Farage being smeared.

You are not thinking this through. If it is based on how people voted at the last election then the polls suggest that a random level of support of at least 15% of those people would be voting Reform so any audience should include a level of potential Reform voters. So there would be expected to be  44% Tories, 32% Labour, a host of others and about 3% Green. In the 44% and 32% there would be a significant change to Reform of an unknown number in each and that some of the Tory total moved to Labour. The Green chap got a few claps and there was a sympathetic view on his answers if not outright support, so the Green Lobby was represented. If there were about 100 in the audience then unless there was a selection the chances of that audience picking up Green supporters of more than one or two was pretty slim. However the chances of picking up Reform voters should have been pretty high especially as it was indicated that they researched voting intentions of the audience before the programme. Farage received no claps for any answer, all questioners were hostile, the 'impartial chairwoman' was hostile and he received no support at the end. If you believe that was not a 'rigged' audience and programme then you are in no way au fey with statistics and are allowing your own bias to colour your view. For clarity I also believe that Jeremy Corbyn received biased press coverage and questions against him during his period of Labour leadership and in no way do I support Jeremy Corbyn.

As regards Parker we also have to look at how it came about. The first day on the job for both Channel 4 and for Andrew Parker resulted in a scoop for Channel 4. There was no wasted legwork of boring days following many canvassers, they managed the whole range of accusations against Reform in one man, in one day in one outing. As I said you are not au fey with statistics. Then we find out he is an actor, he was playing an acting part on the day as it was not his everyday voice. Sometimes despite people wishing it to be otherwise 2 plus 2 does in fact equal 4.

Yes, it's amazing how out of proportion an offence is blown the more that the social unacceptablity is rammed down everyone's throats.

An interesting example of social conditioning.

As you quite rightly mention, objectively speaking, the actual act of racism is galaxies away from any one of multiple atrocities that get no airtime and no condemnation from perpetual virtue signallers. I've repeatedly wondered about the mindset of people who are willing to protest, cause chaos on the streets and denegrate their fellow citizens in the name of 'fighting racism', yet aren't remotely interested in demonstrating about far more serious issues causing direct, tangible suffering. 

And that's before we even get to the fact that the vast majority of accusations of racism are baseless nonsense. 

It's also interesting how people who behave as though bigotry is the single worst act anyone can commit, are happy to accuse anyone of it at anytime with absolutely no basis for doing so. I mean, surely if it's such a grave offence, then the burden of proof that an act has been commited should be extraordinarily high, no?

Yet we constantly see the exact opposite. Accusations thrown around like confetti with no basis whatsoever. Surely a sign that the accusers are either ignorant of their own standards, stupid, or riddled with agenda?

Then there's the hypocrisy of their own smears. Boomer, gammon, white privilege etc etc. The prejudice of people belonging to a pre-defined group. Literal bigotry (or at least it was until they attempted to re-define the word).

It's actually quite remakable how mainstream society just accepts these contradictions without discussion or analysis, basically because so few people are emotionally capable of it.

Yeah, the Channel 4 thing was typical gutter journalism and an example of how out of touch the media and political establishment are with the working class. When trying to de-rail someone you would surely aim high, and get a plausible representation of an unforgiveable sin.

They believe that sin to be casual racism. Speaks volumes.

Their portrayal of it (ie, the way they believe that all the unwashed racists discuss these issues) was also laughably out of touch. All it takes is for one of them to venture north of the M25 and set foot in a pub, and they can see how hammy their script was.

Do you even follow the polls? Labour have been on a downward trend since the beginning of the year, and have dropped off a cliff since Farage took over Reform. Labour's advantage of the Tories goes back at least 2 years, they've done nothing but trend downwards ever since. The only reason they've maintained their advantage is because the Tories have also done nothing but trend down. Labour winning this election will be like winning a sack race where you don't have to use a sack. And Labour are STILL falling over their own feet in a clumsy attempt to get over the line. 

Meanwhile, Reform have been surging upwards since well before Christmas last year, and since Farage tookover, they're almost vertical. They're the only party with any momentum whatsoever, and it's perfectly timed. If you think no-one's scared of him then you're absolutely deluded.

General election 2024 poll tracker: How do the parties compare?


Performance over the past year; 

Reform +10%
Labour -5%
Tories -7%

Both, but that shows that gutter journalism exists and works against those who have a different view than 'the establishment' however you define that. Corbyn had lies made up about him unfortunately for him he was easy meat, the BNP had lies made up about them and they were easy meat as well. It is now becoming harder to find the muck on Farage and Reform so there is a hint of desperation. The three candidates disowned did not say anything worse than the still a member Labour candidate for Clacton or indeed that  still a member  Mz Abbott.