Tory Scum

[tyke1962]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

[Filo]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

Yet you are still prepared to abstain your vote to enable them to carry on!

[DonnyOsmond]

Very strong reaction and passionate, which passion is severely lacking from current leadership. I agree with the comments but will it push away moderate voters?

[tyke1962]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

Yet you are still prepared to abstain your vote to enable them to carry on!

Keith says he wouldn't have made those comments .

You not see the position that places me in ?

[wilts rover]

I am quite prepared to believe that not all Tory members or voters are scum. In fact in the actual video she does specifically say Etonian ones.

I am also prepared to believe that not all Tory voters supported their decision to stop funding free school meals during a pandemic and reduce universal credit for the poorest in society in a time of rising inflation and massive fuel price hikes.

However some did. And you are judged by your actions. I doubt history will treat you well.

[Filo]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

Yet you are still prepared to abstain your vote to enable them to carry on!

Keith says he wouldn't have made those comments .

You not see the position that places me in ?

The position you are in is the position you have chosen by choice, and that is to enable another Tory Govt by cutting your nose off to spite your face

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Her passion and honesty are commendable, she says what she thinks.

But, she wants to lead the party and country, does she think that kind of language is language that will enable her to meet those objectives? I'm not convinced they are.

For me she makes some valid points but has a far too shouty aggressive attitude and like it or not that makes her sound stupid.

The problem I have with her saying this is it bleeds in to the supporters and incites yet more division.  Great for the tribal masses but as I said on a post yesterday, she doesn't need to attract filo or Sydney, she needs to attract people like me.

[tyke1962]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

Yet you are still prepared to abstain your vote to enable them to carry on!

Keith says he wouldn't have made those comments .

You not see the position that places me in ?

The position you are in is the position you have chosen by choice, and that is to enable another Tory Govt by cutting your nose off to spite your face

As I keep repeating to support the direction the current Labour are taking in my world lends itself to agreeing with it and I can't do that .

It's not a great position to be in and I do accept to a certain degree what you and others say .

I can't do it anymore because as I say to vote for it is to agree with it .

[tyke1962]

Her passion and honesty are commendable, she says what she thinks.

But, she wants to lead the party and country, does she think that kind of language is language that will enable her to meet those objectives? I'm not convinced they are.

For me she makes some valid points but has a far too shouty aggressive attitude and like it or not that makes her sound stupid.

The problem I have with her saying this is it bleeds in to the supporters and incites yet more division.  Great for the tribal masses but as I said on a post yesterday, she doesn't need to attract filo or Sydney, she needs to attract people like me.

Would you accept that the choice of words could lead to the sections of society who feel excluded actually having the motivation to vote for her .

A choice of words they connect with rather than the usual empty vessel suspects .

Millions don't vote let's not forget .

Not saying I'm right but something to discuss none the less .

[Filo]

Is Angela Rayner right to use those kind of words when talking about a Tory government placing economically challenged people in to yet more difficulty ?

In my opinion given what we know about how this government has spent taxpayers money and who has received it then parliamentary and political speak doesn't work for me .

This isn't some idle comment , the evidence is pretty clear .

This Tory government have given millions of pounds of taxpayers money to their donors and supporters with absolutely nothing back to the UK taxpayer in return whilst cutting universal credit .

Just exactly are you supposed to sugar coat that ? .

This isn't some Oxford University debating society this is real life ffs .

Comments like this demonstrate that Rayner is on the side of economically challenged people in society and that goes a long way with me .

The only wrong here is the actions of a government which led to such robust comments .

Every action leads to a reaction .

Yet you are still prepared to abstain your vote to enable them to carry on!

Keith says he wouldn't have made those comments .

You not see the position that places me in ?

The position you are in is the position you have chosen by choice, and that is to enable another Tory Govt by cutting your nose off to spite your face

As I keep repeating to support the direction the current Labour are taking in my world lends itself to agreeing with it and I can't do that .

It's not a great position to be in and I do accept to a certain degree what you and others say .

