Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

In an attempt to keep the politics on one thread and as election year begins on both sides of the Atlantic, let’s agree that it hasn’t been a great week for those, like me, of a ‘centre left’ persuasion.
Frankly any party that can’t defeat the dishonest and incompetent rabble masquerading as the current Government/ Conservative Party doesn’t deserve to win and, although they still have my full support, we’ve perhaps seen the first signs of a wobble from Keir Starmer in the last couple of days…certainly one which will arm and excite the ‘flip flop’ brigade.
There must also be concerns about the impact Reform UK - or whatever the reincarnation of UKIP is now called - on the Election result bearing in mind the still unresolved chaos they caused via Brexit.

More worrying still though is the ‘performance’ of Joe Biden in recent times. Now looking - and acting - every one of his 81 years it looks as if US citizens have a choice between the amoral and frankly deranged Trump v Joe Biden who is displaying the first sad signs of dementia.

Let’s not forget that this is an election of probably the most powerful individual in the World and certainly the leader of the West. Without being disrespectful, at least not to Biden who I believe to be a good man, can this really be the best the USA has got to offer and as JB shuffles onto another platform where he’ll forget his lines and confuse his countries/leaders, shouldn’t we be considering an age cut off where leadership is concerned?

I know I could no longer do the job I used to do and I’m well over a decade younger than Uncle Joe. From what we’ve seen this week I wouldn’t trust him to run our local Parish Council let alone the most powerful nation on the planet and I fear the images that we’ve seen this week are only going to provide further ammunition for Trump supporters. Where has the next Kennedy, Clinton or Obama gone…there surely has to be a stronger candidate somewhere.

Thoughts?

Sorry, but which bit of this opening post of the ‘Election Year…’ thread, written in February, is confusing you, GP?

[Geoff Parkstone]

That's your take on the matter of the elections in the year. A narrow agenda of your own making. Does that first post define what everyone must discuss on the thread? I'd suggest not, it's just your own interpretation of a broader subject and a starter for 10. Nothing in the title restricts the subject matter.

[ramAnag]

That's your take on the matter of the elections in the year. A narrow agenda of your own making. Does that first post define what everyone must discuss on the thread? I'd suggest not, it's just your own interpretation of a broader subject and a starter for 10. Nothing in the title restricts the subject matter.

Okay…have it your way, let’s have a free for all on every thread. Should be great for the forum. Honestly, I know you’re in wum mode, but your recent posts have made about as much sense as Tricky’s and his latest contribution was quite incomprehensible.

[Andy_Faber]

Source please for you claim of 7,000 asylum seekers - your incorrect to call them illegals, as by International Law, they are not illegal until their claims have been processed.

As for the rest of your post it’s utter bull****.

I’d written a post challenging TTR to provide provenance but tried to edit it when I found the source, which is the migration watch website. Not an impartial website but it’s actual figures do tie up with official sources

[Geoff Parkstone]

What it tells me is that "illegal migration" has gone up a lot since Brexit - suggestion that even ****ing asylum seekers don't want to be in the EU ??

[swaledale]

What it tells me is that "illegal migration" has gone up a lot since Brexit - suggestion that even ****ing asylum seekers don't want to be in the EU ??

Actually it hasn't, its just that following Brexit the Tories closed all legal routes to claim asylum, refused to continue with the returns agreement that existed with the EU prior to Brexit, refused the French offer of a jointly manned Asylum reception centre at Calais, whereby an initial screening of asylum seekers could take place and those obviously ineligible could be refused entry and returned to the first safe country or deported.

Couple that with increased border checks post Brexit so the normal route via Lorry's etc was more risky and so the boast across the channel became the only option. Numbers actually entering the country have not significantly increased, just the method of entry has changed.

It is still the case that Asylum Seekers are a minority of those coming into the country, that they come into the UK due to prior connections and that other EU countries have taken far more and continue to do so than the UK does.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Swale, inaccuracy and bias. 3 words I'd not normally expect to see in one sentence. Well any more so than TTR, inaccuracy and bias anyway. 2 sides of the same coin.

[swaledale]

Swale, inaccuracy and bias. 3 words I'd not normally expect to see in one sentence. Well any more so than TTR, inaccuracy and bias anyway. 2 sides of the same coin.

Really? Please do explain which bits are inaccurate and which bits are biased, I'm always willing to learn you know, rather than have these words thrown at me with no justification for them. Of course like AF none will be forthcoming.

[Geoff Parkstone]

If they toss their papers away, how do you know where they are from?

[Trickytreesreds]

If they toss their papers away, how do you know where they are from?

You don't. You have work on the pretext of what they say.
Harder for some, a Viernamese isn't going to get away with saying they are Syrian.
But a Pakistani, may be able to pull off claiming to be Afghan.

Either way, its virtually impossible to eject someone without ID and why they toss it away.

That's why no one coming by boat or lorry should even be considered. They may not like it, but back to France you go.