>>>>>hell of delivering, simply because he has no chance
>>>>>of forming a government.
>>>>>
>>>>>2. A ghastly old boiler egging him on.
>>>>>
>>>>>3. A fawning audience consisting entirely of geriatric
>>>>>Little-Englander gammons.
>>>>>
>>>>>4. No black faces.
>>>>>
>>>>>5. A bloke going round with a mop clearing up the leaked piss.
>>>>
>>>>Good point. We can't possibly have policies that are popular with the
>>>>public, can we? I'll bet you can't imagine anything worse. Instead we
>>>>need policies that will impoverish the voters, raise their taxes in
>>>>exchange for poorer and poorer public services and swamp them with
>>>>enormous numbers of illegal immigrants who will further add to the
>>>>burden on those services. That lot's a sure-fire vote-winner (and it
>>>>demonstrably must be as people keep on voting for more of it!)
>>>>Now grab your mop and get back to cleaning up the piss.
>>>
>>>Why are you so bothered about this? You're a foreigner so it won't
>>>affect you.
>>
>>I said: "GRAB YOUR MOP AND GET BACK TO CLEANING UP THE PISS." No
>>wonder the country's in the state it is with foreigners like you who
>>just don't want to work.
>
>As a foreigner, why are you so worried about the state of my country?
>
>For what it's worth I work and pay taxes in the UK. Do you?

Not any more, no. You seem to think that if you work and pay taxes in
Britain, that makes you British! Wot a nutter you are. Now grab that
fucking mop like I said and clean up that piss. For the last time!

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 00:07:29 +0000, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:

>On 29/02/2024 22:21, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Mar 2024 06:21:34 +1100, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Mar 2024 04:06:30 +1100, "Rod Speed"
>>> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 23:18:15 +1100, R Souls <ron.souls@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:45:18 +1100, "Rod Speed"
>>>>> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>....
>>>>> We're talking about Doom, who lives outside the UK and avoids UK
>>>>> taxes, not a theoretical foreigner working in the UK.
>>>>
>>>> Still true of Doom who clearly would return to
>>>> the UK if things changed in a way that suits him.
>>
>>> That won't happen, thank goodness.
>>
>> Not convinced. Brexit did happen.
>
>The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving some
>women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or over the
>age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a massive boost
>in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took them more than
>20 years simply to become the largest opposition party. If Reform UK,
>which has less support and won't get the same boost in voters, takes no
>longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of the longest Labour
>governments in history.

What difference would that make? Labour and Conservative parties these
days are both the same. Whichever you vote for you get a self-serving
useless bunch of cunts who don't give a FF about you and your life.
They're too busy interfering in foreign affairs to give a toss about
the people who were stupid enough to vote for them. The only time they
even *mention* them is when there's an election coming up.

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:32:49 +0000, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:

>On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving
>>> some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or
>>> over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a
>>> massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took
>>> them more than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same boost in
>>> voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of
>>> the longest Labour governments in history.
>>
>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>> situation now?
>
>That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them that
>helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.

The biggest asset of smaller parties and Independents is that they're
not Lab/Lib/Con and tainted by decades of failure. Theyr'e thinking
and saying things that the main parties would much rather were left
ignorned and undiscussed. And those are the things that people are
most concerned about: the quality of their daily lives being No.1 on
the list.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 10:18:00 +1100, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:32:49 +0000, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 01/03/2024 09:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2024 00:07, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>> The early years of the Labour Party show how difficult it is to get a
>>>> new party started. They had the backing of the Trade Unions and the
>>>> Representation of the People Act 1918, better remembered for giving
>>>> some women the vote, gave the vote to all men over the age of 21 or
>>>> over the age of 19, if they had fought in the Great War. That was a
>>>> massive boost in the numbers likely to vote for them. However, it took
>>>> them more than 20 years simply to become the largest opposition party.
>>>> If Reform UK, which has less support and won't get the same boost in
>>>> voters, takes no longer, supporting it is likely to result in one of
>>>> the longest Labour governments in history.
>>>
>>> And what about the situation then, is remotely comparable with the
>>> situation now?
>>
>> That is the problem for Reform UK. Apart from also being a new party
>> trying to gain power, they have none of the things going for them that
>> helped Labour eventually to become the largest party in opposition.
>
> The biggest asset of smaller parties and Independents is that they're
> not Lab/Lib/Con and tainted by decades of failure. Theyr'e thinking
> and saying things that the main parties would much rather were left
> ignorned and undiscussed. And those are the things that people are
> most concerned about: the quality of their daily lives being No.1 on
> the list.

But the reality is that while ever FPTP continues, they have
no chance of being the govt. The most they can ever manage
is to influence what the two majors do in some situations.

UKIP never managed to get even a SINGLE MP elected,
just got one refugee from the Torys to join them and
then imploded completely once brexit happened.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 13:15:25 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
FredXX to Rodent Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID: <plbf76$gfl$1@dont-email.me>