Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 40k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • steviewevie

    4685

  • crazyfool1

    3377

  • Ozanne

    3374

  • zahidf

    2173

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think on a music festival message board it’s a legitimate question to ask. It doesn’t suggest the OP doesn’t give a shit about anything else. Of course there are much bigger things to be worrie

I can’t get the following thought out of my head and it’s making the old bottom lip wobble: Wednesday evening at the 2021 festival, the sun has been out all day but temperature not stifling, perf

Howdy folks...sorry I'm late to the party! Was in a meeting and could see notifications coming up! So, looks very promising indeed. The vaccinated group not only didn't develop severe disease, bu

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Out of interest, what decision is that? I’d argue a certain decision should’ve been made in 2008 but the timing doesn’t add that we mean the same thing. 

Apologies, I actually meant 2015 when he was elected leader (no idea why I defaulted to 2010 when typing it out!). It was a shock and controversial at the time, and has now been proven to have been a disaster quite frankly.

What issue are you referring to in 2008? Let’s be honest though, there have been many cock ups along the way we could choose from. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually when Corbyn came in it felt like a breath of fresh air, someone with principles who wasn't a career politician in a smart suit...he was pretty popular in those early days. It was during 2018/2019 when all went to pot, he just showed poor leadership over brexit, and over this antisemitism thing...and in the end, with the help of the right wing press, he was really disliked by a lot of people, unpatriotic etc. McDonnell was definitely more pragmatic, and came across so much better in interviews, wouldn't get all snappy and squeaky like Corbyn did when he got asked difficult questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

You also think California is going to vote Republican next week so we should probs take that with a pinch of salt 

Sorry @Matt42 but that made me properly chuckle :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

So what did Corbyn actually say that was "antisemitic"?

He said the problem was overstated in the press and 'exagerated'. The report said that sort of language is anti-semtiic

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, priest17 said:

Jezza made sense

no, he never did.

A political leader who hopes to get elected needs to share the values of the country, rather than have completely different opinions about the country, its ideals, and its place in the world.

Corbyn's baggage was never going to sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SheffJeff said:

Out of interest has there been a similar type of enquiry into the Tories islamaphobia?

It's certainly been called for, not sure what the progress is.

And that's one of the reasons why Starmer and Labour have to follow up on the recommendations.  They haven't been able to hold them to account over that because the anti-Semitism case has cast such a long shadow, and it's easy for the Tories to tell Lab to get their own house in order first.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SheffJeff said:

Out of interest has there been a similar type of enquiry into the Tories islamaphobia?

Of course not, but that's not going to be treated as a major issue for all the reasons you already know - the Tories make no serious attempt at being inclusive whereas for Labour it's supposed to be a selling point. And because much of the press and many Tory supporters are just as Islamophobic as the party, if not more so.

Huge double standards of course, which I assume is your point, but not something we can do anything about in the foreseeable future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, incident said:

Of course not, but that's not going to be treated as a major issue for all the reasons you already know - the Tories make no serious attempt at being inclusive whereas for Labour it's supposed to be a selling point. And because much of the press and many Tory supporters are just as Islamophobic as the party, if not more so.

Huge double standards of course, which I assume is your point, but not something we can do anything about in the foreseeable future.

The country as a whole takes a much dimmer view of anti semitism 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Actually when Corbyn came in it felt like a breath of fresh air, someone with principles who wasn't a career politician in a smart suit...he was pretty popular in those early days. It was during 2018/2019 when all went to pot, he just showed poor leadership over brexit, and over this antisemitism thing...and in the end, with the help of the right wing press, he was really disliked by a lot of people, unpatriotic etc. McDonnell was definitely more pragmatic, and came across so much better in interviews, wouldn't get all snappy and squeaky like Corbyn did when he got asked difficult questions.

The main issue was that he massively alienated a lot of the centre Labour voters - whom make up a large share of the parties support - resulting in them losing seats they never would have dreamed of losing previously. 
There were a lot of people who simply didn’t like Corbyn as a person and instead voted Tory (but don’t get me started on these fools).
It’s massively underrated how important the leaders are when it comes to winning votes - how they act on a personal level rather than any of their parties politics. Boris won a majority election on the fact he was a ‘funny and charming guy’ alone - he really was the golden ticket for them. I think a sensible opposition like Burnham or now Kier can drag them back to mount a genuine challenge next time around. Corbyn was not the right man for the job, and I believe it was a genuine misread of the publics opinion at the time. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, st dan said:

Apologies, I actually meant 2015 when he was elected leader (no idea why I defaulted to 2010 when typing it out!). It was a shock and controversial at the time, and has now been proven to have been a disaster quite frankly.

What issue are you referring to in 2008? Let’s be honest though, there have been many cock ups along the way we could choose from. 

