Cocha
-
Posts
2,006 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Cocha
-
-
19 hours ago, Postman said:
I am going to argue with the lady behind the table and accuse her of being a Tory before showing my ID and voting anyway. The Tories are attempting to disenfranchise a whole swathe of the UK under the guise of "fixing a security issue" that does not even exist. I am going to do my bit toward what I predict will be a massive fiasco and an own goal for the Tories.
Fiver says you don't. Any why pick on the poor sod in the polling booth (and why assume it will be a lady?)? All they will be doing is enforcing the laws. Go and be a Steve Bray outside parliament if you feel that strongly about it.
-
1 hour ago, Riedquat said:
Couldn't agree more about fixing a non-existant issue. This voter ID requirement stinks to high heaven. The ever-increasing demand for ID is extremely odious in its own right even when you can come up with a degree of justification for it (quite why so many are so willing to be tagged, marked, and branded in this way I'll never sympathise with). This fails even that.
Why is it only a "non existent issue" for us English? How come so many other countries insist on ID being show to vote? Do you think us English are just better and more trustable than all those forriners?
-
1 hour ago, MARTINX9 said:
Exactly - young people are far more likely to carry round photo id all the time to enter venues, buy alcohol etc. Because you could be asked for it at any time.
Odd that people accept you need photo id to buy a bottle of vodka or some cans of lager - but not to vote?
The vast majority of European nations require people to show photo ID to vote - France, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Iceland, Norway, Sweden etc etc
Indeed. There is simply no sensible argument against it. Some of the supposed reasons people are trying to create are utterly pathetic. And they didn't seem to give a toss about Northern Ireland when it was introduced over there. Must be a case of English exceptionalism. We are English and we are better and more trustable than than all those other countries who insist on ID being shown to vote. Which is also pretty racist.
-
4 hours ago, winkie said:
Vote for something different...... what we should have as in most countries of the world is proportional representation.....
A government that represents the views and needs of everyone....not just the few.
And we are never going to get that. We will always have FPTP because FPTP suits the Westminster Party down to the ground and those who want proportional representation keep voting for parties who want FPTP. How dumb can people be?
-
13 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:
Are you really dim enough to believe that.
The only reason this is being introduced is because the people in charge believe it will favour them. May only be a 1% bias but that could make a difference in many seats
🤣🤣🤣
If you are incapable of obtaining FREE voter ID, you are too thick to deserve a vote. Simple as.
-
15 hours ago, Chunketh said:
no, blocking the poor out is the objective. Its the republican playbook 101.
How is it blocking the poor out? The ID is FREE. The desperation of some to find non existent issues is quite something.
-
16 hours ago, winkie said:
I know for a fact, many young people and older people also do not drive in London, they don't need to......holding a passport, not everyone has one of those for sure.
Another hurdle is knowing where to go and getting there to get a photo for the id card, and of course there is the price.
The ID is FREE. Everyone who has a passport or a driving licence has had to somehow manage the incredibly arduous (not really) task of finding where to get a photo taken, get there and pay for them. Anyone incapable of this doesn't deserve a vote and it is probably for the best that they can't, just like anyone incapable of this shouldn't be driving.
-
3 minutes ago, nightowl said:
Because the old are treated preferentially and their vote has been traditionally more coveted?
I thought postal voting was where the big fraud risk was where having ID has little meaning.
It does reek of fixing a problem that doesn't exist becuase it's easy, while missing the real risk.
I'd have preferred them to start with postal voting and then move onto voter ID, but once voter ID has been introduced then the focus can move to postal voting.
-
24 minutes ago, fellow said:
Is this designed to stop the underclass from voting?
As free voter ID is available to anyone who wants it, the only people it will prevent from voting are people who wouldn't have been bothered about voting anyway.
-
Just now, winkie said:
Much you miss......best not vote for any of them if neither of them are up to building more secure property to rent for key workers to live in the area they are wanted to work.
I won't and don't vote for either. I want lower house prices, so I would be exactly what I've accused others of being should I vote for a party which wants higher house prices, whilst moaning about high house prices. My vote will be going to a different party. If more and more people started doing this, then as the vote share of the Westminster Party falls, they would be more likely to change, either voluntarily or via necessity.
However, neither have any need to change whatsoever currently, because they know enough useful idiots will continue to keep voting for them, wazzing down on us and laughing their heads off, no matter what they do. And those very same people will continue to moan and whine about the exact things they keep voting for more of.
-
3 hours ago, winkie said:
.......house prices now are becoming the least of our problems...........just give people places they can rent, with a secure tenancy and rent controls....build homes to rent that can never be bought on the cheap and not replaced.
I don't disagree with this. Have the tories or labour done anything at all, whatsoever to make you believe this is something they would even think about, let alone enacting. If so, please detail it here for me as I've obviously missed it.
-
20 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:
So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?
Doesn't matter if it is a snap election or Jan 2025. If you want lower house prices, don't vote for either party which has proven time and again over the last 2 decades that they want higher house prices. And if you do then accept whatever you are voting for, the trade off is higher house prices, so quit whining about high house prices.
-
Just now, winkie said:
Who are you calling a people......speak for yourself and don't be childish and rude.
We have enough running the country as it is.
Childish and rude? Have you been on the Brexit thread 😂
So you have 2 parties who want higher house prices, but someone wants lower house prices. How would you define someone who keeps voting for higher house prices when they want lower house prices and then spends years and years crying about higher house prices on a house price crash forum?