I can't do it anymore because as I say to vote for it is to agree with it .

Sometimes a choice may not be ideal, in those cases you sometimes have to grit your teeth and go with the lesser of the two evils, If we are all honest there’s never a perfect candidate that fits anyones perfect profile. I too am a trade unionist 15 years a GMB representative on the shop floor, over that time the biggest lesson I learned was the ability to compromise, even when sometimes those compromises were hard to swallow, doing it for the greater good of the people you represent. Again I put it to you that your abstained vote is by default a vote for the people that you lambasted inyour opening post, a vote to keep them in power, do you really want that?

[DonnyOsmond]

Her passion and honesty are commendable, she says what she thinks.

But, she wants to lead the party and country, does she think that kind of language is language that will enable her to meet those objectives? I'm not convinced they are.

For me she makes some valid points but has a far too shouty aggressive attitude and like it or not that makes her sound stupid.

The problem I have with her saying this is it bleeds in to the supporters and incites yet more division.  Great for the tribal masses but as I said on a post yesterday, she doesn't need to attract filo or Sydney, she needs to attract people like me.

I commend her passion and the fact she's made a solid career for herself despite leaving school early but it's just some of the language she uses will alienate some people and like you say is too aggressive. She isn't electable but she is a better candidate than Starmer, which says a lot. For me the best hope Labour have is Andy Burnham, he has the passion, he's composed and he has the leadership needed. What's your thoughts on Burnham as being someone who is more center/center-right?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Her passion and honesty are commendable, she says what she thinks.

But, she wants to lead the party and country, does she think that kind of language is language that will enable her to meet those objectives? I'm not convinced they are.

For me she makes some valid points but has a far too shouty aggressive attitude and like it or not that makes her sound stupid.

The problem I have with her saying this is it bleeds in to the supporters and incites yet more division.  Great for the tribal masses but as I said on a post yesterday, she doesn't need to attract filo or Sydney, she needs to attract people like me.

Would you accept that the choice of words could lead to the sections of society who feel excluded actually having the motivation to vote for her .

A choice of words they connect with rather than the usual empty vessel suspects .

Millions don't vote let's not forget .

Not saying I'm right but something to discuss none the less .

The mix is too complicated for me to answer that I have to be honest, but has it ever worked before?  We saw under Corbyn how the leadership's personalities can turn voters away and does that language strike as leader of the country?  For me no but maybe you're right and it is enough to attract 40% of voters.  I'm sceptical on that.

[belton rover]

‘We all hate Tory scum’ doesn’t have the same ring to it, or the same nationwide approval as ‘we all hate Leeds scum’.

[ColinDouglasHandshake]

Andy Burnham? A fully fledged member of the absolute t**t club.

Personally i will never vote Labour every again in my lifetime due to the Covid stuff. I have been desperate for a party to support who actively opposes much of the nonsensical, irrational, hypocritical  Covid measures illegally foisted upon us by the Tories throughout this pandemic. Yet Labour didn't oppose, they agreed with the Tories and even wanted more severe restrictions. Quite bizarre.

Personally i suffered mentally and physically due to the Tories Covid policies and our generally useless NHS that is mistakenly held up as some beacon of reverence,  and i also saw my kid suffer needlessly. I won't be forgetting that lot in a hurry.

Tories and Labour will never get my vote. Ever.

Raynor at least is aggressive and passionate but like pretty much all politicians, if she ever 'made it', she'd end up bent as a nine bob note.

[tyke1962]

Her passion and honesty are commendable, she says what she thinks.

But, she wants to lead the party and country, does she think that kind of language is language that will enable her to meet those objectives? I'm not convinced they are.

For me she makes some valid points but has a far too shouty aggressive attitude and like it or not that makes her sound stupid.

The problem I have with her saying this is it bleeds in to the supporters and incites yet more division.  Great for the tribal masses but as I said on a post yesterday, she doesn't need to attract filo or Sydney, she needs to attract people like me.

