All the Tories out this morning

BoroMart said:
For Corbyn see Milliband and Kinnock. They'll probably do teh same character assassination on Starmer.
Click to expand...

Sorry to disagree Mart, but you're wrong there. The problem was Corbyn specifically, because he was a Czech spy and an IRA Hezbollah terrorist and he wanted to make the internet communist

Starmer's a forensics expert and his mum lives with donkeys so it's not a problem anymore. (y)
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
The problem was that people like you believed all the bulls**t about Corbyn.
Click to expand...
You mean the guy who has been suspended from the party, the bloke who voted against a Labour government more than Cameron did, the Political genius who had no policy on Brexit even though he personally against it, that one?
 
You
Muttley said:
Some of the things that Corbyn stood for were entirely reasonable and I believe he was, at his core, a decent man. Yes, there were things that were problematical but as with all leaders you have to weigh the pros and cons. More than that you had to judge him against the alternative which was to vote for Johnson the serial liar, chancer, racist, philanderer, child abandoner, (the list goes on of Mr. Johnson's "character flaws"). As someone who voted Tory you gave them the approval for their manifesto and (at best) forgave their previous record on poverty.
Click to expand...

Throughout you seem very certain about the way people voted.
I think you probably voted Tory and this is all just a smoke screen
 
Same_as_before said:
You mean the guy who has been suspended from the party, the bloke who voted against a Labour government more than Cameron did, the Political genius who had no policy on Brexit even though he personally against it, that one?
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Corbyn voted against the Labour party on moral grounds; things that he couldn't possibly endorse whilst being true to himself..
You have been told and have chosen to believe that Corbyn had no policy on brexit. Not true, he respected the result and set about preventing the terrible deals that May presented, preferring instead to negotiate a deal that included a customs union and staying in close alignment with the single market, allowing the UK to continue to trade with Europe without tariffs.
As for being suspended from the party, that is a travesty. He has broken no rules or gone against any EHRC guidelines.
 
Same_as_before said:
You mean the guy who has been suspended from the party, the bloke who voted against a Labour government more than Cameron did, the Political genius who had no policy on Brexit even though he personally against it, that one?
Click to expand...
Lets be honest here, he voted against Labour more than Cameron because a) he has been an MP for about 4 centuries, and b) he was left of Blair during the decade he revamped the party. It's a nice soundbite that he voted against Labour leadership more than Cameron, but it's a worthless soundbite because it lacks context.

He had a policy on Brexit, this is a Tory project, let them deal with it. In a way he was right to let them own the mess that is brexit, the egg will be on their face.

His suspension from the party signals a direction change, a more Blairite era of soft left. I'm cool with that. I'd have preferred Corbyn to Cameron who has been destructive for this country economically, culturally and psychologically. I'm very happy having Starmer fighting to get a soft left position, as it is more electable than a harder left (due to the overton window rather than any serious implementation and value capture issues).
 
oh I forgot c) He's a lot harder working as an MP than Cameron, who on social issues between 2002-2016 voted 30 times and abstained 29 times. He bothered voting about half the time.

From 99-2019, Corbyn 69 votes, 9 abstentions, i.e. voted in 88% of votes.

Cameron was workshy, Corbyn was principled, even if you don't agree with his principles.
 
SuperStu said:
Sorry to disagree Mart, but you're wrong there. The problem was Corbyn specifically, because he was a Czech spy and an IRA Hezbollah terrorist and he wanted to make the internet communist

Starmer's a forensics expert and his mum lives with donkeys so it's not a problem anymore. (y)
Click to expand...
Corbyn is one of the most decent and principled politicians this country has seen in decades - a man of the people, and one of the few in the Labour Party not to take a bung from Israhell (not a spelling mistake) he’s spent his whole life fighting against racism and the media campaign against him was unprecedented - 13 million suckers bought it and voted for the totally trustworthy, never told a lie, non racist Boris Johnson - enough fcuking said !



🐔
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Corbyn voted against the Labour party on moral grounds; things that he couldn't possibly endorse whilst being true to himself..
You have been told and have chosen to believe that Corbyn had no policy on brexit. Not true, he respected the result and set about preventing the terrible deals that May presented, preferring instead to negotiate a deal that included a customs union and staying in close alignment with the single market, allowing the UK to continue to trade with Europe without tariffs.
As for being suspended from the party, that is a travesty. He has broken no rules or gone against any EHRC guidelines.
Click to expand...
He lost two elections out of two, if that's a successful leader in your eyes so be it. He lost after 10 years of austerity, a leadership in one case from one elite school, the second a lady who had no support from her own Party. The issue is and you will never accept is that the British public will never accept a party of the far left. If Corbyn could not defeat a lying cheat like Boris who can he beat?
 
