Fair enough, although haven’t seen Lou debating Politics on here for a while, and I think (although can’t be arsed to go search) that she had a problem with the dismissive nature of the way Pap expresses himself on these threads. Lou, apologies if I’m misrepresenting you.
Nah, I just have this mental image of Lou holding pap at arm’s length while he swings wild and useless lefts and rights. Mostly lefts obvs…
I think Lou expected (hoped) for more football debates on here than political. On a football forum, you know.
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
Not at all, all I was doing was linking to an Independent article…I dont care if you don’t think it’s a valid poll, it’s a poll done
At least be real, Cherts. All you were doing was providing a counter-thread to the Tories in trouble? thread I started last night. Nowt wrong with that, but you started off with rather more opinion based off considerably less substantiation.
You provided a link, set the title and had a one-line opinion about how Labour were crap because of this one Indy article.
in the paper that has been most complimentary about the new guard. That’s my only point. I’d like to know what assumptions you think I’m making…
If I decided to go on some mass diatribe about how this is proof that Corbyn is going to poll lower than any post war Labour politician then fair enough, but all I said was from people I know this is pretty accurate.
I know what assumptions you’re making.
Assumption #1 - The Indy is a Corbyn ally
Surprisingly from their only real press ally as well…
Reality: The Indy never endorsed Corbyn. Only the Morning Star and Daily Record did.
Assumption #2 - The people I meet are representative of general society
Not really a surprise judging by the general sentiment I’ve encountered.
Assumption #3 - pap isn’t critical of Corbyn, or any of his policies.
I love how you will bend over backwards to defend him, anything negative said about Corbyn etc.
Assumption #4 - that when losing debate, one can somehow “win” that debate by insulting your opponent and then claiming that your opponent is stifling debate
The dismissive way you deal with anything that doesn’t got with your sycophantic rhetoric means that people become stifled (see Verbal/Lou) and then don’t bother.
Lol, see this is where you’re bang wrong (Partridge). The title was used because as with your thread last night, it doesn’t mean the party are in trouble by any means. It was mocking at people making mountains out of molehills. I’m surprised you didn’t get that as it’s a tactic I’m sure you have used in the past.
It was a flippant remark as I know they didn’t endorse him, but are very supportive, not an assumption.
No, just that the poll agrees with the people I know. Don’t care if it’s representative of society, it’s not the point I was making.
3 and 4) You’re email outlining me making assumptions was before I’d written all this. Back to the Future indeed. Also, not sure where I insulted you…?
C’mon, even your thread title was a loaded statement.
Let’s recap. I’m threw down my thread in the wake of a Lords amendment that’ll cripple Osborne’s plans to take money from the poor.
You’re hitting us with an Independent article, based on polling - backed up on the false premise that the Indy is only ever going to run with positive press for Corbyn. You think the Indy is pro-Corbyn because it featured more positive articles than other papers. I put it to you that the Independent was simply being more balanced than other newspapers. It is apparently part of its remit, after all.
Even the papers that stacked themselves with anti-Corbyn viewpoints had a proportion of articles in support of his candidacy, or at least grudgingly acknowledging the threat he poses.
Unfortunately, we’ve seen little to advance the argument that Labour are in trouble, or in any more trouble than they were when Corbyn was first elected as leader. It also follows a monumental break in convention, that was broadly in line with Labour policy. This has already been claimed as a first victory for Corbyn. Osborne has already promised to lessen the impact of the cuts.
So I dunno, Cherts. I’m actually thinking that it’s been a good couple of days for Corbyn and co. Does your Indy article overturn all that has been achieved, or even take it into account?
P.S. Describing anyone’s behaviour as sycophantic is a bit of an insult. I don’t think Corbyn has the message fully formed on EU and immigration yet, and I think that will be a continuing liability unless they address genuine concerns in some shape or form.
I wouldn’t say I’m stifled, but I certainly don’t want to get involved in the debate since I’m not overly impressed with where the debate ended up before (we had that discussion before no need to rehash it). But that’s just me, and I don’t want to offend anyone.
If someone said to me - hey Lou come and join this amazing far left political forum where everyone debates how great Corbyn is doing - I would undeniably have run a mile in the first place. I really don’t like far left politics, and I have zero desire to spend time debating far left politics unless it’s a balanced and two sided debate. But this isn’t a political forum, it’s a lot more - footie, humour etc. Plus nice people. So inevitably, the more we have Corbyn euphoria, the less I’ll be interested, the more we have the other stuff, the more I’ll be hanging around. I’ll think the fact that it’s Pap, as the owner of the forum and the most enthusiastic far leftie of the lot, that sometimes makes me feel I’ve lost my way home and accidentially ended up in the SWP secret gathering.
It is what it is, I’m not expecting anyone to be any different. I’m sure there’s plenty I do that others don’t like (Ohio for one).
I do wish people would quit making digs at Furball though. It’s very uncool.
Sounds fair enough to me. FWIW I mostly enjoyed Furball’s posts. Shame he didn’t stick around but hey ho…
Too late to backtrack now, GB. You’re in my ‘uncool’ book.
That’s it, I’m off.
Can I gently enquire as to what makes us far left?
None of us are John McDonnell, Lou. Even so, I’m broadly in agreement with his economic arguments. They’re not that out there; collect owed tax, raise tax from people that can afford it, create money for infrastructure.
I can see how it can be perceived as far left from our rather static position in what Tariq Ali calls the extreme centre, but the neoliberal consensus is 40 years old at most and is already busting at the seams. If the legitimacy of an ideology is based on the number of people it helps, then neo-liberal ideology has to come under question.
Things like democratic control of vital industries, and cheap education are not far left concepts. We’ve given the “market is king” approach a proper go. The idea that we were all going to become a nation of shareholders never really materialised; the reality is that large overseas corporates have bought controlling interests in most vital services. There are further dangers on the horizon with TTIP.
I don’t think you have to be Leon Trotsky to suggest the pendulum needs a swing back the other way.
Originally posted by @Goatboy
Originally posted by @Coxford_lou
Too late to backtrack now, GB. You’re in my ‘uncool’ book.
That’s it, I’m off.
That’ll be all the weird ale you drank last weekend
I am not ready for Beardman Backlash yet! I haven’t got that scheduled until day after he is sworn in at Oval Office! Also I am distrust on opinion polls in general cos of I.e:
Pap isn’t far left. He debates things and reads things. He even changes his mind.
Corbyn and Co? Some of the interviews of his cabinet after they were put in place were very poor. One individual, can’t remember her name, was told she had free rein to say what she thought. She tried to play politics, say nothing, and ended up looking a waste of space bleating that she didn’t know anything as she’d only been in the job a few days.
The interviewer was actually quite kind.
The marketing type questions are worthless: anyone who knows anything about design of surveys/experiments will know that so they’re geared to elicit a certain response, presumably for news because journalism is nigh on all but gossip and rank idiocy.
The important thing will be as and if and when Corbyn is around for the next election. Undoubtedly the Tories are not going to be on solid ground and perhaps something of interest might happen in the intervening period to make things a bit more interesting.
I see JC has now been sworn in, he didn’t kneel but he did kiss her hand by all accounts. Happy to retract my issue with him over this now.
I don’t know why you thought it was such a big deal in the first place. We’ve managed a discussion about the role of poppies and remembrance without anyone getting too upset about it. The only thing that you could have got Corbyn on was genuine disrespect and/or hypocrisy, which would have been a challenge to his authenticity, arguably his biggest asset.
He wasn’t disrespectful. I don’t think he’s a hypocrite either.
There’s a by-election coming up, which should give us our first idea of Corbyn’s wider appeal. Labour are expected to hold Michael Meacher’s old seat, but I expect pollsters will be keeping a keen eye on both turnout and swing.
Funny, that. Because relatives of his victims both here and in the States have said they wished he could have been put on trial.