General Election 2017

[darrenm]

9 minutes ago, Chindie said:

You saying it's subjective nonsense rhetoric doesn't make it so. I can't be arsed to reiterate the same stuff everyone's said dozens of times again. I wont deny some of it is nonsense, as anyone in a partisan field would get, but some of it isn't and has merit.

Apologies. I'm tired of the, IMO... naive, forlorn hope, positivity propaganda stuff. 

To me it is. But that's only my opinion.

For the avoidance of doubt, when I said "it's happening" I was referring to a decent upswing in the popularity of Corbyn and Labour. Like I said above I'm not so sure it's impossible that Labour could get a majority government but it's definitely moving the right direction.

[Wainy316]

Was it naive, forlorn, hope that the MAGA rocket polishers had for Mr Donald to be elected against the odds and indeed make their country great again?

[blandy]

9 hours ago, darrenm said:

And yet no-one who dislikes him quite knows why*.. is it because it's people who are incapable of independent thought so just cling to what they think is en vogue? Like Dave in the pub? People like that tend to change their mind pretty quickly when they see others changing.

*Present company excepted

This is completely untrue. People on VT have gone into detail about why they (we) consider him a terrible leader, why he is disliked. Now if the VT posters are all the 'present company' you mention, then we're talking about, presumably voters at large, or voters that have been interviewed or written or spoken in the media.

Reasons given include his lack of leadership quality ( many people vote based on assessment of that), his weakness (sure that's not a detailed review, but people don't often get asked to go into detail, when stopped on the street. Doesn't mean they couldn't). His views on the likes of hamas, hezbolla and the IRA, his views on Trident, Nato and defence, because he is too left wing, because they don't know what his views on brexit really are, or they don't believe him on brexit, or they don't trust him. People say they don't like him because he'll bankrupt the country. People say they'd much rather one of the other ones (Alan Johnstone or Burnham or yvette Cooper) would have won. Then there are the Blairites who say he'd destroy the Tony legacy. There are people who look at his choice of friends and at his opponents in the labour party and judge on that. 

I don't necessarily agree with all of that, but I've seen and heard it all said.

And then there are all the newspaper columnists, who have gone into great detail about the problems with corbyn.

And of course there are all the supporters of other parties, the kippers without a home to go to, the tories, the libs and SNP in Scotland, and they compare the choice on offer, and decide he's weak on immigration, or he's an Islington twit from down south...

But ultimately it doesn't matter if you don't understand why people don't like him, it's only necessary to accept that they don't, and that it's not your or my verdict on their reasoning that counts, but their own. That's what the tories are counting on, "people don't rate corbyn, he loses by elections, he's miles behind in the polls, let's have an election" "let's make the election about may v corbyn, because people don't like him"

I can totally accept people rating corbyn highly based on whatever reasoning people have, and I can completely accept people rejecting some or all of the arguments against corbyn, but I struggle with the notion that people haven't said or don't know why they don't like him

[meregreen]

It would appear most people support Labours policies above those of the Conservatives. What they don't want, sadly is the man most responsible for those policies, go figure. Occurs to me though, that those pundits and posters predicting the permanent demise of Labour as a political force, are pretty wide of the mark. Corbyn is temporary, keep the policies with a more palatable leader, and we're in a very different scenario. It's just a pity that the British electorate are so bloody shallow that they allow personalities to override policies. It's the policies that will mould our country. The Tories with a large majority could inflict terrible suffering . Been there before, bad times.

[mjmooney]

15 minutes ago, meregreen said:

It would appear most people support Labours policies above those of the Conservatives. What they don't want, sadly is the man most responsible for those policies, go figure. Occurs to me though, that those pundits and posters predicting the permanent demise of Labour as a political force, are pretty wide of the mark. Corbyn is temporary, keep the policies with a more palatable leader, and we're in a very different scenario. It's just a pity that the British electorate are so bloody shallow that they allow personalities to override policies. It's the policies that will mould our country. The Tories with a large majority could inflict terrible suffering . Been there before, bad times.

Nail. Head. 

[jon_c]

8 minutes ago, meregreen said:

It would appear most people support Labours policies above those of the Conservatives. What they don't want, sadly is the man most responsible for those policies, go figure. Occurs to me though, that those pundits and posters predicting the permanent demise of Labour as a political force, are pretty wide of the mark. Corbyn is temporary, keep the policies with a more palatable leader, and we're in a very different scenario. It's just a pity that the British electorate are so bloody shallow that they allow personalities to override policies. It's the policies that will mould our country. The Tories with a large majority could inflict terrible suffering . Been there before, bad times.

