General Election 2017

[HanoiVillan]

8 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Wrong. I named Palestine, Israel and Iran. Three countries. Go look at a map.

So Israel is a country like Iran then?

[magnkarl]

Just now, HanoiVillan said:

So Israel is a country like Iran then?

No, but parts of Israel, especially the parts of it that Corbyn has interests for, definitely is. 

[Xann]

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

The biggest problem in this picture is the guy standing up to talk.

The biggest problem is our bizarrely suicidal money driven society model.

Voting for more of the same with bells on is insanity.

Voting for Corbs and co is silly - tbh It's not so much him for me, it's the team.

That's the choice, or pitchforks?

Usually I'd vote Green regardless, but it's got nasty.

[HanoiVillan]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

No, but parts of Israel, especially the parts of it that Corbyn has interests for, definitely is. 

I'll be honest, I'm totally confused. When Chris asked for three or four countries like Iran, you answered with 'East Bank' as one of the answers. I don't understand why. Is it because you got confused between the East Bank and the West Bank? Or is 'East Bank' - a term I've never heard before - some sort of Hamas name for the land we currently think of as Israel? And if it's the latter, why did you use it? 

[magnkarl]

Just now, Xann said:

The biggest problem is our bizarrely suicidal money driven society model.

Voting for more of the same with bells on is insanity.

Voting for Corbs and co is silly - tbh It's not so much him for me, it's the team.

That's the choice, or pitchforks?

Usually I'd vote Green regardless, but it's got nasty.

Couldn't agree more mate, however I don't feel like the greens are an alternative either. We need labour to splinter FAST and get back to where they were in the 70's.

[darrenm]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Couldn't agree more mate, however I don't feel like the greens are an alternative either. We need labour to splinter FAST and get back to where they were in the 70's.

Isn't Labour in the 70s very similar policy and ideology wise to now?

[magnkarl]

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'll be honest, I'm totally confused. When Chris asked for three or four countries like Iran, you answered with 'East Bank' as one of the answers. I don't understand why. Is it because you got confused between the East Bank and the West Bank? Or is 'East Bank' - a term I've never heard before - some sort of Hamas name for the land we currently think of as Israel? And if it's the latter, why did you use it? 

Sorry, I should probably have been clearer on that. The West Bank is the West Bank of the river of Jordan, parts of Israel which the Palestinians contest as their own. The East Bank, also known as Transjordan is part of both Israel and Jordan on the East Bank of the Jordan river. Hamas has claims in both these areas.

In fact I should have said four countries, add Jordan to that.

Edited May 6, 2017 by magnkarl

[magnkarl]

2 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Isn't Labour in the 70s very similar policy and ideology wise to now?

To some extent I'd say so, it was certainly fueled by trade unions. The big difference however was that they managed to resonate with people. These days they are putting people off by and large due to their extreme leanings on certain subjects. My dad and mam are perfect examples, black country born and bred, voted labour all their lives until about 5 years ago where they sort of lost their identity and didn't feel like labour had anything else to talk about than very outer lying subjects like the ones we see Corbyn clinging to today. The good policies sort of get lost inside all the noise that the left wing of labour are currently making.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, Ingram85 said:

It was wrong to mention old white people I realise but that is one of the main demographics I get annoyed with, among others. Of course its their democratic right to vote the way they do, doesn't mean I have to like it or shut up about it and vice versa.

People like Jeremy Corbyn the late Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner and so on are or were "old white people". I agree there's a bunch that are of course tories to their roots, there's also plenty who aren't, who (through facing it day to day) are worried about the NHS and worried how their grand kids will afford a house or get a decent job. There are posters on this site who are of retirement age and clearly very not-tory. I just think it's a mistake to label any group of society as one thing or another. Not all older white people are tories and they're not the problem at all, as a generic group. 

[snowychap]

13 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

The socialist worker's party caused starvation on an industrial level in both China and Ukraine

You wot?

[HanoiVillan]

4 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Sorry, I should probably have been clearer on that. The West Bank is the West Bank of the river of Jordan, parts of Israel which the Palestinians contest as their own. The East Bank, also known as Transjordan is part of both Israel and Jordan on the East Bank of the Jordan river. Hamas has claims in both these areas.

In fact I should have said four countries, add Jordan to that.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. My geographical knowledge of the region isn't very good. 

But now I'm confused about Jordan - do you mean that Jeremy Corbyn has been paid by the Jordanian government for something? 

