The Poolie Bunker

50/50 Snowy, love my footy and my politics both very interesting topics nowadays.

I don’t follow any TV Channels or read newspapers, YouTube provides left wing, right wing and centralist journalists who opinions are not governed who ever they are employed by.

No they're all neutral apolitical philanthropic commentators aren't they?

[url][/url]

Obviously above your intelligence levels Sussex, stick with the Dandy and the Beano or whatever rag you read, the fella shows it like it is in the real world by posting interviews. His last vlog had over 10000 views and over 400 comments, you must be a very quick reader to take them all in. In fact his latest one about Braverman really exposes her, I bet she wishes she never joined Reform.

https://youtu.be/g0hdZmWHyFU?si=b9CpAgzjbaXp3lRs

Political Custard and the real world are 2 very different things.

Out of interest I asked Gemini the question "is Political Custard a serious source of information" and this was the response.

No, Political Custard is not a serious, objective source of news or information. It is a politically partisan, left-leaning, and satirical commentary channel that operates primarily across [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/inmynewsfeed/v ... 494558402/) and other social media platforms [Political Custard](https://www.facebook.com/inmynewsfeed/p ... 154139953/).
Key characteristics of the channel include:

* Political Satire and Commentary: The channel frequently uses memes, satire, and heavy commentary to mock right-wing politicians and movements, particularly Reform UK and its supporters Political Custard.
* Highly Subjective Framing: Videos and posts are heavily edited to push a specific progressive narrative and are not intended to be a neutral, balanced source of political reporting Political Custard.
* Use of Clickbait: The channel often utilizes sensationalized and hyperbolic language in its video titles and captions to generate engagement and stir up political reactions Political Custard.

While it may express opinions that align with some viewers, it should be categorized as an entertainment and activist page rather than a reliable, factual journalistic outlet. For serious and verified UK political coverage, you should look to established news organizations with editorial oversight, such as the BBC News or major newspapers like The Guardian. [1]

[1] [https://www.facebook.com](https://www.facebook.com/inmynewsfeed/v ... 662395025/)

Jamie's real world. Says it all.

Not questioning your ‘love’ for the topics, just the ratio on here.

Dear me PTID having to turn to AI to post replies now, haven’t you a mind of your own or just lost for words ?

Why is that, he post clips from real time interviews not A1 generated like one of your recent posts.

You only read the news you approve of, which isn’t news, you’re just someone agreeing with those who share your views.
You need to widen your news sources and actually read views you don’t like.

Where've I claimed or even intimated that the AI description of Political Custard is my own opinion?
I, obviously mistakenly, thought it might cause you to be a bit more open minded about the truth and validity of the source of much of your misinformation.
I don't believe everything that I read on the internet, whereas you seem to be assisting that every link you post to this partisan political site must be true.

He’s believing what he wants to believe, so he only reads what he agrees with.
Like some Victorian preacher, he sticks to his beliefs and never compromises his dogma.
A man who cannot change his mind, has no use for that mind.

somebody should tell the media that when politics come up. changing you mind is called a U turn as if changing your mind is bottom of the list in what you should ever do.

Nothing wrong with changing your mind when you realise it's absolutely clear you're doing the wrong thing.
Starmer's problem was that he never actually thought out what or which policies to introduce or amend before implementation, if he had he'd have been pretty much sitting pretty for his full term.
So many piss poor decisions made without any impact assessment or even "reading the room of public opinion and needs".
No doubt he'll be given a substantial pay off, pension, and a cushy high paying job somewhere within the EU or WEF whilst sitting in the HoLs.

My algorithms on YouTube highlight varying political topics, you obviously don’t read or want to understand or just baiting me which I think you do most of the time Snowy. Many journalists right, left wing and centralist not controlled by their employers. Many other interesting topics, a couple I watched recently was the story about Perkins Engines now owned by Caterpillar and last night about the Germans advancing into Russia in WW2.

Look after yer ‘algorithms’ especially if they get itchy…..don’t scratch em…Starmer did and look where he’s ended up

A lot of the posters in the comment sections aren't the full shilling..You must .have noticed this,Jamie?

He also posts heavily edited interviews to promote his own agenda.
I've no doubt that today when the rest of the media are commenting on Starmer's resignation and failings PC will be focussing on digging up dirt on Reform - just for balance!

Can you post an example of my heavily edited posts PTID, at least they are not AI generated.
Dig the dirt on Reform, strange how Farage only does speeches from a studio or outdoors with no one from the media
present, scared to death the £5 million will be brought up. Both Sky News and GB News had requested Reform presence but were rejected, A party spokesperson stated they skip these programs unless they receive an invitation from the BBC Laura Kuenssberg who would likely tickle the belly of who ever appeared like Ferrari did with Farage on LBC recently.
He also has the cheek to call for a GE when have of his MPs jumped parties from which they were elected from initially, tbh I think he would struggle to be re elected in Clacton.

I was referring to Political Custard posting heavily edited interviews.
As I said, the media are full of Starmer and turmoil in the Labour Party, Political Custard and Jamie are more focussed on casting aspersions on Reform and Farage.
I dare say there's hundreds of MPs who'd struggle to retain their seats if a GE was called, including most of the cabinet.
I think it's unprecedented that a man who wasn't even an MP a week ago is favourite to become PM and likely within weeks. In the circumstances Burnham needs to either commit to the present Manifesto, otherwise it's reasonable for the general populace, not just Farage, to call for a GE. And btw didn't Starmer call for a GE at every resignation of a Tory PM?

there are over 400 labour mp,s and i,m sure there will be a good number of them not happy that a newly elected member is being pushed in front of them all for the top job. its not as if he has some past record of some super politician and being a regional mayor is a very different job indeed.