I'm not entirely sure if the Labour poll so well against the Tories, just because the Tory policy is so bad.

I completely agree if Corbyn's own vanity would allow him to step aside (even to another cabinet role) keep the policies and have a better leader, and probably more importantly a better shadow cabinet. Then I think they would start picking up a lot of votes. 

Voters don't like Corbyn (personally I find him quite obnoxious and inflexible) But people really don't like John McDonnell or Diane Abbott, and I certainly don't have much confidence in those two to actually govern.

Conversely however, I cannot understand what people seem to like about Theresa May, she was a horrendous Home Secretary, with repulsive policy and supreme idiocy. Yet I talk to a lot of people who say they "quite like" her.

Same goes for why anyone could like, Gove, or Hunt, or Rudd?

[PauloBarnesi]

12 hours ago, darrenm said:

And yet no-one who dislikes him quite knows why*.. is it because it's people who are incapable of independent thought so just cling to what they think is en vogue? Like Dave in the pub? People like that tend to change their mind pretty quickly when they see others changing.

*Present company excepted

I don’t necessarily think people ‘dislike’ him; I think the majority of people don’t think he’s up to the job. If you can’t unite your own party, could you unite the country and rule the country?

Personally I think Dave Nellist would have been a better leader than Corbyn. But he’s no longer an MP.

[snowychap]

2 hours ago, PauloBarnesi said:

Personally I think Dave Nellist would have been a better leader than Corbyn. But he’s no longer an MP.

I don't think he's been a member of the Labour party since he was expelled in 1991.

[dAVe80]

 

[darrenm]

8 hours ago, blandy said:

This is completely untrue. People on VT have gone into detail about why they (we) consider him a terrible leader, why he is disliked. Now if the VT posters are all the 'present company' you mention, then we're talking about, presumably voters at large, or voters that have been interviewed or written or spoken in the media.

Reasons given include his lack of leadership quality ( many people vote based on assessment of that), his weakness (sure that's not a detailed review, but people don't often get asked to go into detail, when stopped on the street. Doesn't mean they couldn't). His views on the likes of hamas, hezbolla and the IRA, his views on Trident, Nato and defence, because he is too left wing, because they don't know what his views on brexit really are, or they don't believe him on brexit, or they don't trust him. People say they don't like him because he'll bankrupt the country. People say they'd much rather one of the other ones (Alan Johnstone or Burnham or yvette Cooper) would have won. Then there are the Blairites who say he'd destroy the Tony legacy. There are people who look at his choice of friends and at his opponents in the labour party and judge on that. 

I don't necessarily agree with all of that, but I've seen and heard it all said.

And then there are all the newspaper columnists, who have gone into great detail about the problems with corbyn.

And of course there are all the supporters of other parties, the kippers without a home to go to, the tories, the libs and SNP in Scotland, and they compare the choice on offer, and decide he's weak on immigration, or he's an Islington twit from down south...

But ultimately it doesn't matter if you don't understand why people don't like him, it's only necessary to accept that they don't, and that it's not your or my verdict on their reasoning that counts, but their own. That's what the tories are counting on, "people don't rate corbyn, he loses by elections, he's miles behind in the polls, let's have an election" "let's make the election about may v corbyn, because people don't like him"

I can totally accept people rating corbyn highly based on whatever reasoning people have, and I can completely accept people rejecting some or all of the arguments against corbyn, but I struggle with the notion that people haven't said or don't know why they don't like him

With respect, I don't believe any of those reasons you list are objective, like I asked for. It's pretty much all subjective personal opinion. That's why I say no-one has yet posted any objective reasons why they personally don't like him. I can fully accept that people don't like him, but I struggle with anyone pretending that the reasons you give above are valid as logical objective reasons.

Perhaps with the industry I've worked in my entire life, I'm used to dealing only with facts. I don't really get the concept of liking or disliking someone because of how they're perceived. If they kick a cat, I can accept that. If someone says they're a poor leader, I consider it means nothing. Perhaps it's my limitation.

[darrenm]

5 hours ago, PauloBarnesi said:

I don’t necessarily think people ‘dislike’ him; I think the majority of people don’t think he’s up to the job. If you can’t unite your own party, could you unite the country and rule the country?

Personally I think Dave Nellist would have been a better leader than Corbyn. But he’s no longer an MP.

