Don't vote Tory

[eFestivals]

58 minutes ago, Mozzer79 said:

The reason being that the turnaround of political momentum has been huge!

in which case Jez *MUST* have been doing shit for 2 years. 

 

[frostypaw]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Or was Jez so perfect that nothing of what I've listed (in other posts) happened?

That's so ridiculously polarised and BLACK/WHITE that you know it's nonsense and not a position I would ever stand by. You make yourself automatically wrong by taking such a stance, then continue it into another post....

Nobody here - I think - is so naive or simplistic to think him purely saintly and all his actions right and it's rather demeaning of everyone else to think that of them don'tcha think?

Obviously he wasn't entirely toxic or he wouldn't have received the backing he did from members, nor caused the upsurge in membership that he did - to the point of being the party with the highest membership in the whole of Europe..... There comes a point where the detractors need to go back and check their earlier assumptions.

I suspect by painting things in such hilariously simplistic cartoon like terms they were never seeing the situation in an accurate light to start with, which would explain those people's surprise at the end result.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

That's so ridiculously polarised and BLACK/WHITE that you know it's nonsense and not a position I would ever stand by. You make yourself automatically wrong by taking such a stance, then continue it into another post....

Nobody here - I think - is so naive or simplistic to think him purely saintly and all his actions right and it's rather demeaning of everyone else to think that of them don'tcha think?

So is that an admission that he was very often shit? Because you seem to have trouble admitting it.

And if he was often shit, the moves against him by the PLP weren't out of order.

(and don't forget, Corbyn was happy enough to make moves against the leadership without them being shit as a reason to cause his own past moves).

 

Quote

Obviously he wasn't entirely toxic or he wouldn't have received the backing he did from members, nor caused the upsurge in membership that he did

But that's from people with a big attachment to the socialist ideal.

The electorate are much more than just them, and much less attached to those ideals.

 

Quote

- to the point of being the party with the highest membership in the whole of Europe.....

always a myth. Like so much around Corbyn.

 

Quote

There comes a point where the detractors need to go back and check their earlier assumptions.

Like yours, about "highest membership in the whole of Europe"..... ?

 

Quote

I suspect by painting things in such hilariously simplistic cartoon like terms they were never seeing the situation in an accurate light to start with, which would explain those people's surprise at the end result.

"Those people's" - like Jez himself? 

When Jez himself would say your version is a crock of shit, who's line are you actually supporting? He was no less surprised at the result as anyone else.

Edited June 12, 2017 by eFestivals

[Rose-Colored Boy]

2 hours ago, Homer said:

Tory insider quoted anonymously in the Sunday Times. Summary: We will get a sh1t deal from Brexit now, the country will blame us for the whole thing, and we will be wiped out in the subsequent election.

This was always going to happen even if they'd won by 150 seats on Thursday. If they're now going to be 'forced' into getting a deal in the best interests of the country as opposed to what they had been planning, it'll hurt them less going forward. Both directly and indirectly.

[frostypaw]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So is that an admission that he was very often shit? Because you seem to have trouble admitting it.

No. There are other shades in-between black and white, as I keep having to say. He was not great a whole bunch of times, but only once or twice actually shit. If you can accept a position not at the total extremes....

You should stop trying to force me into a box marked "People who think Jez is a saint" - it'll make this easier and more like a conversation as that's not my position, nor one I've made at any point here which makes your replies seem rather strange.

Your initial assumption that all his backers are raving lunatics is obviously wrong, and that's what's making all the arguments hinged on that automatically wrong and silly.

I've not made any arguments that rely on it having the largest membership so your point there is moot btw - I have nothing to go back to reassess. While I can't find a neat table of the figures I assume you have one - which european party has a larger membership btw? Labour has >517,000 and the largest I could find elsewhere was c487,000 for Podemos and Germany's SDP on c445,000

[Rose-Colored Boy]

think I read Labour's has gone up to 800,000 since Thursday, not that it really matters.

[grumpyhack]

Might be interesting to start a poll on here asking "Who do you think will be the next Prime Minister?"  But not who do you want to be next PM as that would start endless arguments.;

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

No. There are other shades in-between black and white, as I keep having to say. He was not great a whole bunch of times, but only once or twice actually shit. If you can accept a position not at the total extremes....

Just one or two? You're free passing in a way you'd never free pass his opponents.

I can give you a list. Shall we discuss the list? 

