bickster Posted January 9, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2020 Just now, peterms said: How ironic that three of them fell into the Corbyn / Marr Trap. A trap that shouts out "it's a trap" at the top of it's lungs as anyone approaches. (I still think Corbyn jumped into the trap but hey ho) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 36 minutes ago, peterms said: and that’s the real quiz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Spot the barrister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 10 minutes ago, LondonLax said: Spot the barrister. Spot the savvy operator. Starmer and Nandy are absolutely streets ahead of the others in terms of competency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 9, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, peterms said: 2 correct (or OK) answers Lewis and Starmer. Even I wouldn't give Corbz a 0 and I can't stand the bloke as a politician (leader), he's absolutely dreadful and proven so, now. 0 and 10 are ludicrous. Starmer's is an intelligent answer and Lewis is also OK by me (I'd score him about 2 or 3), but Lewis resigned his post because he disagreed with Corbz, and the score he gave recognises that and their disagreements, but doesn't slaughter him. It's essentially an honest answer reflecting a kind of reality. Starmer's could be used by a Tory to say "he wouldn't even say what he thought..." or "avoided answering" - not fair, but that's the way boliticians mostly are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 If you watch the Thornberry interview, she gives him 2/10 for his handling of anti-Semitism, 10/10 for bring people in to the party and enthusing them, and 0/10 for the handling of the election. Which averages out as a 4/10, although obviously the election should be weighted more heavily. 0/10 for his election performance is probably being generous to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Didn’t even get Thornberry’s name right, but Its a bit selective as Thornberry gave him 10/10 on principal and policy or something and qualified her 0/10 as being on election performance ... which is probably a higher score than he deserves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Snap @Risso 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 9 minutes ago, blandy said: 2 correct (or OK) answers Lewis and Starmer. Even I wouldn't give Corbz a 0 and I can't stand the bloke as a politician (leader), he's absolutely dreadful and proven so, now. 0 and 10 are ludicrous. Starmer's is an intelligent answer and Lewis is also OK by me (I'd score him about 2 or 3), but Lewis resigned his post because he disagreed with Corbz, and the score he gave recognises that and their disagreements, but doesn't slaughter him. It's essentially an honest answer reflecting a kind of reality. Starmer's could be used by a Tory to say "he wouldn't even say what he thought..." or "avoided answering" - not fair, but that's the way boliticians mostly are. My view is that playing daft games with imbeciles only encourages them. If we want a better media, we need to train them in better behaviour, by refusing to descend to their preferred level of imbecility. Like housetraining a dog. Starmer (not my preferred candidate) does so. Well done him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: I wonder how many... "I'm sorry, who are you again" answers he got? or even "What charity are you from?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 8 minutes ago, bickster said: I wonder how many... "I'm sorry, who are you again" answers he got? or even "What charity are you from?" "If you'd only called yesterday, Barry." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 5 minutes ago, bickster said: I wonder how many... "I'm sorry, who are you again" answers he got? or even "What charity are you from?" Obviously, the answer is "none". I don't get what is wrong with him doing this. He's not an obvious front runner, but far more credible than the laughable Owen (goal) Smith and several of the other nonentities who ran in 2015, whose names escape me already, thank god. It's a proper, sensible, respectable and accepted course of action to sound out potential supporters before committing. The answers you get will vary from yes please, to not now, to don't split the vote, to I don't think you're cut out for it, and other things. I can see from your posting history that you really, really don't like him, but you should recognise as a simple fact that he is a possible contender, even if you don't welcome that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Isn't the point that, within 24 hours, it has become obvious even to himself that he is not actually any sort of possible contender? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2020 48 minutes ago, snowychap said: Isn't the point that, within 24 hours, it has become obvious even to himself that he is not actually any sort of possible contender? And quite frankly never was, I'm more wondering what was the point? It's the staggering lack of awareness of his place in the grand scheme of things. It must be the shortest lived leadership bid in the history of the Labour Party Anyone with more than half a brain would have sounded people out first before announcing their bid. Amateurish doesn't really cover it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2020 52 minutes ago, peterms said: It's a proper, sensible, respectable and accepted course of action to sound out potential supporters before committing. If only he'd done that before getting it put in George Osborne's organ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, bickster said: If only he'd done that before getting it put in George Osborne's organ Never speak to me again of George Osborne's organ. Or I will force-feed you salad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 I don't watch Question Time, so Barry Gardiner doesn't often drift across my consciousness, and as a result I had completely forgotten his weird (and completely unacceptable) stanning for Narendra Modi until this week. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ml1dch Posted January 10, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2020 11 hours ago, snowychap said: 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 Corbyn saw fit to make this absolute idiot Shadow Secretary for International Trade, says it all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts