Your 6 most disliked UK politicians active today

Scroll to see replies

Dennis Skinner - Done nothing in 40 years except insult George Osborne a few times. completely out of touch with everyone in britain.

Too true. Pretty sure normal people in Britain are insulting George Osborne much more often than that

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2014/01/08/15-tweets-to-george-osborne-that-will-cheer-you-up-nsfw/

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qqM0Ube0oLs

Also, heaven only knows what the thought process is in necromancing this 2 week old thread just to say this.

Reply 81

jammy4041

Jacob Rees-Mogg
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Jacob Rees-Mogg

Seriously, it's

Jacob Rees-Mogg, (obvious reasons).

Michael Gove (for what he did to screw education).

Ed Miliband (since David should have been leader; Labour have no hope with him, at all...and also, he has no left-wing credentials at all).

David Cameron (I just hate him...I have personal sympathy for him sure, but as a leader he's just leading the country to ruin...and the amount of u-turns has been annoying).

George Osborne (I just fundamentally disagree with his financial policies).

Jeremy Hunt (rewarded for failure with the most important job in the cabinet).

Nigel Farage...technically, he shouldn't count because he's not even an MP or anything...

(whoops...turns out he is. Add a seventh...consider it a bonus. )

I hate him not for his European policies even though I would respectfully disagree...wait...the fact that he has the sheer audacity to complain about EU fishing policies when he was on the fisheries commission and didn't even go to meetings, meaning that any shred of credibility he had went out of the window...

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 82

excaliburnus

I'm not really that fond of Barack Obama

Reply 83

Jammy Duel

Original post by jammy4041

Jacob Rees-Mogg, (obvious reasons).

I disagree with most of the rest of what you had to say, but at least you gave reason, but what are the "obvious" reasons that one of the finest members of the house is so bad?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 84

jammy4041

Original post by Jammy Duel

I disagree with most of the rest of what you had to say, but at least you gave reason, but what are the "obvious" reasons that one of the finest members of the house is so bad?

Original post by Baby Milo

So you want him to go to meetings where he has no influence on the overall outcome because of the makeup of the EU and cost the taxpayer more money? That doesn't make sense at all. Farage knew that it'd be a waste of time and to be quite honest, someone who hates the EU should not take part in any votes or play privy to the system at all. They should continue to grow until the anti-EU sentiment is large enough and then try to kill it from within.

I just want him to do his job!! To be on a commission is a privilege, that most MEPs will not get. And fundamentally, any representation of UK interests in an intimate setting would be better than no representation at all. He let down the UK interest, big time, by not doing more.

If he did all that he could, and then criticized the fishing policies, would be fair game. Honestly, even I couldn't argue against that. However, giving up before he even tries, is lamentable.

Also, look at the amount of expenses that Farage has claimed, for the privilege of doing jack in the EU Parliament. I've never understood that UKIP logic to be honest. "Pay us expenses for going to Brussels...and yet we won't even go into the Parliament building." Or, "we hate the EU Parliament....but their system of expenses allows us to campaign in the UK."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-euro-3012708
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/1993d000-c48d-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3RKKgjomB
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/85563e82-8f44-11e3-be85-00144feab7de.html#axzz3RKKgjomB
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/may/24/mps-expenses-ukip-nigel-farage

Work within the system to get as much influence as possible to get the best possible representation for your EU Parliamentary constituency.

Even if I was to agree that a UKIPer should not vote in things...(I don't)...they're doing themselves a disservice. It's counter productive -- it give the rest of the EU Parliament, which you know, would then hate UKIP, to then vote in their own interest, which may or may not be in the UK interest. I'd instead argue that they should vote as a defense of UK interests, taking what they can get on the system, to help bring about that 'independence' which they apparently want.

And well, it then becomes a case of sour grapes, when they get the 'wrong' result.

UKIP policy comes from the top, and well...All these things are overlooked in the rise to UKIP. I hate UKIP and everything it stands for, to be honest...so you know...I will hate its leader.

Reply 85

jammy4041

Original post by Baby Milo

No point discussing this then as it'll be impossible to have a rational and logical debate when your hatred runs so deep. However, I must say that to anybody with political understanding UKIP's stance makes total sense. They're opposed to the EU setup as a whole so do not want to take part in it. They put the money they obtain from it into promoting the anti-EU campaign. UKIP have been very smart in fact as they're using EU money to promote an anti-EU sentiment. If you can't see that for a party with their views that this is the logical thing to do then I despair.

I respect you point that as a party, UKIP are "principled" enough to not partake in the EU Parliament, and that representation in the EU Parliament runs counter to what they believe in. Yes, leadership comes from the top, and if you see that as a positive, it follows that you may have a positive opinion of Farage as an active politician.