I don't think anyone but a right winger could unite the Labour party. But that's not what the country needs. We need someone who can talk to people on the streets and who people can believe in to get behind a real movement to unmask the monster of the mess of the last 30 years.

Don't know about anyone else but I'm inspired by him to make a difference

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, darrenm said:

With respect, I don't believe any of those reasons you list are objective, ....It's pretty much all subjective personal opinion. ... I don't really get the concept of liking or disliking someone because of how they're perceived. If they kick a cat, I can accept that. If someone says they're a poor leader, I consider it means nothing. Perhaps it's my limitation.

I think, I dunno how to put this without sounding rude, which I don't want to be, so I'll just go ahead and hope you know I don't mean any offence . What you seem to be asking for is something that is not possible to provide

I mean the thing is, people liking or disliking someone, it IS subjective personal opinion, perception, by definition, really.

I like so and so because they're kind/funny/generous - [The Dude] well that's just, like your opinion, man. 

[/Dude]

I don't like someone because of their double standards  - "well that's not objective, that's just your perception"

And if someone says they don't like his attitude to the IRA and Hamas and the contrast with his attitude to Russia...or they don't like any of the things I listed above that people have said...and that doesn't count as a "reason not to like him" well, there's now't more I can say.

If I desperately want there not to be a tory Gov't and if the state of the Labour party, due in large part (but not solely) by Corbyn's incompetence and divisive nature is making that Tory Gov't a nailed on certainty, then excuse me for not liking the clueless f**ktard

 

 

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, darrenm said:

That's why I say no-one has yet posted any objective reasons why they personally don't like him.

How can someone's personal likes/dislikes be anything other than subjective?

[darrenm]

17 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think, I dunno how to put this without sounding rude, which I don't want to be, so I'll just go ahead and hope you know I don't mean any offence . What you seem to be asking for is something that is not possible to provide

I mean the thing is, people liking or disliking someone, it IS subjective personal opinion, perception, by definition, really.

I like so and so because they're kind/funny/generous - [The Dude] well that's just, like your opinion, man. 

[/Dude]

I don't like someone because of their double standards  - "well that's not objective, that's just your perception"

And if someone says they don't like his attitude to the IRA and Hamas and the contrast with his attitude to Russia...or they don't like any of the things I listed above that people have said...and that doesn't count as a "reason not to like him" well, there's now't more I can say.

If I desperately want there not to be a tory Gov't and if the state of the Labour party, due in large part (but not solely) by Corbyn's incompetence and divisive nature is making that Tory Gov't a nailed on certainty, then excuse me for not liking the clueless f**ktard

 

 

Fair enough :up:

[darrenm]

19 minutes ago, snowychap said:

How can someone's personal likes/dislikes be anything other than subjective?

Exactly. So how are they relevant?

It may be me. I have admitted that. Just doesn't compute. 

[PompeyVillan]

1 hour ago, darrenm said:

Perhaps it's my limitation.

I would say so, leadership is objective. I think Theresa May is a horrendous leader. She's an opportunist who lies about her intentions and has only her own best interests at heart. She plays identity politics with patriotic working class folk then **** them with policy. She patronising the electorate with *robot* strong and stable*robot* and dodges the public and difficult questions. Etc etc.

But apparently being a malicious clown is endearing to many people because she's insulting (sorry, tough) to the EU. And Brexit means Brexit. 

[snowychap]

Just now, darrenm said:

Exactly. So how are they relevant?

It may be me. I have admitted that. Just doesn't compute. 

I'm sorry but you aren't making the slightest bit of sense here.

We're in a politics thread where people are posting their opinions (amongst other things) on politics (including the leader of the Labour party).

You're saying that they're irrelevant because they're subjective? What are we all doing here, then?

[OutByEaster?]

25 minutes ago, snowychap said:

How can someone's personal likes/dislikes be anything other than subjective?

I think I can hear the advertising industry laughing.

 

[snowychap]

7 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think I can hear the advertising industry laughing.

Only if you've been told that they are.

Edit: You're going off at a tangent towards a discussion of influence and control, though, rather than the existing thing about objective reasons for holding a personal opinion.

Edited May 13, 2017 by snowychap

[OutByEaster?]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Edit: You're going off at a tangent towards a discussion of influence and control, though, rather than the existing thing about objective reasons for holding a personal opinion.

You're quite right, but I think in context it's worth noting that our subjective personal opinions on politicians are rarely without influence from external sources.