-
2 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:
QED
You keep voting for higher house prices by all means Bruce, but if you do and then carry on whining about high house prices on here then that can only be defined as completely re-tarded.
-
Just now, Bruce Banner said:
Thank you for reinforcing my point by resorting to insult.
The one thing the "Tory" machine can't handle, in the runup to an election, is a public determined to have a change of government and using tactical voting to achieve that, so they muddy the water an any way possible.
And thank you for reinforcing my point that anyone wanting lower house prices but still votes for the Westminster Party is a re-tard.
-
39 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:
And given a straight choice between Sunak and Starmer? One word answer please, one or the other.
I'll go first..... Starmer.
There, that was easy wasn't it.
One word? Re-tard.
-
10 hours ago, Homeless Millionaire said:
Yet hope we do. What's happened is that a shrewd way of keeping us at each other throats and unable to progress has been developed, keeping us in perpetual slavery!
Yep and re-tards keep voting for it again and again and again, then spend the next 5 years crying into their beer about our political overlords. Then they go out and vote for them again, because We NeEd To GeT rId Of ThE ReDs/BLuEs AnD oUr OnLy OpTiOn Is To VoTe FoR ThE BlUeS/rEdS. It's staggering how stupid people can be.
-
54 minutes ago, Homeless Millionaire said:
That's about what I'd say, thanks...
Pretty much what I expected. Nothing other than some unfounded hope based on zero past evidence.
Westminster might as well do away with voting, they are just wasting time and money with it. The red half and the blue half just need to agree to take turns every 5 years and be done with it.
I agree 100% the tories need to go. But I disagree 100% that labour are in anyway an answer to what you expect them to deliver.
-
6 minutes ago, miguel said:
Lol! 'our re-tarded masses' ! . . . . I always knew you were a complete shthead. Now we have it clear in print. Fck off you Brex shter ars*hole.
So how is your great Brex sht manufacturing boom going to happen with our 're-tarded masses' ?
BTW: You set up anything yet?
You vile piece of sht.
Awww, is mummy letting you play on her phone again? Get off back to your play pit child.
-
1 hour ago, slawek said:
One potential benefits often raised by Leavers was a greater accountability of the UK political class. Ironically British people trust the EU more and the UK government and parliament now.
It helps our political class aka The Kleptocratic Duopoly of Westminster, no end that they know that no matter what they do, they will retain power because our re-tarded masses will just keep voting for them and alternating between the red half and the blue half. And they just laugh at the re-tarded masses moaning endlessly about the things they keep voting for more of.
It was pretty clear after the expenses scandal that the KDoW knew it could get away with doing whatever it wanted. Rather than pitchforks and burning torches, they had to endure a couple of weeks of angry tutting and rolling eyes. Us British are seriously brutal when it comes to bringing our political class to task.
As the old saying goes, you get the politicians you deserve.
-
2 hours ago, Homeless Millionaire said:
If, having won, Labour can knuckle down and tackle some of the real problems facing us, namely education, housing, immigration and pensions that would be marvellous.
Considering their history in both power and opposition, what gives you the belief they will do so for any of the 4 you cite? And what is it they would need to do do regarding them to reach your high bar of marvelous?
-
48 minutes ago, msi said:
right now Who is in power and who has failed to sort out HPI over the last decade?
And who presided over the 2000-2010 blowing of the biggest housing ponzi scheme in history? And who has done ****** all about it in opposition since 2010? Just like the tories did ****** all about it in opposition between 2000-2010.
But keep on voting for higher house prices and trying to deflect this by accusing anyone who reminds you of your slavish tribalistic willful blindness to labour as being a Tory voter.
-
39 minutes ago, msi said:
I don't care about personal politics. You choose who you want but you hold them accountable - that is the sibling to Democracy.
M*rons like Cocha and the usual squad are quick to fire on Labour but have amnesia on how the Tories have scr*wed the country. When you call them out they fall back to ThEy ArE aLl ThE sAme KlEpToCrAtIc DuOpOlY cr*p. Nothing but Tory shills and I call them out.
In which case you aren't anywhere near as clever as you think you are. I despise the Tories as much as Labour, but your tribalistic obsession with Labour prevents you seeing this. You are on a forum called house price crash, you want lower house prices, history proves both sides of the Westminster Party are equally culpable for the 2 decade housing ponzi scheme we are suffering, but your tribalism to Labour prevents you accepting this. So you just try and deflect to defend your slavish support of Labour. It's not too late to better yourself though, but I very much doubt you are capable. Just go stick your tick in the red box of the KDoW party and keep whining about house prices like a re-tard.
Oh and perhaps throw out another 'I'm putting you on ignore' lie of a post 😂
And just another reminder, in case your selective short term memory is in overdrive, I've never voted tory and I've never voted Labour 🙂
-
1 hour ago, Homeless Millionaire said:
Why all the Toryboi stuff? Is he a Tory voter? Who do you vote for or not at all? Who would you like to vote for if they existed?
For some strange reason, it really irks this particular poster that I've never voted tory. They appear to think that by insinuating I have, it will somehow change the fact that I haven't for them, but unfortunately for msi, no matter how much they wish it to be so, the fact remains that I've never voted tory. They themselves are a tribalistic labour supporter and won't ever vote for anyone else, so perhaps it is something to do with this, although quite what, only their warped mind could explain.
Voting photo ID
in House prices and the economy
Posted
Considering all the things you need ID for to participate in society in a meaningful way, this, if true, should be very concerning indeed.