I can leave my hatred at the door. I hate the Tories, Lib-Dems, New Labour and UKIP equally, but, again, I just don't think it's in the national interest, to do nothing. Yes, the way the parties are structured in the EU Parliament, UKIP would struggle to get representation, in the grand scheme of things.

For the record, this applies to all UK parties. Go to Brussels and give the UK the representation it deserves! At least try!!

But its UKIP's militant hostility to working within the system, to further the national interest, which, you know, is sort of their raison d'etre as a MEP, I have to strongly disagree as working within the national interest. The Tories may not exactly like the EU Parliament policies, but to their credit...they at least work within the system. Then when the EU comes up with a ruling that is not to their liking, at least they tried to represent the national interest.

Even considering the make up of the parties...UKIP are so insignificant in the EU Parliament that the rest of the parliament could potentially run roughshod over UK interests. They may or may not have something that would be in the UK interests...but it's annoying to hear parties criticize policies of a parliament, when they

However, if UKIP really was opposed to the "evil" EU and everything...it makes no sense to claim travel expenses, not represent UK interests, and plow it into campaigning. Farage has enough connections to fund a campaign without resorting to using expense money.

By the way...I'm so glad that Nigel had the foresight to not attend commission meetings...considering what he has personally claimed in expenses. (however...what was before, during and after his tenure on the commission, is overlooked). Maybe conservatives do it too...or even other MEPs, of other party affiliations.

I'd rather, as a constituent , that they used expense money for the purposes for which it was designed -- and which all parliamentary expenses are designed to do -- represent constituent interests.

Not campaigning.

It's just the sense of entitlement and corruption that obscene amounts of expense claims have to be associated with....at all levels.

I appreciate that without expenses, we would end up with an entire parliament of Jacob Rees-Moggs (:O)...so some sort of salary or expenses or both is needed...however, I consider what UKIP and others do to be abuse of the system. If it's right that Parliament (EU, UK or whatever) gives out expenses, then its representatives...should...uh...represent. I don't think UKIP does that. You disagree...and I respect that.

Had she still been an active MP, I would have said Margaret Moran among my 6 MPs of dishonor...because she was known to have had the highest expenses claim, of all active MPs, as early as 2005...and quel suprise, her expense claimants, when it all became known, was among the highest. None of it was in the interest of Luton South, and it was just used for personal gain.. Makes it very hard to trust the Labour party when you realize they're all the same.

You're right though. I'm not an expert on EU, or even UK politics. US politics is much more my forte.

Reply 86

tariktarkan1907

The only reason you all despise George Galloway is because hes the only british politician that has the guts and nuts between his legs to speak the truth today in politics. Hes the only man who will actually talk the truth on every topic and the only man who freely lists the war crimes against humanity that the terrorist state Israel has been commiting against the palestinians, since they colonized, invaded the territory...forced over 800000 people to flee their homes and become refugees in neighboring arab states and anybody who refuses to leave was slaughtered
most of you will probably just laugh this off, thinking that Israel are the actual victims and you all also probably have it in your thick heads that this conflict has lasted during just YOUR lifetime
On question time this week, even tho BBC brought-together a zionistic anti-muslim audience just for that question that the panel knew hed defend in a heartbeat...even tho everybody in the room was against him, he still won the debate. Because when you bring facts to an arguement, your undoubtedly going to win and show the world whos speaking the truth.
On the debate, not one of those young english pricks said one valid point supporting the israelis or condemning any palestinian action....because its impossible to condemn palestine for anything when Israel are occupying and killing off their land since the ****ing 1950s!!!!

You condemn Hamas for fireing rockets that have killed 20 people, and you dont condemn the israelis whatsoever for slaughtering 2419 innocent people on the beaches of Gaza...its just pathetic. Its simply because none of you value the blood of palestinians like you value the blood of israelis.

Reply 87

jammy4041

Original post by tariktarkan1907

George Galloway has more stones in his little finger, than most MPs combined.
He's one of my favorite MPs because at least he was principled enough to stand up what he believes in. He's outspoken and sure, he could put things more tactfully...but more often than not, he has a point.

Reply 88

tariktarkan1907

one thing id like to make very clear, is being anti Semitic and anti-israel...are two very complete different things. Being anti-Semitic is when your against the jewish religion, which is very wrong an should be condemned, just like being anti-christian, anti-islam...whatever! By the rate our society is going we will be reversing all the love and peace guys like MLK put into this world.
Being anti-israel is standing up against the true terrorist state, that has ruined the lives of million since it came into existance, you think im wrong, go read up on how they came about. How minister of affairs Balfour gave a promise to a bunch of zionist atheistic jews from europe the right to another people's country. Go read on how the israeli settlers forced innocent palestinians out of their homes, forcing them to leave not having enough time to take their belongings with them. Go read on how their villages were burnt down and over 750000 were slaughtered, who refused to leave their homeland. Israel is able to get away with these kind of crimes against humanity, and everybody in the west is too busy partying, drinking, having a jolly-time to give a damn about the people suffering in Gaza. George galloway is the only politician of this country that full-heartidly stands against this disgusting state...so yes, your damn right im gonna support him in the election!
People act like muslim countries are so 'anti'semitic', why dont you go read on how when the Umayyad empire lost its control of Granada, and were forced out of spain in the 7-8th century..the muslims were forced back to their Arab states, and the Jews when with them. They lived in peace and harmony for centuries!!! Until the rise of CHRISTIAN anti-semitism in europe arose...these zionists, manipulated the Jews that the muslims were the true aggressors, which is completely false.

