The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

Are you still voting labour?

Right now, probably not no. It doesn't actually make any difference where I live in any case but right now I don't feel like voting for any of them.

[chrisp65]

nice thing about a moat, tory Lord Hogg 3rd Viscount Hailsham of Marlborough can stick cleaning it on his expenses...again

 

 

[a m ole]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

She's going with the moat option. 

And we must cut funding for the NHS and disability allowance to pay for it.

Edited May 3, 2017 by a m ole

[Demitri_C]

17 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Right now, probably not no. It doesn't actually make any difference where I live in any case but right now I don't feel like voting for any of them.

That's how I feel, been labour for years and the woman is absolutely hopeless 

[TrentVilla]

3 hours ago, darrenm said:

Those who don't like him seem to be because of either the apparent links to the IRA which I still can't find any actual details about apart from being an active member of the peace process, his looks, or general I just don't like him. All of which is purely arbitrary and subjective. 

Well have you tried Google? I don't think anyone is saying he was a paid up balaclava wearing IRA member but you don't really have to look too far to see why some raise issue with his history on the topic. Now I'm not passing comment/judgment on this but I find it a little odd that you say you can't find any details about why some do.

As for the rest of the post I quote, I think its wrong to conclude that the only reason people are against him are because of the above, his looks or generally not liking him. I think that sort of belief is a part of where Labour are going wrong and frankly kidding themselves.

For example - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

Quote

The editorial board of a hard-Left magazine, of which Mr Corbyn was a member, wrote an article praising the Brighton bombing. In its article on the IRA attack, which almost wiped out Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, the editorial board of London Labour Briefing said the atrocity showed that “the British only sit up and take notice [of Ireland] when they are bombed into it.” 

According to an authoritative parliamentary reference work, Mr Corbyn was general secretary of the editorial board. He wrote the front-page story in the same issue of Briefing. 

The same edition of Briefing, for December 1984, carried a reader’s letter praising the “audacity” of the IRA attack and stating: “What do you call four dead Tories? A start.” 

It mocked Norman, now Lord, Tebbit, the trade secretary who was dug out of the rubble of the Grand Hotel, saying: “Try riding your bike now, Norman.”

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, dAVe80 said:

I'm a div, who doesn't know where to post stuff.

Happy to help

[TrentVilla]

17 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

That's how I feel, been labour for years and the woman is absolutely hopeless 

Not going to lie, I'm confused. You know May is on the blue team right?

[dAVe80]

15 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Happy to help

I don't use them now they've been privatised by the bloody Tories!

[darrenm]

24 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Well have you tried Google? I don't think anyone is saying he was a paid up balaclava wearing IRA member but you don't really have to look too far to see why some raise issue with his history on the topic. Now I'm not passing comment/judgment on this but I find it a little odd that you say you can't find any details about why some do.

As for the rest of the post I quote, I think its wrong to conclude that the only reason people are against him are because of the above, his looks or generally not liking him. I think that sort of belief is a part of where Labour are going wrong and frankly kidding themselves.

For example - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

You're actually quoting the telegraph as a fair source for information about Jeremy Corbyn?

Like I say, I can't find any actual details (e.g. from unbiased sources)

[TrentVilla]

1 minute ago, darrenm said:

You're actually quoting the telegraph as a fair source for information about Jeremy Corbyn?

Like I say, I can't find any actual details (e.g. from unbiased sources)

Its a bit of a common theme this, anything that doesn't fit your view is just dismissed out of hand.

When you stated you couldn't find "any actual detail" it quite clearly suggests there isn't anything to be found and the criticism from some is some figment of their anti Corbyn imagination. I'm simply pointing out a very quick Google turns up plenty of results, I simply picked the first one.

You can add the bias/unbiased caveat now if you wish and dismiss the source if you wish, but that wasn't the point you originally made which I was countering.

(You will also find article in the Independent should you care to look, that hot bed of right wing bias)

[darrenm]

10 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Its a bit of a common theme this, anything that doesn't fit your view is just dismissed out of hand.

When you stated you couldn't find "any actual detail" it quite clearly suggests there isn't anything to be found and the criticism from some is some figment of their anti Corbyn imagination. I'm simply pointing out a very quick Google turns up plenty of results, I simply picked the first one.

You can add the bias/unbiased caveat now if you wish and dismiss the source if you wish, but that wasn't the point you originally made which I was countering.

(You will also find article in the Independent should you care to look, that hot bed of right wing bias)

No need for the sneering sarcasm. Don't worry about replying.

[TrentVilla]

Just now, darrenm said:

No need for the sneering sarcasm. Don't worry about replying.

There is no sneering sarcasm, I simply pointed out why I thought you were wrong. 

[V01]

3 hours ago, Davkaus said:

I got the letter spam from my incumbent Labour MP today. 

Predictably, but depressingly, more than half of a letter is about how the choice is 'him or a Tory'.  And laying in to the Tory government's hard Brexit, when on each occasion I've written to him about Brexit, he's replied with a stock "will of the British people" response. word removed. 

I think I had the same letter, it included a survey about who I'm voting for and what my issues within the constituency are. I'm sending it back to let him know I'm voting other.

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

Not going to lie, I'm confused. You know May is on the blue team right?

I meant my local MP mate. 

[HanoiVillan]

4 hours ago, wazzap24 said:

Labour could still win this, but they won't do what needs to be done. 

Dan Jarvis + some good old political bullshite and this would all turn around. 

No, it wouldn't. 

There isn't enough time, and the Labour party doesn't appoint leaders randomly or based on who has the most tabloid-appealing backstory. 

[TrentVilla]

10 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I meant my local MP mate. 

Ah! 

[Seat68]

Today locally I will be definitely be voting Labour. Come the GE I will probably vote the same way. Less definite as if there is an independent that fits my views then I will go that way. Corbyn is the reason. 

[PompeyVillan]

Labour are by no means perfect, has any political party ever been? I won't defend everything anyone perceives as negative about Labour.

However, for me, they are the only viable alternative to Tory austerity. For everyone.

Whether we leave the EU is neither here nor there to me. Whatever happens we get hit in the pockets. We're poorer because of it. And, yes, it's definitely happening.

Labour are offering an increase in public service spending across the board. I should imagine they'll have the backing of most of the doctors, nurses, teachers and police across the country. What does that tell you?

And they're funding it by reversing a tax break given by the conservatives to their wealthy mates. Nothing radical, just fair.

 

[Demitri_C]

29 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said:

.

Labour are offering an increase in public service spending across the board. I should imagine they'll have the backing of most of the doctors, nurses, teachers and police across the country. What does that tell you?

And they're funding it by reversing a tax break given by the conservatives to their wealthy mates. Nothing radical, just fair.

 

That they are likely to bankrupt the country again 

Have not heard absolutely anything creditable from any in labour how they intend to pay for any of these things  

[meregreen]

8 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

That they are likely to bankrupt the country again 

Have not heard absolutely anything creditable from any in labour how they intend to pay for any of these things  

Oh please, not this old chestnut again, it was the Tory bankers who "bankrupted" the nation. Public finances under Labour were healthier than they had been for decades. Don't equate private debt from the casino banking industry with public finances. Incidentally if the Tories had been in power during the global banking crisis, chances are things would have been much worse as they were strong advocates of less regulation in the sector. Let's stick to facts shall we and not peddle Daily Heil bullshit.