Same_as_before said:
He lost two elections out of two, if that's a successful leader in your eyes so be it. He lost after 10 years of austerity, a leadership in one case from one elite school, the second a lady who had no support from her own Party. The issue is and you will never accept is that the British public will never accept a party of the far left. If Corbyn could not defeat a lying cheat like Boris who can he beat?
Click to expand...
you explained why she didnt vote labour but what attracted her to vote tory rather than another party?
 
Same_as_before said:
He lost two elections out of two, if that's a successful leader in your eyes so be it. He lost after 10 years of austerity, a leadership in one case from one elite school, the second a lady who had no support from her own Party. The issue is and you will never accept is that the British public will never accept a party of the far left. If Corbyn could not defeat a lying cheat like Boris who can he beat?
Click to expand...
Sadly you are correct about what the British* public will - and will not - accept. They will not vote for a party properly of the left but regrettably - and we will live to regret this, as we did with Thatcher - they will enthusiastically elect a government of the far right.

*Correction - English/Welsh/Northern Irish. Scotland has no truck with this insanity. I feel a great affinity with them and their situation.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
Corbyn is one of the most decent and principled politicians this country has seen in decades - a man of the people, and one of the few in the Labour Party not to take a bung from Israhell (not a spelling mistake) he’s spent his whole life fighting against racism and the media campaign against him was unprecedented - 13 million suckers bought it and voted for the totally trustworthy, never told a lie, non racist Boris Johnson - enough fcuking said !



🐔
Click to expand...

Yeah but he was naff at bowing and I heard he doesn't even sing along with the Monster Mash at Halloween.
 
Maybe, I cannot think of any examples of them doing so, but they are responsible for proscribing numerous far-right groups like FKD, SKD and National Action.
 
Same_as_before said:
He lost two elections out of two, if that's a successful leader in your eyes so be it. He lost after 10 years of austerity, a leadership in one case from one elite school, the second a lady who had no support from her own Party. The issue is and you will never accept is that the British public will never accept a party of the far left. If Corbyn could not defeat a lying cheat like Boris who can he beat?
Click to expand...
Oh here we go. Whenever you lose grasp of a debate you start bouncing the argument all over the place. Don't think nobody notices. I don't believe you didn't see the persistent attacks on Corbyn, from the Tories, from the MSM and from his own party. The reason for this was not anti-Semitism, or that he was a Russian spy or an IRA supporter but because he was pro Palestinian. I don't believe that you have never seen the leaked report which demonstrates without doubt that the right of his own party were working against him for two general elections. What I do know is that a few weeks ago you were arguing that Blair was more left wing than Corbyn (ha). Well that didn't stop him getting elected did it?
 
Corbyn was 2227 votes from becoming PM in 2017 so I don’t accept the people won’t elect a left wing government - he isn’t far left, he’s a socialist, nothing more nothing less. Murdoch an co saw him as a major threat to their wealth, power and influence - probably with good reason, and made damn sure he had as small a chance as possible of getting the keys to No 10. They were, and still are by the looks of it, shít scared of him. We had a chance for real change for the better - by we I mean the average working man and woman. A real chance to level up, not the bullshít level up on offer from Johnson, but 13 million swallowed the Brexit lie and elected Johnson - look where we are and where we’re heading ........... happy ?????????




🐔
 
Same_as_before said:
I think you need reading lessons.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you could explain what you mean by that? You know help me with my "education"?

I set out a reasonable reply to your point and you come back with what you probably think is a clever one-liner. You asked me if I thought Corbyn a "loyal" Labour MP. I gave an answer commenting on his character. I'm not sure what you mean by "loyal" I guess you mean an MP who consistently follows the party line? What I don't know is why you think that would be a good or a bad thing? Take the Iraq War, Corbyn voted against it at every opportunity. He was right to do that. Perhaps that is not "loyal" but it is certainly being a good MP.
 
MFP said:
We don't and never have had a far-right government.
Click to expand...
it's all relative, many nations would view us as far right, I would classify it as firm right and the direction of travel has accelerated for a decade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top