BBC covering Johnson's back !!!

We all know that Boris Johnson is a lying, conniving scumbag, but apparently the BBC won't allow its journalists to confirm it !!!

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2019/11/...g-to-expose-boris-johnsons-lies-because-it-i/

 

Vote him out then if you think he's a shocker.
It's like most of us not liking Pauline Hanson who is nothing but racist

 

Suzanne

I think what is been alluded to here is that we have a huge problem with media bias in the UK (or rather England)

We have a wealth owned right wing press that always fights for the Conservatives (and Brexit) and doesn’t care about twisting the truth out of all recognition or just plain lying. The BBC used to a mild antidote to that propaganda but recently it has become so cowed into been ‘balanced’ that it seems fearful to question those in power.

So there is very little pushing the other way there are a few radio programmes some other media outlets and The Guardian newspaper but the latter still has journalistic integrity so tries not to twist the truth or lie.

It’s not a level playing field

Many people see the con in the right wing propaganda but many others can be bamboozled by lies I mean even very intelligent people can get scammed.

 

Yeah understood that one.
However, It doesn't mean that you as a uk citizen has to vote for some party because they are forcing it down your throat.
Don't let the media tell you what to do.

Here in Australia we have plenty of parties. Some are rather forceful. Some aren't so forceful.
As i said in my earlier post you need to vote that politician out.
So when you get a list of parties to vote for put his party last.

Remember Brexit is a whole new currency and if you don't want it then don't vote it in.

 

Everything always comes down to the word "racist", so sad.

 

Suzanne

Here in the UK we don’t have a preferential voting system we don’t number the candidates on the ballot paper in the order of our preference we have a first past the post system were the winner takes all which means that in a voting area the majority of people might vote against a party or candidate but that party and candidate can still win.

*

In a GENERAL election there are lots of little races where there are safe seats and marginal, safe seats are where one party or another always win and marginal places were only a few votes can swing it one way or another you could literally have just one vote saying who is the winner. This means that in reality only a few areas and only a few votes can decide who wins an election.

This system means that the political Party’s that get control of the government have power in excess (often far in excess) to their mandate.

For example even though Margret Thatcher’s as leader of the Conservatives won three elections the Tory’s never polled more than 43% of the popular vote. I’ve been told that that the last time a UK government was elected with more than 50% of the popular vote was back in 1931.

You could say a yes/no referendum is very democratic but a General election is not

So a General election should not be treated like a yes/no referendum because that would be morally dishonest but I don’t think Dominic Cummings or Boris Johnson care about morals.

 

What a terrible system...

Yeah i reckon you might be right there.

General elections suck in the uk.
They are totally different and i would have thought they would be similar to what Australia has which is democratic rather than not.

A bit unfair on all of you guys living in the uk not being able to vote for a Prime Minister.