[Wooden Spoon]

But it?s still a ludicrous thing to say - more so as an MP your just opening yourself to ridicule and look like a nut job


More importantly, does this sort of daft statement really engage with the ordinary public? Or does it alienate the ordinary public from politicians?

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 12 February 2025 - 02:05 AM

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Wooden Spoon, on 11 February 2025 - 07:31 PM, said:

Recognising the right to identify as a llama is insane. Don?t you see how ludicrous that is?

I'd like to see the entire exchange in context.

A context not supplied by those shouting loudest about it.

On the other hand the context of the Reform councillors' words couldn't be clearer.

Yet unlike the two Labour MP's and councillors involved in the 'Whataspp' group remains untroubled by sanction.

As does the Reform MP who lied about his domestic abuse conviction.

I choose to believe ordinary people will judge that comparison accordingly...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 12 February 2025 - 07:36 AM

[Search & Destroy]

Ask her if a make llama can have a womb, that?ll spin her out

[Mr Mercury]

Apparently the minister for Llamas also asked in other Twitter exchanges was it time to abandon the terms Dear Sir or Madam on letters, said women can have a penis and she also asked if reproduction was really that important.
And this is the new Health Minister.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 12 February 2025 - 09:00 AM

[Mr Mercury]

Search & Destroy, on 12 February 2025 - 08:29 AM, said:

Ask her if a make llama can have a womb, that?ll spin her out

I?m concerned at the cost of fitting troughs for the Llamas as well as sinks in all these multi use bathrooms.

[Goku]

You lot need summat meaningful to actually care about

[Mr Mercury]

Goku, on 12 February 2025 - 09:04 AM, said:

You lot need summat meaningful to actually care about

Come on mate that?s hardly treating those identifying as Llamas with the respect and dignity they deserve.

[Wooden Spoon]

Goku, on 12 February 2025 - 09:04 AM, said:

You lot need summat meaningful to actually care about

I?ve really cared about these animals since Steve right in the afternoon had a man on his radio show who identified as a llama







Ahead of his time was Steve - if he?d have been about now he could have had a seat on the front benches as the minister for Llamas


At least it would have injected some humour to Westminster

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 12 February 2025 - 09:41 AM

[Wooden Spoon]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 12 February 2025 - 07:11 AM, said:

I'd like to see the entire exchange in context.

A context not supplied by those shouting loudest about it.

On the other hand the context of the Reform councillors' words couldn't be clearer.

Yet unlike the two Labour MP's and councillors involved in the 'Whataspp' group remains untroubled by sanction.

As does the Reform MP who lied about his domestic abuse conviction.

I choose to believe ordinary people will judge that comparison accordingly...

The sensible, rational thing to say would be something like - some people suffer with gender dsysphoria and identify with a gender that is different from their biological sex.

We should treat these people with dignity and respect that choice.


Saying people who identify as flipping llama should be respected is a world away from that and just invites ridicule and removes any sense of credibility we?ve already got people calling her the minister for llamas and no doubt the press will follow a similar line. Who?s gonna take this person seriously now? And this person is now on the front bench?


Surely you see that?



When 30p Lee is no longer seen as a nut nut because we have the minister for Llamas taking that mantle don?t you see the dangerous position politicians have put the country in by being so out of touch with mood music of the country?


Put aside your party membership Chris, surely you see this? Surely?


EDIT - actually you do see all of this - it?s why you?ve been absent.


To quote you - My work here is done- should be you go back to your local constituency and report to them stuff like comments on this section of this board, comments in the times, on X and other local social media. Your work isn?t done. It should be LISTENING and only just begun


If you don?t want to be a serious party at the next election

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 12 February 2025 - 10:46 AM

[The Jolly Friar]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 12 February 2025 - 07:11 AM, said:

I'd like to see the entire exchange in context.

A context not supplied by those shouting loudest about it.

On the other hand the context of the Reform councillors' words couldn't be clearer.

Yet unlike the two Labour MP's and councillors involved in the 'Whataspp' group remains untroubled by sanction.

As does the Reform MP who lied about his domestic abuse conviction.

I choose to believe ordinary people will judge that comparison accordingly...

