The election 2015

EC1 said:
why don't you start to talking to me sensibly without the put downs... if you want a reply?
Click to expand...

I though I was -- talking sensibly, that is.
It is you who see only the imagined put-downs. You need to be less sensitive; just because someone disagrees with your stance on politics ( or horseracing analysis) doesn't mean that they are out to "get you".
 
icebreaker said:
Yep, and if he had done that, I know what the reaction would be ............ "Stifling Free Speech; Dictatorial Commie Style; Tyrant" blah, blah.
Click to expand...

Not from anyone with a sensible perspective it wouldn't..the press don't fall into that category imo.

No one has said that about Cameron..the tories were whipped...they had MP's who voted against them..they aren't getting intimidated by thicko keyboard warriors

And even if the bias press had said that..the tories could have been compared in response.

I have no issue with Corbyn as a man or with his principles..bar the fact he would not want to defend our country. He is isn't a strong enough man to be a leader though imo. I was not a supporter of the air stikes but i can see where such as Benn and those who have supported them are coming from. It was a hard decision..it was not a matter of disloyalty at all imo

Benn has known Corbyn most of his life..if you watch the beginning of his speech where he reprimanded Cameron about the sympathiser bollox you could easily see he has every respect for JC..that reprimand..was one of the best i've seen...and its one of the few times i've seen Cameron look visibly shaken.

No..i don't like the hard left factions...sorry..they talk bollox
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
I though I was -- talking sensibly, that is.
It is you who see only the imagined put-downs. You need to be less sensitive; just because someone disagrees with your stance on politics ( or horseracing analysis) doesn't mean that they are out to "get you".
Click to expand...

Are you fuckin serious? Genuinely?

that is what i'm talking about,,thats not imagined...and i'm sorry but you are jumping on a bandwagon of nonsense about me disagreeing re horse racing or politics.

the problem i see on here with this accusation of paranoia in my direction is people who are unable to back up their opinion pot shotting instead of having the abilty to debate a point...for a start if i'm wrong..i'll come on and admit it..others disappear from threads when they are wrong...but are soon quick to highlight if i get it wrong..that type of negative posting is based mainly on jealousy...biased people are soon quick to rub it in..not so quick to congratulate

i get loads wrong re racing...but i'll wager i'm more right than wrong compared to average Joe...that isn't popular on racing forums..most people posting on racing forums want to see people get it as wrong as oten as they do..thats why most people don't post on Gigilos thread...they resent his success
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
i get loads wrong re racing...but i'll wager i'm more right than wrong compared to average Joe...that isn't popular on racing forums..most people posting on racing forums want to see people get it as wrong as they do..tahts why most people don't post on Gigilos thread...they resent his success
Click to expand...
Most people don't post on Gigilo's thread because they have been told so very often that comment -- unless it is "congratulations" -- isn't welcome.
Stop with the idea that people resent his success, please, or that people begrudge yourself, EC, your own nice winners that you are generous enough to post.

Hope that you know me better by now to appreciate I'm not a "bandwagon-jumper". I is a contrarian that just has to disagree wiv everything ! :)


Can we leave it at that, maybe?
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
Most people don't post on Gigilo's thread because they have been told so very often that comment -- unless it is "congratulations" -- isn't welcome.
Stop with the idea that people resent his success, please, or that people begrudge yourself, EC, your own nice winners that you are generous enough to post.

Hope that you know me better by now to appreciate I'm not a "bandwagon-jumper". I is a contrarian that just has to disagree wiv everything ! :)


Can we leave it at that, maybe?
Click to expand...
aye..fair comment re G's thread...but you can engage him in chat..i have done as have a few others

I'll just say..i have strong views..and i do argue fiercely..and this isn't the best medium of discussing anything really is it?..you can read stuff into things that aren't there..sometimes it is there though and people won't admit it

one thing i do like to think though..and its important in this medium..i don't bear grudges..well i try really hard not to...some do....i might disagree..or even fall out with people..but i forget and move on...i get things wrong..others do..i read things wrongly sometimes..so do others. I'm no different to anyone else re that stuff.

if we all agreed..it would be a boring carry on...but i would like to think if i get something wrong..i can admit it.

