Don't vote Tory

[Mr.Tease]

Just now, babyblade41 said:

Boris Johnson is an idiot but it wasn't what I asked, even labour must see if you have to keep her on she is doing nothing to help the cause doing media interviews . I thought she was persuaded not to do anymore ?

Why does no one question whether Boris should be allowed to continue doing interviews? That clown represents us to the world.:

 

 

[babyblade41]

Still no one answered my question ...if you all think she is helping you then I'll butt out now, but I am surprised 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

Why pick her out? Do you think Boris Johnson is much better? (genuine question)

People happily point out that Boris is a cock. Is it impossible for a black woman to also be as much of a cock, and wrong for it to be mentioned?

I have a lot of sympathy for Abbott in many ways, because if I were a professional politician I suspect I'd be getting nailed for stuff i'd said or supported in the past (and caught out being hypocritical about, too) in much the same way as happens with Abbott (and because I know that of myself it's one of the reasons that I'm not)  ... but it doesn't stop me recognising that she is a cock, or that she's said plenty of things which very many have found offensive *only* for the words spoken, or that her manner is not not one that's found widely attractive.

She's apparently under instruction from Jezza to keep herself under a blanket for the rest of the campaign (tho gone against that at least once to put herself on TV against the Labour leadership's wishes). Why not ask Jezza himself why HE's picked her out?

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

Yeah thats a fair point. I would imagine that the proportion of students voting is higher than the proportion of young people voting as a whole (although I have no stats to back that up)

I read an anecdotal thing the other day from someone involved in a Uni's SU, that said there's plenty of students going around proclaiming big interest in Jezza but who haven't registered to vote. I also saw a similar claim from a student on TV (tho he was advocating for the tories, so might have been telling porkies).

How great those factors might be I've no idea, but I do reckon those anecdotals are in the right ball park to a large degree, and that the action won't match the noise.

[Scott129]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

People happily point out that Boris is a cock

It does concern me that people still seem to buy the whole loveable idiot act that Boris plays or that people still think of him as a "lad"

On Diane Abbott, I do agree that its very odd that Corbyn has chosen her as a key member of his cabinet. You would have thought given his own colourful past with the IRA, that he would want to distance himself from that, and not have a Home Secretary who has the same chequered history 

[Scott129]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I read an anecdotal thing the other day from someone involved in a Uni's SU, that said there's plenty of students going around proclaiming big interest in Jezza but who haven't registered to vote. I also saw a similar claim from a student on TV (tho he was advocating for the tories, so might have been telling porkies).

How great those factors might be I've no idea, but I do reckon those anecdotals are in the right ball park to a large degree, and that the action won't match the noise.

It would be a shame if thats true, but I can't say it would surprise me. I think there's certainly more of a stigma at university for not voting, which may result in people lying about whether they will be

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

It does concern me that people still seem to buy the whole loveable idiot act that Boris plays or that people still think of him as a "lad"

They don't any more. He's a dead man walking, and if May wins on Thursday you can be sure he's getting demoted.

 

4 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

On Diane Abbott, I do agree that its very odd that Corbyn has chosen her as a key member of his cabinet. You would have thought given his own colourful past with the IRA, that he would want to distance himself from that, and not have a Home Secretary who has the same chequered history 

McD, too.

Thing is, while there's not Corbyn's own words to nail him in the same way as there is for Abbott and McD, I know with certainty he was in the same place. I know that because at the time I was in that same place too.

The righteousness or not of that place can be argued over, but how acceptable those views are to the wider public can't really be. It was always going to bite Corbyn's arse.

[arcade fireman]

6 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

It does concern me that people still seem to buy the whole loveable idiot act that Boris plays or that people still think of him as a "lad"

On Diane Abbott, I do agree that its very odd that Corbyn has chosen her as a key member of his cabinet. You would have thought given his own colourful past with the IRA, that he would want to distance himself from that, and not have a Home Secretary who has the same chequered history 

It's entirely in keeping with Corbyn - him, McDonnell and Abbott have been political bedfellows since the 1980s. It would be very unusual for him not to give them prominent positions. Of course it's massively to the detriment of Labour's chances at this election unfortunately, but there you go. 