I commend her passion and the fact she's made a solid career for herself despite leaving school early but it's just some of the language she uses will alienate some people and like you say is too aggressive. She isn't electable but she is a better candidate than Starmer, which says a lot. For me the best hope Labour have is Andy Burnham, he has the passion, he's composed and he has the leadership needed. What's your thoughts on Burnham as being someone who is more center/center-right?

I could be brought round to Burnham but I would have to be brought round as I say .

I'd be paying his leadership pitch with some attention to say the least .
He'd have to improve his leadership campaign from his first leadership attempt because he was walloped by Corbyn along with the other Blairite Liz Kendal .

His time as Mayor of Manchester and covid have increased his popularity no doubt .

I was also impressed with his work with the Hillsborough families .

I wouldn't dismiss him I'll say that .

[BillyStubbsTears]

Burnham's entire career has been WAY to the right of Starmer.

What exactly DO you want? Just someone who speaks with a northern accent?

[tyke1962]

Burnham's entire career has been WAY to the right of Starmer.

What exactly DO you want? Just someone who speaks with a northern accent?

What part of brought round with a leadership campaign aren't you understanding ?

[hstripes]

If Rayner wants to privately say or think that the Tories (or certain ones) are scum that's fine; if private individuals, on here for instance, want to say the Tories are scum that's fine too.

But for a leading member of the Labour Party to say this publicly is crass stupidity.

To win an election you need to gain the votes of floating voters i.e. those who have voted Tory in the past or are considering doing so.

By calling the Tories scum these voters will believe you are implying they, by considering to vote Tory, are either stupid or scum themselves for doing so. For the electorate who mainly aren't impassioned about politics and as aware of what Johnson, for instance, has said or done in the past, using such language just makes you look nasty.

The only people impressed by Rayner's 'passion' in making such remarks are died-in-the-wool Labour supporters whose vote can be relied upon anyway.

Labour needs to focus on the policies of the Tories and explaining why these are wrong and what Labour would do differently rather than making childish personal attacks. They have plenty to go on. In footballing parlance 'play the ball not the man'. Let people come to their on conclusions on whether the Tories are 'scum' or at least not credible enough in their politics to be allowed back into Government.

[Bentley Bullet]

Why don't you party at war members just accept that the more right you go the more chance you have of gaining more votes?

[normal rules]

It’s not the first time she has used this term. She used it in the hoc last October.
I don’t care what political party you lean towards.
This language is unacceptable, and should not be dressed up as passion or commitment.
If I called someone this in my profession I would be in trouble. Big time.
She is a potty mouth. This will do her cause and that of her party no good.
Her true colours have come to the surface again.

[tyke1962]

It’s not the first time she has used this term. She used it in the hoc last October.
I don’t care what political party you lean towards.
This language is unacceptable, and should not be dressed up as passion or commitment.
If I called someone this in my profession I would be in trouble. Big time.
She is a potty mouth. This will do her cause and that of her party no good.
Her true colours have come to the surface again.

Don't get me wrong she's definitely in marmite territory to say the least .

So was bloody Thatcher who came in from the opposite direction and it didn't do her any harm .

Plenty of folk like to hear it said how it is and leave the political speak to the moderates .

We don't live in moderate times , it's toxic out there and sometimes this kind of talk can cut through .

It's a risk I won't lie but ............

[BigH]

It’s not the first time she has used this term. She used it in the hoc last October.
I don’t care what political party you lean towards.
This language is unacceptable, and should not be dressed up as passion or commitment.
If I called someone this in my profession I would be in trouble. Big time.
She is a potty mouth. This will do her cause and that of her party no good.
Her true colours have come to the surface again.

Don't get me wrong she's definitely in marmite territory to say the least .

So was bloody Thatcher who came in from the opposite direction and it didn't do her any harm .

Plenty of folk like to hear it said how it is and leave the political speak to the moderates .

We don't live in moderate times , it's toxic out there and sometimes this kind of talk can cut through .

It's a risk I won't lie but ............