8 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

You should stop trying to force me into a box marked "People who think Jez is a saint" - it'll make this easier and more like a conversation as that's not my position, nor one I've made at any point here which makes your replies seem rather strange.

and yet you say one or two - when the bad BAD 'errors' are waaaay more than one or two.

I can give him full credit for his successes, as can the PLP.

Jez supporters cannot admit his 'errors' or that his many errors gave good and strong justification to much of what happened 'against' him.

8 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

Your initial assumption that all his backers are raving lunatics is obviously wrong, and that's what's making all the arguments hinged on that automatically wrong and silly.

And yet, as an example, the likes of waterfalls said all polls were a crock of shit, until they said something he liked when he started waving them in people's faces.

Or, as an example, criticisms - well-founded criticisms - of Jez apparently makes me a tory that should fuck off and vote tory.

There's a fuck of a lot of unhinged around him. Failing to face up to his many errors is more of the same, failing to recognise that the criticisms of him were well founded is more of the same, etc, etc, etc.

10 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

I've not made any arguments that rely on it having the largest membership so your point there is moot btw - I have nothing to go back to reassess. While I can't find a neat table of the figures I assume you have one - which european party has a larger membership btw? Labour has >517,000 and the largest I could find elsewhere was c487,000 for Podemos and Germany's SDP on c445,000

you did say it tho, and it's a crock of shit. Putin has more members of his party - about 2M members.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Russia

Like so many things around Jez, it only stands up by being selective about the evidence, by rejecting facts in favour of myths.

[Mozzer79]

40 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

in which case Jez *MUST* have been doing shit for 2 years. 

 

Well he won two successive leadership campaigns in what has been two years of relentless campaigning, despite the constant detracting and plotters in his own party. 

That shows remarkable strength. I'd be knackered! 

He also quite evidently improved his public speaking since those early days of DC giving him a pasting in PMQs.

It isn't at all a case of 2 years of shit then a six week turnaround, more likely 2 years of developing from a no-hoper to a genuine challenger. 

Quite impressive. And I'm not a Corbynista at all. 

[frostypaw]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Just one or two? You're free passing in a way you'd never free pass his opponents.

----

 

you did say it tho, and it's a crock of shit. Putin has more members of his party - about 2M members.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Russia

Like so many things around Jez, it only stands up by being selective about the evidence, by rejecting facts in favour of myths.

Russia isn't part of Europe.

And again you assume things without even asking - how do you think you know what I would or would not give a 'free pass' to? How do you know I'd give any to anyone?
Oh yes.... because you've already stuffed anyone suggesting he's anything other than utterly incompetent into the "Jezza is a saint" box. You make your own arguments fail by doing that because you're obviously wrong. The rest isn't worth replying to because you've been so presumptious.

[eFestivals]

Just now, Mozzer79 said:

Well he won two successive leadership campaigns in what has been two years of relentless campaigning, despite the constant detracting and plotters in his own party. 

self-selected party members is not the wider electorate.

And he'd have lost that 2nd vote if the vote was held only amongst the members who'd voted for him the first time, too.

 

Just now, Mozzer79 said:

That shows remarkable strength. I'd be knackered! 

It's certainly required some extraordinary vanity. He had 82% of Labour MPs call for him to step down as leader, for strong and solid reasons.

Tory party rules require their leader to step down if only 15% of MPs are against them. IDS stepped down despite him still having very solid support amongst the membership (similar to Jez).

Just now, Mozzer79 said:

He also quite evidently improved his public speaking since those early days of DC giving him a pasting in PMQs.

It never showed up in PMQs very much. He did improve, but even with the improvement he still missed endless open goals.

Still, anything is better than the letters from Mrs Miggins.

It'll be interesting to see how he goes when he gets back to the day job. I hope his new-found confidence has an improvement, but him shitting all over one of his own shadow ministers in the GE campaign doesn't fill me with huge amounts of hope. It shows it hasn't gone away.

 

Just now, Mozzer79 said:

It isn't at all a case of 2 years of shit then a six week turnaround, more likely 2 years of developing from a no-hoper to a genuine challenger. 

Quite impressive. And I'm not a Corbynista at all. 

I'm quite happy for it to be seen like that, if that's how you want to say it .... but it was still 2 years of very shit.

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

Russia isn't part of Europe.

The Council of Europe will be surprised to hear that.