[magnkarl]

Just now, HanoiVillan said:

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. My geographical knowledge of the region isn't very good. 

But now I'm confused about Jordan - do you mean that Jeremy Corbyn has been paid by the Jordanian government for something? 

No, I have no evidence to support this. He does however support Hamas quite openly and has visited and invited them to come to see Parliament. Jordan and Hamas are not friends at all so when I say Jordan I mean that Corbyn is involving himself in the area conflicts that Hamas has with Jordan.

[blandy]

57 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I think you're missing the real issues which are at stake. Diane Abbott got confused with numbers twice. That's what everyone's talking about so it must be the most important thing, right?

I take your posit to a degree, but the shadow home secretary went on a media round specifically to talk about and promote a policy. Now, even if she couldn't remember the exact numbers in terms of "these are the costs of 10,000 coppers" each year, it is unprofessional and incompetent not to have them on a bit of paper given that it is an absolute certainty that when announcing a new policy to employ more people she would be asked "how much will it cost"?

So the issue of basic competency and ability to do the job is bound to come up as a result. And she was at it again yesterday. She's pretty useless, amongst other things. It matters. Maybe competency shouldn't matter so much, as it does to the media, but I don't think it's as minor as "she got confused" - she's permanently confused, it seems and therefore unfit to do the role of, for example, Home Secretary. She's dim.

[Risso]

37 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Sorry. 2nd most important thing behind whether she got confused or tried to blag it.

You don't think it's important that one of the three most senior people in the opposition isn't able to give an even remotely credible account of herself?  She's one of the people who you need to convince the electorate that "it's happening". 

[Awol]

6 minutes ago, snowychap said:

You wot?

Isn't he referring to Mao's Great Leap Forward and Stalin's liquidation of the Kulaks in Ukraine? 

Definitely killed 10's of millions between them in the name of Socialist Workers Parties - not their modern UK namesake..

[darrenm]

Just now, blandy said:

I take your posit to a degree, but the shadow home secretary went on a media round specifically to talk about and promote a policy. Now, even if she couldn't remember the exact numbers in terms of "these are the costs of 10,000 coppers" each year, it is unprofessional and incompetent not to have them on a bit of paper given that it is an absolute certainty that when announcing a new policy to employ more people she would be asked "how much will it cost"?

So the issue of basic competency and ability to do the job is bound to come up as a result. And she was at it again yesterday. She's pretty useless, amongst other things. It matters. Maybe competency shouldn't matter so much, as it does to the media, but I don't think it's as minor as "she got confused" - she's permanently confused, it seems and therefore unfit to do the role of, for example, Home Secretary. She's dim.

I fully agree. It's just a huge shame that this has happened 1. When (I think) Labour were starting to pull back and 2. because it takes the focus off May hiding and locking journalists in a room.

It shouldn't be the biggest issue of a GE that affects our future for a long time. But modern media makes it such that it is. She shouldn't be shadow HS and yes that's Corbyn's fault. I'd argue that while Abbott is incompetent, Amber Rudd is dangerous.

[darrenm]

3 minutes ago, Risso said:

You don't think it's important that one of the three most senior people in the opposition isn't able to give an even remotely credible account of herself?  She's one of the people who you need to convince the electorate that "it's happening". 

That's gone right over your head hasn't it?

[magnkarl]

Just now, darrenm said:

I fully agree. It's just a huge shame that this has happened 1. When (I think) Labour were starting to pull back and 2. because it takes the focus off May hiding and locking journalists in a room.

It shouldn't be the biggest issue of a GE that affects our future for a long time. But modern media makes it such that it is. She shouldn't be shadow HS and yes that's Corbyn's fault. I'd argue that while Abbott is incompetent, Amber Rudd is dangerous.

This.

[snowychap]

6 minutes ago, Awol said:

Isn't he referring to Mao's Great Leap Forward and Stalin's liquidation of the Kulaks in Ukraine? 

Definitely killed 10's of millions between them in the name of Socialist Workers Parties - not their modern UK namesake..

I understood the historical events that were being referred to in the post - my question was about the attempt to link these events to the SWP in the UK and by that to Corbyn.

 

 

 

Edited May 6, 2017 by snowychap

[Davkaus]

One of the few good things about Labour's imminent thrashing is that Diane Abbott will be relegated back to the backbenches. Hopefully permanently. Appointing that useless, incompetent, hypocritical bigot says it all about Jeremy. He's surrounded himself with the dregs of the party.