To me, Rayner is the modern day equivalent of John Prescott. Someone who wears her working class credentials on her sleeve and doesn't really care who she upsets. Even the propensity for mangling the English language offers an uncanny similarity.

But Prescott was never Prime Minister material and he knew it. He also knew that a lot of people who voted Labour didn't do so because of him. However, in the 1997 election he dialled it down a bit and came across as a measured and composed politician, contributing to the 'mission', namely, winning an election.

Rayner could learn a thing or two.

[tyke1962]

It’s not the first time she has used this term. She used it in the hoc last October.
I don’t care what political party you lean towards.
This language is unacceptable, and should not be dressed up as passion or commitment.
If I called someone this in my profession I would be in trouble. Big time.
She is a potty mouth. This will do her cause and that of her party no good.
Her true colours have come to the surface again.

Don't get me wrong she's definitely in marmite territory to say the least .

So was bloody Thatcher who came in from the opposite direction and it didn't do her any harm .

Plenty of folk like to hear it said how it is and leave the political speak to the moderates .

We don't live in moderate times , it's toxic out there and sometimes this kind of talk can cut through .

It's a risk I won't lie but ............

To me, Rayner is the modern day equivalent of John Prescott. Someone who wears her working class credentials on her sleeve and doesn't really care who she upsets. Even the propensity for mangling the English language offers an uncanny similarity.

But Prescott was never Prime Minister material and he knew it. He also knew that a lot of people who voted Labour didn't do so because of him. However, in the 1997 election he dialled it down a bit and came across as a measured and composed politician, contributing to the 'mission', namely, winning an election.

Rayner could learn a thing or two.

Except it ain't 1997 is it .

We live in different times the game and dare I say culture is changing .

Neither Trump or Johnson wouldn't have got anywhere near office in 1997 .

Scum by the standards of today is pretty tame when you hear the stuff you do on tv these days .

However I take the point it's not exactly everyday talk in politics and just as long as she uses these terms sparingly and doesn't empty her gun then she may have gained more support than many people think .

If she's different , feisty and authentic with a young past to prove it .

Fake she most certainly isn't .

She may connect with the disenfranchised and there's votes to be had there especially in the former red wall .

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't make a habit of it but I'd certainly keep up the feisty attacks and a bit of class warfare with the Tories .

A strong women won three elections in this country with half the people despising her .

Let's not be too hasty here and see how this one rolls would be my take .

[selby]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

[drfchound]

Probably about ten pages selby.

[tyke1962]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

Personally it depends at least from my point of view .

If they called Mandelson Scum then I'd shrug my shoulders .

If they called David Evans it then so what .

What I'm saying is that if the cap fits then it fits doesn't it irrespective .

[DonnyOsmond]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

I feel like James Gray MP saying someone should plant a bomb in Anneliese Dodds office is far worse...

[drfchound]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

I feel like James Gray MP saying someone should plant a bomb in Anneliese Dodds office is far worse...

But at least he has done the right thing and apologised.

[DonnyOsmond]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

I feel like James Gray MP saying someone should plant a bomb in Anneliese Dodds office is far worse...

But at least he has done the right thing and apologised.

Really? He apologised to a newspaper when they asked him to make a comment, he didn't apologise to the person he was referring to and is only apologising as he got caught. He was hoping to get away with saying it in a private WhatsApp group and not being pulled up on it. Like I said proposing the murder of someone is worse than calling someone scum.

[drfchound]

  What would be the reaction if a conservative MP called  anyone scum? I would be interested to see the reaction on here.

I feel like James Gray MP saying someone should plant a bomb in Anneliese Dodds office is far worse...

But at least he has done the right thing and apologised.

Really? He apologised to a newspaper when they asked him to make a comment, he didn't apologise to the person he was referring to and is only apologising as he got caught. He was hoping to get away with saying it in a private WhatsApp group and not being pulled up on it. Like I said proposing the murder of someone is worse than calling someone scum.

Irrespective, he has apologised.