 

Quote

And again you assume things without even asking - how do you think you know what I would or would not give a 'free pass' to? How do you know I'd give any to anyone?

you said "one or two" to downplay and endless catalogue of shit.

You've already done it and I've seen it.

 

Quote

Oh yes.... because you've already stuffed anyone suggesting he's anything other than utterly incompetent into the "Jezza is a saint" box.

No, I put those who refuse to pass fair comment on his failings as those who free pass him.

 

Quote

You make your own arguments fail by doing that because you're obviously wrong. The rest isn't worth replying to because you've been so presumptious.

Yep, jez is perfect, it's Neil that is wrong about everything. My point proven.

Edited June 12, 2017 by eFestivals

[Rose-Colored Boy]

13 minutes ago, grumpyhack said:

Might be interesting to start a poll on here asking "Who do you think will be the next Prime Minister?"  But not who do you want to be next PM as that would start endless arguments.;

yes, although with so many different possible dates for the next election (and indeed candidates, where the Torys are concerned) it's almost pointless trying to predict !

Edited June 12, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[eFestivals]

anyway, shall we move onto something more certain, Corbyn's plans for a financial transaction tax (tobin tax)?

Anyone able to tell me why this will be the first tax in history which won't change behavior towards tax?

And how come those financial firms will happily trade at a loss, just so Jez and McD get their expected tax return?

I support a tobin tax, I support everything in the manifesto. But the numbers are a crock of shit, and the effect of implementing those plans will have a bad negative financial effect onto society.

Why not look how it went for Hollande who over-promised that taxing the rich can give the rest everything for free? It's killed the socialism in the most socialist country in Europe.

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

yes, although with so many different possible dates for the next election (and indeed candidates, where the Torys are concerned) it's almost pointless trying to predict !

Including  whether ot not Corbyn might be one of the leaders.

It's a bit inconvenient i know, but he might not be around, but even if he is, his age suggests an unsuitability depending when that next election happens. if it's 5 years time he'd be 73 when taking office and 78 when leaving office.

Edited June 12, 2017 by eFestivals

[frostypaw]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

Yep, jez is perfect, it's Neil that is wrong about everything. My point proven.

I've never said that either. You gotta find some of those shades of grey or it's only going to be upsetting for you too and you'll be imagining I'm more negative about your position than I am - but with everything so black and white I can't actually make those points as they get turned into cartoon vision.

The Council of Europe deal with matters that affect Europe so it includes it's neighbours, such as Russia, not just the core European states. No dice there I'm afraid.

[eFestivals]

Just now, frostypaw said:

I've never said that either. You gotta find some of those shades of grey or it's only going to be upsetting for you too and you'll be imagining I'm more negative about your position than I am - but with everything so black and white I can't actually make those points as they get turned into cartoon vision.

Shades of grey that include Corbyn being shit.

You don't undermine your own shadow cabinet unless you're shit.
You don't fuck up your own relaunch unless you're shit.
Etc, etc, etc.

You cannot polish those turds into grey.

 

Just now, frostypaw said:

The Council of Europe deal with matters that affect Europe so it includes it's neighbours, such as Russia, not just the core European states. No dice there I'm afraid.

I just googled "countries of Europe". Seems like everyone disagrees with your take, that of course isn't fact rejecting because they're inconvenient.

https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/countries-of-europe.htm

http://www.worldometers.info/geography/how-many-countries-in-europe/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Europe#Sovereign_states

 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

20 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Including  whether ot not Corbyn might be one of the leaders.

It's a bit inconvenient i know, but he might not be around, but even if he is, his age suggests an unsuitability depending when that next election happens. if it's 5 years time he'd be 73 when taking office and 78 when leaving office.

Yes I agree with this and have said as much on my blog. As I see it: if there's an election before next summer, or one on the immediate horizon come next Summer, he stands in it and then - assuming he wins - hands over in Summer 2020 to someone who voted against Article 50 (probably Clive Lewis). If by next summer there's no election on the immediate horizon, he hands over next summer to someone who campaigned against Brexit but voted for Article 50 (probably Emily Thornberry). Of course if the polls move dramatically against Corbyn before next Summer, and/or these gains he's been making in the personal approval ratings fall through the floor, things will be different, but I don't see that being especially likely.

