The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[The Wengerbabies]

Always found it ironic his surname was Ghey.

[Letters]

The problem is that it's a dogwhistle for some really nasty bigotry.

Mmm. I mean, the trouble with that is “bigotry” these days seems to be basically “expressing an opinion which these days you’re ‘not allowed’ to have”. Which isn’t to say there isn’t some nasty bigotry around, but any opinion which diverts the slightest bit from the one which you “should” have is labelled as such. Which is ironic, given what bigotry means.

All Sunak did was list things which Starmer apparently promised to do and then didn’t do. One of which is apparently the “definition of a woman”. I don’t know if Starmer did promise to do that, but I guess Sunak isn’t completely making that up. Sunak didn’t express an opinion himself on the matter, he was just listing it as a broken Starmer promise. That’s literally all he said, for all the faux outrage it’s generated

[WMUG]

Mmm. I mean, the trouble with that is “bigotry” these days seems to be basically “expressing an opinion which these days you’re ‘not allowed’ to have”. Which isn’t to say there isn’t some nasty bigotry around, but any opinion which diverts the slightest bit from the one which you “should” have is labelled as such. Which is ironic, given what bigotry means.

All Sunak did was list things which Starmer apparently promised to do and then didn’t do. One of which is apparently the “definition of a woman”. I don’t know if Starmer did promise to do that, but I guess Sunak isn’t completely making that up. Sunak didn’t express an opinion himself on the matter, he was just listing it as a broken Starmer promise. That’s literally all he said, for all the faux outrage it’s generated

The whole point of dogwhistling is that some people hear the basically reasonable thing on the surface, and the extremists you're trying to court hear something else entirely.

[Letters]

The whole point of dogwhistling is that some people hear the basically reasonable thing on the surface, and the extremists you're trying to court hear something else entirely.

OK. But there's nothing you can do about that. I mean, I guess you can choose your words more carefully so there's no way they can do that. But some people are idiots and will twist your words whatever you say.
The press will twist your words whatever you say. Even HCZ said that Sunak "[made] a dead trans girl the butt of your joke"
He didn't do that.

It's really clear what Sunak was trying to say - Starmer has a track record of U turns.
Now, I'm not saying Sunak is right about that, or that he's wrong. I really don't have much of an opinion about it. But it's very clear what point he was trying to make was.

What Starmer said was a clear deflection, and it worked. That's what the story is now - not the point Sunak was making, but the "terrible" thing Sunak said. In this article:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68237826

Brianna's father says that Sunak should

say sorry for the "degrading" and "dehumanising" remark.

What degrading remark? What was dehumanising? You're going to have to explain that one with sock puppets or crayons.
Why are you buying in to the bullshit? The debate we should be having here is whether Starmer does constantly make U-turns and whether that's a bad thing. My answers, if you're interested, are:

1) Dunno
2) Probably not. I don't even like the negative connotation of the term "U-turn". If you're going in the wrong direction then you do a U-turn to put yourself on the right track. Politicians should change their mind if it's shown they're wrong. But obviously it depends what the change is. The hasty backtracking on the promised green spending may not be a good thing.

While we're here, in the video in that BBC article. I wish Sunak had the balls to say, when asked if he would apologise, "No, it's obvious what I was saying, I've got nothing to apologise for". But, of course, he can't say that. So you have to get the same soundbite repeated after every question.
Honestly, the quality of political debate is so bloody awful. No wonder we always end up with such idiots in charge.

[The Wengerbabies]

I'm with Letters on this. It's faux outrage, typical of the wokerati to be offended on other people's behalf.

I will also add if we stopped appeasement of mentally ill children he would still be alive.

[Letters]

I'm with Letters on this.

Hmm. That's not a good sign.

It's faux outrage, typical of the wokerati to be offended on other people's behalf.

Mostly agree with this.

And then you go and spoil it all by saying something stupid like...

I will also add if we stopped appeasement of mentally ill children he would still be alive.

[WMUG]

The whole point of dogwhistling is that some people hear the basically reasonable thing on the surface, and the extremists you're trying to court hear something else entirely.

See?

[Letters]

See?

But he's not saying that because of anything Sunak said. Well, not directly. He's saying it because of the faux outrage it generated. He held those views anyway, his response to the faux outrage is to express these things. No faux outrage and focus on what Sunak was clearly getting at and he wouldn't be posting that.

[HCZ_Reborn]

But he's not saying that because of anything Sunak said. Well, not directly. He's saying it because of the faux outrage it generated. He held those views anyway, his response to the faux outrage is to express these things. No faux outrage and focus on what Sunak was clearly getting at and he wouldn't be posting that.

My argument was that Sunak’s clumsy insensitivity means that people will invariably double down around an absurdity


I get completely what you’re saying, but the fact of the matter is Sunak stumbled into a bear trap that Starmer set up for him and when I said he made a trans girl the butt of a joke that’s what it looks like, whatever you and I know his intention was.

Unlike Wengerbabies I tend to blame murderers for murder.

[The Wengerbabies]

My argument was that Sunak’s clumsy insensitivity means that people will invariably double down around an absurdity


I get completely what you’re saying, but the fact of the matter is Sunak stumbled into a bear trap that Starmer set up for him and when I said he made a trans girl the butt of a joke that’s what it looks like, whatever you and I know his intention was.

Unlike Wengerbabies I tend to blame murderers for murder.

I don't blame the victim at all. The only people to blame are the murderers.

But the adults who constantly push this nonsense as normal and even encourage it are partly culpable.