How do you manage to turn comments about a Llamma into dissing Reform? and whats all this like to see this context crap. She believes it and you know it and everybody knows it.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Wooden Spoon, on 12 February 2025 - 09:49 AM, said:

The sensible, rational thing to say would be something like - some people suffer with gender dsysphoria and identify with a gender that is different from their biological sex.

We should treat these people with dignity and respect that choice.


Saying people who identify as flipping llama should be respected is a world away from that and just invites ridicule and removes any sense of credibility we?ve already got people calling her the minister for llamas and no doubt the press will follow a similar line. Who?s gonna take this person seriously now? And this person is now on the front bench?


Surely you see that?



When 30p Lee is no longer seen as a nut nut because we have the minister for Llamas taking that mantle don?t you see the dangerous position politicians have put the country in by being so out of touch with mood music of the country?


Put aside your party membership Chris, surely you see this? Surely?


EDIT - actually you do see all of this - it?s why you?ve been absent.


To quote you - My work here is done- should be you go back to your local constituency and report to them stuff like comments on this section of this board, comments in the times, on X and other local social media. Your work isn?t done. It should be LISTENING and only just begun


If you don?t want to be a serious party at the next election

Okay, let's turn this on it's head, Rob - do you honestly think Dalton was being serious?

Really?

That her comment wasn't just a facetious response to an equally facetious prompt?

As tongue in cheek as my 'work done' post, perhaps.

A quip, of course, which was always gonna be used by hostile media regardless of context.

Again, I think the general public are more than capable of grasping that. And maybe we're all guilty of forgetting that today's headlines are tomorrow's chip paper...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 12 February 2025 - 11:06 AM

[isleaiw1]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 12 February 2025 - 11:05 AM, said:

Okay, let's turn this on it's head, Rob - do you honestly think Dalton was being serious?

Really?

That her comment wasn't just a facetious response to an equally facetious prompt?

As tongue in cheek as my 'work done' post, perhaps.

A quip, of course, which was always gonna be used by hostile media regardless of context.

Again, I think the general public are more than capable of grasping that. And maybe we're all guilty of forgetting that today's headlines are tomorrow's chip paper...

I think the polls show that the general public is capable of grasping some things.... after 6 months the governing party has managed to make itself as unpopular as the previous one who had 14 years of f*** ups. And we are left with Reform leading the way....

What's your view of how things are going, I know you are incapable of taking off your membership hat but at least try to be honest.

Claiming your comment after the election was tongue in cheek... might wash if you were not now studiously avoiding the section as defening the crap that your party has done is much harder than carefully crafted critiques of the corrupt conservative crap that preceded...

[The Jolly Friar]

isleaiw1, on 12 February 2025 - 11:17 AM, said:

I think the polls show that the general public is capable of grasping some things.... after 6 months the governing party has managed to make itself as unpopular as the previous one who had 14 years of f*** ups. And we are left with Reform leading the way....

What's your view of how things are going, I know you are incapable of taking off your membership hat but at least try to be honest.

Claiming your comment after the election was tongue in cheek... might wash if you were not now studiously avoiding the section as defening the crap that your party has done is much harder than carefully crafted critiques of the corrupt conservative crap that preceded...

Well said. Ironic that the public would disagree with just about everything he posts.

[s42blue]

isleaiw1, on 12 February 2025 - 11:17 AM, said:

I think the polls show that the general public is capable of grasping some things.... after 6 months the governing party has managed to make itself as unpopular as the previous one who had 14 years of f*** ups. And we are left with Reform leading the way....

What's your view of how things are going, I know you are incapable of taking off your membership hat but at least try to be honest.

Claiming your comment after the election was tongue in cheek... might wash if you were not now studiously avoiding the section as defening the crap that your party has done is much harder than carefully crafted critiques of the corrupt conservative crap that preceded...

Playing Devil?s advocate here: IF the finances are as bad as Labour claim and IF there is a long term plan and vision it would surely be good politics to get all the electorally unpopular actions out of the way in the early stages of their parliament? Then as their term comes to an end highlight (IF) it?s working and here are the sweeteners so elect us again?