NB I know he wouldn't directly 'appoint' his successor, as such, but unless something significant happens I don't expect any leadership contest in the foreseeable future to be anything other than a procession for the candidate of Corbyn's choosing

Edited June 12, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[frostypaw]

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I just googled "countries of Europe". Seems like everyone disagrees with your take, that of course isn't fact rejecting because they're inconvenient.

https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/countries-of-europe.htm

http://www.worldometers.info/geography/how-many-countries-in-europe/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Europe#Sovereign_states

Those fuckups would fit my "but only once or twice actually shit."

Those seem very generous definitions - the vast majority of Russia is on the asian continent, with only around a quarter in Europe - but I guess by that position you're right so I amend my statement to "the largest in europe, not counting the transcontinental nation of Russia".

Happier?

Edited June 12, 2017 by frostypaw

[eFestivals]

21 minutes ago, frostypaw said:

Those fuckups would fit my "but only once or twice actually shit."

but undermining his own shadow cabinet happened countless times. The last poor sapp who made the mistake of giving the party line as stated in the manifesto is supposedly top of the list for the sack.

And even his own relaunch he fucked up twice in 2 days, by doing the same thing of not being able to explain his own policy clearly.

There's over ten instances of shit just there, which you count up to be "one or two". 

So .... You are Dianne Abbott, and I claim my five pounds.

Edited June 12, 2017 by eFestivals

[Mozzer79]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

self-selected party members is not the wider electorate.

And he'd have lost that 2nd vote if the vote was held only amongst the members who'd voted for him the first time, too.

 

It's certainly required some extraordinary vanity. He had 82% of Labour MPs call for him to step down as leader, for strong and solid reasons.

Tory party rules require their leader to step down if only 15% of MPs are against them. IDS stepped down despite him still having very solid support amongst the membership (similar to Jez).

It never showed up in PMQs very much. He did improve, but even with the improvement he still missed endless open goals.

Still, anything is better than the letters from Mrs Miggins.

It'll be interesting to see how he goes when he gets back to the day job. I hope his new-found confidence has an improvement, but him shitting all over one of his own shadow ministers in the GE campaign doesn't fill me with huge amounts of hope. It shows it hasn't gone away.

 

I'm quite happy for it to be seen like that, if that's how you want to say it .... but it was still 2 years of very shit.

He certainly needs to avoid the hubris that was evident on the Marr show. Cockiness doesn't suit him. 

Labour need to unite to keep the bandwagon going. 

The Tories now have a chance to create a softer image and steal Labour's Brexit vision. Expect the word 'hope' to be seriously overused in the next GE campaigns.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Mozzer79 said:

Labour need to unite to keep the bandwagon going. 

the PLP have united around Jezza.

The Corbynites continue the war, saying everything is their fault and that Jez was always perfect with 40% support, no endless fuckers, no half-hearted anti-brexit campaigning (we *all* know Jez is a liar about that one now), etc, etc, etc.

 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

6 minutes ago, Mozzer79 said:

He certainly needs to avoid the hubris that was evident on the Marr show. Cockiness doesn't suit him. 

 

you reckon? I thought that was the best interview I've ever seen with him. Looked fantastically relaxed. (sorry if this has already been discussed at length, been living this election on twitter rather than here)

[Mozzer79]

Just now, Zac Quinn said:

you reckon? I thought that was the best interview I've ever seen with him. Looked fantastically relaxed. (sorry if this has already been discussed at length, been living this election on twitter rather than here)

For the most part he was good but there were a couple of cringe moments such as "I'm the most generous man in the world!"

It'll be interesting to see if he lets a few notable detractors back in the team.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

5 minutes ago, Mozzer79 said:

For the most part he was good but there were a couple of cringe moments such as "I'm the most generous man in the world!"

oh I agree with that but I think that was just him being overly-relaxed, his advisers will soon put him back into his 'likely to snap at any remotely difficult questioning' box I'm sure.

 

5 minutes ago, Mozzer79 said:

 

It'll be interesting to see if he lets a few notable detractors back in the team.

I hope so, really. He's plainly not going to be walking arm-in-arm with Chris Leslie or John Woodcock, but he'll be shooting himself in the foot for no good reason if he doesn't form a broad coalition from across the party including those who've been openly apologetic over the last few days, like Chuka and Yvette. His supporters would hate it but it's high time he stood up to them anyway. In fact rumour has it he was planning to swap Yvette in for Diane Abbott as soon as yesterday but has delayed it so as not to stop the Tory shambles dominating the news cycles.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Zac Quinn