I guess in all fairness Andy Burnham was his Shadow Home Sec until the reshuffle in 2016, who would have been a much better bet. And Diane Abbott was shadowing for International Development - probably an area she's pretty knowledgable on. But still, there must have been better people than Diane Abbott - even among Corbyn's inner circle. 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

But still, there must have been better people than Diane Abbott - even among Corbyn's inner circle. 

it was a loyalty appointment and not a competence appointment.

It could be pointed out that he had few loyals available to him, but for a smarter and less vain man that would have told him something. Even IDS is smarter than Jezza about that.

Edited June 6, 2017 by eFestivals

[Scott129]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

They don't any more. He's a dead man walking, and if May wins on Thursday you can be sure he's getting demoted.

 

McD, too.

Thing is, while there's not Corbyn's own words to nail him in the same way as there is for Abbott and McD, I know with certainty he was in the same place. I know that because at the time I was in that same place too.

The righteousness or not of that place can be argued over, but how acceptable those views are to the wider public can't really be. It was always going to bite Corbyn's arse.

Yeah its a very easy stick to beat Corbyn with, and something which he can't really justify in the eyes of the public. It certainly would have been wise to distance himself from that position by not having visible reminders of his past, front and centre in his campaign

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Scott129 said:

Yeah its a very easy stick to beat Corbyn with, and something which he can't really justify in the eyes of the public. It certainly would have been wise to distance himself from that position by not having visible reminders of his past, front and centre in his campaign

or alternatively, it would have been wise of the members to not choose someone with Corbyn's past.

It's not like they weren't warned about the costs of his baggage and what that would mean towards a likely victory.

[Scott129]

7 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

I guess in all fairness Andy Burnham was his Shadow Home Sec until the reshuffle in 2016, who would have been a much better bet. And Diane Abbott was shadowing for International Development - probably an area she's pretty knowledgable on. But still, there must have been better people than Diane Abbott - even among Corbyn's inner circle. 

Given the current situation, the Home Office is probably the worst place to have Diane Abbot. I've seen it justified by saying she has already worked there before and has experience of it. While I think the importance of her forgetting facts and figures has been overstated, the public need someone who they trust and believe is competent as Home Secretary 

[Scott129]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

or alternatively, it would have been wise of the members to not choose someone with Corbyn's past.

It's not like they weren't warned about the costs of his baggage and what that would mean towards a likely victory.

It's a fair point. It would be interesting to see how someone with Corbyn's policies, but without his history, would have done in this election. And whether the media would have attacked him as viscously 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

I've seen it justified by saying she has already worked there before and has experience of it.

my ex has a MUCH bigger experience of working at the Home Office than Abbott has.

An administrative trainee is not training for the role of Home Secretary.

[Mr.Tease]

22 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

It does concern me that people still seem to buy the whole loveable idiot act that Boris plays or that people still think of him as a "lad"

On Diane Abbott, I do agree that its very odd that Corbyn has chosen her as a key member of his cabinet. You would have thought given his own colourful past with the IRA, that he would want to distance himself from that, and not have a Home Secretary who has the same chequered history 

When he first became leader most of the shadow cabinet resigned, those that didn't were kept on (Benn, Burnham). Then nearly everyone resigned again one year later and there were barely enough MP's willing to join the shadow cabinet so that's how we ended up with Abbott as Home Secretary. 

[eFestivals]

Just now, Scott129 said:

It's a fair point. It would be interesting to see how someone with Corbyn's policies, but without his history, would have done in this election. And whether the media would have attacked him as viscously 

A better candidate would have found many more buyers for the same message.

However, a better candidate might well be doing much worse now, because they wouldn't have made the same choices. It's quite possible that another leader might, for example, be trying to reverse brexit - and while I'd like that (a lot) I'm aware enough to recognise that would most probably been a much harder sell.

But then again, without the old fraud having delivered us the brexit he wants while pretending that he didn't do half-hearted (we now all know that he did), just about everything could be in a very different place and Jezza wouldn't have sold out the country for his own position.

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

When he first became leader most of the shadow cabinet resigned, those that didn't were kept on (Benn, Burnham). Then nearly everyone resigned again one year later and there were barely enough MP's willing to join the shadow cabinet so that's how we ended up with Abbott as Home Secretary. 

the resigned because they said Corbyn had sold out the country by really wanting brexit. Go on, tell me they were mistaken about that.