I know some of you will say Israelis are entitled to that land called PALESTINE...because of what? Because they ruled it 3000 years ago lmao, give me a break. In that case, me as a Turk, feels he is entitled to all the ottoman land that was lost in the 18-19th centuries. If the Jewish people are entitled the holy land, then why did Balfour, offer countries like Argentina, Uganda, Seychelles, Madagascar etc//and many other jewish populated regions or lands that had crippled? Israelis, have absolutely no right to palestinian land whatsoever. Britain simply being the first people, gave land illegally and immorally to a second people, the land that belonged to a third people(PALESTINE).

Reply 89

tariktarkan1907

Original post by jammy4041

yeah exactly, well said mate

Reply 90

VannR

Original post by Baby Milo

Lets be honest, he doesn't blame immigrants for everything and you've fallen for typical yellow journalism. If anything, Farage is blaming the establishment for everything including mass immigration. He is not blaming immigrants for taking advantage of the systems in place. He's even said if he were an immigrant he'd do the same thing. If you dislike Farage for being anti-establishment then that's fair enough. I think he's the best of a bad bunch personally, he's not afraid to speak his mind and rock the boat. However, I dislike him because he continues to parade around like Jack the lad but in reality, if UKIP gain any power, he will do just as Nick Clegg did and serve his own interests. It's the way of the politician and it's in their nature.

And this is why UKIP, for all their appeals to 'common sense' and 'the working man' which have garnered them so much support, even though these actually rather dubious bases for national politics, they are still a part of the problem.

UKIP's position is a strategy that is being used in order to gain power and make money; it is about the people, but it is not for the people. In some ways, you must applaud them for exploiting a sizeable gap in the political 'market' for votes in recent times. Labour made themselves persona non grata with the 'working man' during the 2000's, and the Conservatives appear to have the ultimate goal of Britain in some sort of feudal system (I kid). UKIP has noticed this dissaffection and they are taking advantage of it.

If they get into power, all you shall see are claims of how 'things are harder than first thought', 'long-term solutions to long-term problems' and so forth while disappointingly little is actually done, while the UKIP elite fill their pockets.

Perhaps there is a silver lining: all this talk about 'the common man' and 'common sense' has had the effect of politicising people who may have felt in the past that the issues in the past where being discussed in a way that is out of touch with them. That is probably the only good thing that I can see about UKIP.

Reply 91

Jammy Duel

Original post by jammy4041

More of the way he comes across. On QT or whatever, I've always hated him...he is the first person I think of when it comes to the Tory Party. Aristocratic, does not think too highly of the poor, Eton educated etc...he is the very caricature of the Arch-Tory.
i.e. I don't like him because he sounds like a ****. Interesting that comes above actual policies to top the hate list

Reply 92

Davij038

Original post by jammy4041

Jacob Rees-Mogg

Ed Miliband (since David should have been leader; Labour have no hope with him, at all...and also, he has no left-wing credentials at all).

D.

Eh? David Miliband is a lot less left wing than his brother (although I agree he would have been better)

I also agree with you On Jacob Rees mogg- an odious, dishonest turd of a man.

Reply 93

Davij038

Original post by Jammy Duel

i.e. I don't like him because he sounds like a ****. Interesting that comes above actual policies to top the hate list

Well there's always this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/tory-backbench-mp-jacob-reesmogg-failed-to-declare-interests-9923362.html

Reply 94

Jammy Duel

Original post by Davij038

Well there's always this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/tory-backbench-mp-jacob-reesmogg-failed-to-declare-interests-9923362.html

Which part do you disagree with, furthering his own interests, which most politicians will be doing, or the failure to declare it?

Reply 95

Davij038

Original post by Jammy Duel

Which part do you disagree with, furthering his own interests, which most politicians will be doing, or the failure to declare it?

Failing to declare it. There is nothing wrong (In my view) with making money outside parliament so long as this does not intervene with your day job or could be seen as compromising themselves.

Failing to declare his links with the tobacco industry, could be an indication that he is not acting in his constituents interest when regarding matters such as plain packet cigarette packaging, for example.