Tbf to EoC, who I?m politically opposed to btw, he has criticised the WFA withdrawal and supported the recent suspension. And few on here remove their particular coloured blinkers.

You could have waited for the next Tory government (if there is one?) and said you can?t have an opinion as you didn?t criticise the Labour government. Now that?d be funny. 🤣

I suspect, I don?t know him, he?s become as bored as other posters in the lack of debate? Current company excepted.

[Mr Mercury]

s42blue, on 12 February 2025 - 02:43 PM, said:

Playing Devil?s advocate here: IF the finances are as bad as Labour claim and IF there is a long term plan and vision it would surely be good politics to get all the electorally unpopular actions out of the way in the early stages of their parliament? Then as their term comes to an end highlight (IF) it?s working and here are the sweeteners so elect us again?

Tbf to EoC, who I?m politically opposed to btw, he has criticised the WFA withdrawal and supported the recent suspension. And few on here remove their particular coloured blinkers.

You could have waited for the next Tory government (if there is one?) and said you can?t have an opinion as you didn?t criticise the Labour government. Now that?d be funny. 🤣

I suspect, I don?t know him, he?s become as bored as other posters in the lack of debate? Current company excepted.

Debate? Sorry I?m just sewing up my sides.

[s42blue]

Mr Mercury, on 12 February 2025 - 02:53 PM, said:

Debate? Sorry I?m just sewing up my sides.

As I said I don?t know him and hypothesized he could be. I?ve no idea.

[Mr Mercury]

s42blue, on 12 February 2025 - 03:04 PM, said:

As I said I don?t know him and hypothesized he could be. I?ve no idea.

It was a generalisation in the main.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 12 February 2025 - 03:06 PM

[s42blue]

Mr Mercury, on 12 February 2025 - 03:05 PM, said:

It was a generalisation in the main.

I?m with you there. 👍

[isleaiw1]

s42blue, on 12 February 2025 - 02:43 PM, said:

Playing Devil?s advocate here: IF the finances are as bad as Labour claim and IF there is a long term plan and vision it would surely be good politics to get all the electorally unpopular actions out of the way in the early stages of their parliament? Then as their term comes to an end highlight (IF) it?s working and here are the sweeteners so elect us again?

Tbf to EoC, who I?m politically opposed to btw, he has criticised the WFA withdrawal and supported the recent suspension. And few on here remove their particular coloured blinkers.

You could have waited for the next Tory government (if there is one?) and said you can?t have an opinion as you didn?t criticise the Labour government. Now that?d be funny. 🤣

I suspect, I don?t know him, he?s become as bored as other posters in the lack of debate? Current company excepted.

The finances long term are worse than they claim - if you allow for the pension issues, the ageing population etc etc. So my concern isnt that they take electorally unpopular decisions (Maggie did and she solved many of the problems we faced in the 70s), but that they arent looking to solve the real problems and are tinkering round the edges with the sort of politics that seems very spiteful and aimed at their non supporters. They govern for the whole country not just a few....

If we are going to copy ideas from other countries (which RR seems to want to do) how about we start with the NHS...and whilst we are looking to save money, look at how much the contributions to the ever growing and even less efficient than before public sector cost.

Might be waiting a long time for the next tory govt.... I suspect coalitions will be the name of the game for the one after this...

[s42blue]

isleaiw1, on 12 February 2025 - 03:58 PM, said:

The finances long term are worse than they claim - if you allow for the pension issues, the ageing population etc etc. So my concern isnt that they take electorally unpopular decisions (Maggie did and she solved many of the problems we faced in the 70s), but that they arent looking to solve the real problems and are tinkering round the edges with the sort of politics that seems very spiteful and aimed at their non supporters. They govern for the whole country not just a few....

If we are going to copy ideas from other countries (which RR seems to want to do) how about we start with the NHS...and whilst we are looking to save money, look at how much the contributions to the ever growing and even less efficient than before public sector cost.

Might be waiting a long time for the next tory govt.... I suspect coalitions will be the name of the game for the one after this...

I agree there?s no long term vision but then what do you expect from short term parliaments filled with career politicians? Rhetorical Q.

Trouble is who joins who?