Like it or not, just about every single criticism that was raised about Corbyn has been proven true. The only one they've been wrong about is his election campaigning - tho it still counts for nothing if he loses, and when the opposition is as weak as May he's been gifted it anyway.

[Mr.Tease]

Just now, eFestivals said:

the resigned because they said Corbyn had sold out the country by really wanting brexit. Go on, tell me they were mistaken about that.

Like it or not, just about every single criticism that was raised about Corbyn has been proven true. The only one they've been wrong about is his election campaigning - tho it still counts for nothing if he loses, and when the opposition is as weak as May he's been gifted it anyway.

Corbyn has been going all out in the election and were still up to 10pts behind. You say he's a disaster yet somehow think he would have got a majority for brexit with his infinite powers of persuasion? I've never bought that narrative at all (that Corbyn caused brexit).

I don't really see how objectively you can say Corbyn critics were right about everything (there are learnings for both sides) , and especially when we haven't even had the election result yet. 

[Ommadawn]

56 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Why does no one question whether Boris should be allowed to continue doing interviews? That clown represents us to the world.:

 

 

At the moment.

[eFestivals]

Just now, Mr.Tease said:

Corbyn has been going all out in the election and were still up to 10pts behind. You say he's a disaster yet somehow think he would have got a majority for brexit with his infinite powers of persuasion? I've never bought that narrative at all (that Corbyn caused brexit).

He *chose* to keep hidden - to the extent that 50% of Labour voters thought that Labour had no stance towards brexit or were supporting brexit.

Would him doing the job properly have caused the very small swing necessary for a different result? We can only guess.

We don't have to guess at whether he did the job properly.

 

Just now, Mr.Tease said:

I don't really see how objectively you can say Corbyn critics were right about everything (there are learnings for both sides) , and especially when we haven't even had the election result yet. 

They said his baggage would cost Labour support. Even in this thread there's the proof of that.

They said he supports trots 'entryism'. He does.

They said he gives a free pass to the unacceptable (like anti-semitism). He has: have you read Lord Sham-i's report? Or noticed that the guy who caused the report to be written (who's name isn't even even mentioned in the report) got given the conference platform at Jezza's request?

There's so fucking much I can't even remember it all.

[Babylon sister]

Having  not had great health in past year, I've had a really great service from the nhs. I went to my go on friday and I'm sitting in the hospital now having been referred for tests. Just saying ....

[Ommadawn]

55 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

People happily point out that Boris is a cock. Is it impossible for a black woman to also be as much of a cock, and wrong for it to be mentioned?

I have a lot of sympathy for Abbott in many ways, because if I were a professional politician I suspect I'd be getting nailed for stuff i'd said or supported in the past (and caught out being hypocritical about, too) in much the same way as happens with Abbott (and because I know that of myself it's one of the reasons that I'm not)  ... but it doesn't stop me recognising that she is a cock, or that she's said plenty of things which very many have found offensive *only* for the words spoken, or that her manner is not not one that's found widely attractive.

She's apparently under instruction from Jezza to keep herself under a blanket for the rest of the campaign (tho gone against that at least once to put herself on TV against the Labour leadership's wishes). Why not ask Jezza himself why HE's picked her out?

I think we all know why

[eFestivals]

Just now, Babylon sister said:

Having  not had great health in past year, I've had a really great service from the nhs. I went to my go on friday and I'm sitting in the hospital now having been referred for tests. Just saying ....

but apparently it can't even provide a basic service, and here you are saying how well it's treated you.

Either you're a liar, or something else is.

[Teddington]

Not only is Abbot useless, she is also a racist.

If a white politician used the phrase  "black people like to play divide and rule"  then we wouldn't hear the end of it.

She, somehow, has survived.

Edited June 6, 2017 by Teddington

[Mr.Tease]

18 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Not only is Abbot useless, she is also a racist.

If a white politician used the phrase  "black people like to play divide and rule"  then we wouldn't hear the end of it.

She, somehow, has survived.

Look at some of the things Boris has said (bongo bongo land)  he also survived