I don’t heavily edit the Political Custard vlogs, I copy and paste the link from YouTube, anyway how do you know they are heavily edited and you said you never watch any YouTube stuff I post ?

I believe there was only 81 Labour MPs calling for Starmer to resign initially, there is no magic money tree but needs not to making any daft decisions like Labour did as soon as they were elected by a initially abolishing WFA. He will find very difficult to make any reforms to the benefits system as there be will opposition from the back benches.

the clock will be ticking more quickly after the summer recess for labour. another WFA type of error will possibly finishing them off as starmer himself never really recovered from rachels badly thought out error.

How will it finish Labour off, they are not going to call a G.E. with their current majority, Farage did himself no favours doing the rounds on Breakfast TV, even Ferrari give him a hard time, I think he was looking for support to call a G.E. but the interviews all reverted back to the £5 million gift and he kept digging a hole for himself citing various reasons what it was for.
https://youtu.be/z9q5bm8cijU?si=RRPdw6PuFy1Ni4Xr.

If Labour continue to make our lives worse then the prospect of real civil unrest could easily bring the government down.
They've already lost for a generation millions of voters from groups such as pensioners, farmers, small and medium business owners, etc
40% of their parliamentary term, gained with a huge majority (of a very low turn out), already squandered and wasted, it's a huge job for anyone to turn their fortunes around.
I'm way more worried about how my standard of living is in decline today than I am about what the next government regardless of party may or may not do in 3 years time.
Isn't there already some dirt flying about Burnham allegedly giving his wife's business Council contracts in Manchester, although I doubt Political Custard will have any opinion on that.

Of course the right wing MSM will be looking to dig the dirt on Burnham or who ever becomes the PM.

Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, has faced multiple accusations regarding conflicts of interest concerning both his wife's employment and campaign donors. However, there is no evidence that he directly awarded contracts to his wife's company according to an article in The Times.

There will never be enough civil unrest to bring the government down, how many people do you know who would take to the streets to start civil unrest, would you ?

There's no evidence that Farage has done anything wrong but you drone on about him constantly!
With the cost of living going through the roof, regardless of what the official figures tell us, businesses going to the wall at record rates, taxes the highest in peacetime memory, youth unemployment sky-rocketing, welfare costs rising, the tipping point is not too far away imo.

The damage now will probably be unrepairable.

I drone on about Farage because he caused the biggest economical disaster the U.K. has ever experienced which has caused many of the problems the U.K. is currently experiencing.
At the end of the day why didn’t he make it public knowledge about the £5 million and avoid all the controversy what it was for, one minute he says it was for security the next a reward for all his years in politics. I don’t recall any politician receiving huge sums of money for spending years in politics, the Parliamentary Standards Committee will decide.
Ben Habib publicly claimed that Nigel Farage took a £1 million bribe to stand the Brexit Party down in certain seats during the 2019 election in favor of the Conservative Party under Boris Johnson.
In response to these allegations, Nigel Farage and Reform UK have vehemently denied the claims and threatened to sue Ben Habib. Farage's legal team has sent formal letters to Habib demanding retractions, while Habib has publicly stated that he stands by his claims and is prepared to defend them.
As yet no action has been taken to Sue Habib.

So no evidence against Farage but you constantly post allegations as though they're proven facts, why?
The Brexit impact has been bigger than it should have been due to the fact that our politicians watered down the actuality of the Brexit we were offered.
Brexit was promoted by Farage, but supported by Boris, but even more importantly voted for by a majority and mostly by Red Wall voters. Democracy should have endured but wasn't allowed to thanks to our wet EU loving politicians who thought they knew better.
There's been bigger shocks, COVID had a massive impact (which would have been even bigger with longer lockdown favouring Starmer in charge, without any financial plans, god knows what Rachel's response would have been). The financial crash in 2008 with good old Gordon Brown selling off the gold reserves in the cheap and robbing our pensions alongside the fortune's spent on rescuing the banks, resulting in the infamous "there's no money left" note.

No evidence although he admitted receiving a £5 million ‘gift’ ?
Ben Habib made the allegations not me, Farage threatened to sue him weeks ago but there are still no proceedings currently.

Accepting a gift isn't breaking the rules unless it's proven is it? He hasn't been found guilty of breaking the rules so surely "innocent until proven guilty" instead of constantly making out that he is already proven guilty.
Didn't our dead man walking PM get found guilty of accepting a gifts without declaring them (suits, glasses, dresses, etc) but an reprimand and apology was offered as being suitable penance btw. Now does the size of the gift affect the punishment if he's found guilty, that's for the investigation panel to decide, does the poison you hold affect things PM against a man who hadn't even declared he was standing to be an MP at the time the gift was made?
A balanced view is reasonable, particularly when you never comment on the rule breaking and sometimes law breaking of our government representatives, strange that eh?

talking about gifts, i have always wondered what exactly the majority of the political elite got out of us being in the EU and doing everything they could to water brexit down and now pushing to get us back in. old enough to remember voting not to join the common market and felt closer to the politicians who felt the same both from the right and the left.

Starmer a few £1000s of gifts nowhere near £5 million, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has declared his gifts and hospitality, but his declarations have faced significant scrutiny and political backlash.