I could be slightly out with the year but of Gordon Brown had a General Election within 6-12 months of taking over from Blair then he would’ve won the election. Then nothing else would’ve happened. However he waited as he was a cautious person and that cost him due to various things that happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I could be slightly out with the year but of Gordon Brown had a General Election within 6-12 months of taking over from Blair then he would’ve won the election. Then nothing else would’ve happened. However he waited as he was a cautious person and that cost him due to various things that happened.

Yeah, if you’re playing the Butterfly Effect that’s where it really went wrong. He would have won and then had until late 2012. Would Cameron have been there? Austerity wouldn’t have been as harsh and Labour may have been able to avoid all the blame for the downturn. However I still think Brexit would have become an issue at some point. Either it would have completely split the stories or we’d still have had a referendum but with a more competent Labour Party/Remain campaign.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, st dan said:

Boris won a majority election on the fact he was a ‘funny and charming guy’ alone

nah, not only that.

Plenty knew he was a charlatan and a liar, but they still aligned with his values more than they did Corbyn's.

At the end of the day your or my opinion on whether they made a bad choice doesn't mean shit, cos it was their decision where to place their votes, and it doesn't take a genius to know that Corbyn's views were waaaay outside of mainstream opinion on far too many topics.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I could be slightly out with the year but of Gordon Brown had a General Election within 6-12 months of taking over from Blair then he would’ve won the election. Then nothing else would’ve happened. However he waited as he was a cautious person and that cost him due to various things that happened.

The polls swung blue in October 2007 a few months after Gurdon Broon was elected Labour leader and PM, but I reckon he could have called an election in the summer of 2007 and Cameron would have won. He never had the charisma to win over middle England in an election campaign. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, st dan said:

The main issue was that he massively alienated a lot of the centre Labour voters - whom make up a large share of the parties support - resulting in them losing seats they never would have dreamed of losing previously. 
There were a lot of people who simply didn’t like Corbyn as a person and instead voted Tory (but don’t get me started on these fools).
It’s massively underrated how important the leaders are when it comes to winning votes - how they act on a personal level rather than any of their parties politics. Boris won a majority election on the fact he was a ‘funny and charming guy’ alone - he really was the golden ticket for them. I think a sensible opposition like Burnham or now Kier can drag them back to mount a genuine challenge next time around. Corbyn was not the right man for the job, and I believe it was a genuine misread of the publics opinion at the time. 

No he didn’t. He won because the north felt ignored over their Brexit vote and wanted it done, whilst the south was very afraid of a far left PM that would strip away at their hard earned assets. I voted for Labour because I was very pro second referendum but I completely get why Boris won a thumping majority. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MEGABOWL said:

I don’t think he will. It’s never his fault.

The bit I don't get is how he can't look at the bigger picture and go "you know what, I think this is all bollocks but we need to find a way to unit and really capitalise on the fact that Johnson is turning everything he touches to shit".

Nope. Let's keep the infighting going and give them room to breathe.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

The polls swung blue in October 2007 a few months after Gurdon Broon was elected Labour leader and PM, but I reckon he could have called an election in the summer of 2007 and Cameron would have won. He never had the charisma to win over middle England in an election campaign. 

Unless the polls were way off there was a big window where Brown would have either won a small majority (remember this was pre-Crash) or been able to form a Government with the Libs.

 

2007 polls Wiki

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Quark said:

The bit I don't get is how he can't look at the bigger picture and go "you know what, I think this is all bollocks but we need to find a way to unit and really capitalise on the fact that Johnson is turning everything he touches to shit".

Nope. Let's keep the infighting going and give them room to breathe.

The big thing that turned me against him at the time was when we had that shot at a vote of no confidence and he insisted on being leader, despite the fact it was clear nobody would allow him near power temporarily because of concerns he might not give it back.

Between that, backing the election last december and even running in it when it was clear he had no chance, he did more for the no deal Brexit cause than any Tory 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

don't think Harding has anything much to do with it.

There's a woman (don't know her name but not Harding) who's in charge of managing the roll-out, to a criteria set by someone else (might be harding but don't think so).

Top of the roll-out list is care home staff and residents (starting with the oldest), which I feel is wrong; I reckon it should be NHS health workers first as there'll be a bit of 'wastage' from doing the oldies first.

(I'm not trying to mean to oldies. I just think it's a bit weird to suddenly put lives at the top of the list rather than 'protect the nhs').

Kate Bingham - please be excellent in your job and prove you weren’t appointed because you are married to Alexander Jesse Norman Conservative MP serving as Financial Secretary to the Treasury

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I could be slightly out with the year but of Gordon Brown had a General Election within 6-12 months of taking over from Blair then he would’ve won the election. Then nothing else would’ve happened. However he waited as he was a cautious person and that cost him due to various things that happened.

Pretty much spot on. He bottled the election and it cost him dearly. Seems like he likely would have won it too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...