I might be horribly wrong about Corbyn's leadership..but my gut feel is he isn't the deal..only time will tell

We are usually in agreement on topics..and when we haven't been..i think we can disagree usually ok...hopefully continue to do so..no prob
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
Get real, EC. Respectfully you're living in fantasy; or maybe you can't see the facts for being blinded by a bitterness or contempt for Corbyn.
The facts are:
1) The majority of his shadow cabinet voted with him in the "Bomb Syria" Commons vote
2) The majority of the Labour Parliamentary party voted with him on same.
3) The majority of the Labour Party members have agreed with his stance on the Syria bombing issue.
Those are the three fundamental framework/architectures of the national Labour movement. That's it, Corbyn has the support of the majority of the Labour movement on this particular issue.

Am I right in thinking ( my memory ain't too good nowadays) that you forecasted that Corbyn would lead Labour to a defeat in Oldham East? Strange, then, that Labour increased their vote by 7% last Thursday in that election, no?

You also dismissed a suggestion ( by me) that Labour under Corbyn might not be the disaster in the 2016 general election that is forecasted by you and by others on here. All it takes is a right clusterfuck down the road in Syria or the Brexit vote next year to radically change public opinion.
Don't be too fast to swallow the right-wing media that is selling you a "Labour With Corbyn Is Dead" spin. The truth is otherwise.
Click to expand...

totally wrong ice.

Shadow cabinet was 15 to 4 against. Naturally they were out under pressure on their jobs

memebership is irrelevant. Green ink nutters. Who cares?

Oldham East had a superb candidate that was lauded by the economist magazine no less, before he was a candidate.
Corbyn was banned form the constituency and all literature. It is also a very heavy muslim vote there which will never go for ukip

venezuela kicked out their disastrous socialism last night. We will never go through that experiment.

corbyn and his closest team are terrorist sympathisers. No doubt about it.

He is the worst party leader in living memory. Also the worst personal poll ratings which will get worse as the truth sinks in further down the line. He is also devious and two faced with his back room team clearly working to destabilise the moderate party. This is effectively a coup and they have no concerns about whether the party is destroyed as an electable force so long as it is ideologically pure

oldham is completely irrelevant. How on earth is this party of Abbott livingstone mcdonell and corbyn (which is effectively what it is) going to win the votes of those that they have barely concealed hatred for?
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
totally wrong ice.

Shadow cabinet was 15 to 4 against. Naturally they were out under pressure on their jobs

memebership is irrelevant. Green ink nutters. Who cares?

Oldham East had a superb candidate that was lauded by the economist magazine no less, before he was a candidate.
Corbyn was banned form the constituency and all literature. It is also a very heavy muslim vote there which will never go for ukip

venezuela kicked out their disastrous socialism last night. We will never go through that experiment.

corbyn and his closest team are terrorist sympathisers. No doubt about it.

He is the worst party leader in living memory. Also the worst personal poll ratings which will get worse as the truth sinks in further down the line. He is also devious and two faced with his back room team clearly working to destabilise the moderate party. This is effectively a coup and they have no concerns about whether the party is destroyed as an electable force so long as it is ideologically pure

oldham is completely irrelevant. How on earth is this party of Abbott livingstone mcdonell and corbyn (which is effectively what it is) going to win the votes of those that they have barely concealed hatred for?
Click to expand...

the green ink nutters hold sway in any leadership election though Clive..so anyone standing in any type of leader poll will lose to Corbyn or any other left candidate

irrelevant of by election..didn't i hear the other day that labour are behind in the polls by a few %?..even if they were level with tories they would be behind so any % they are behind torys is a big minus.

i don't buy the terrorist sympathiser stuff at all...he is just weak..which when viewed by the electorate is a massive negative. I think that was one of Millibands main weaknesses..as far as the electorate was concerned..he didn't come across as a strong leader. We can talk about policies and whatever..but when the "grand national" voters come out in 2020..a party leader that looks weak will do badly imo..policies are important..so is the feeling of confidence in someone. He doesn't fill me with confidence much.

Like i said before..imo he is a genuine bloke...but his faction of followers will tarnish anything good he does. Look at the negative image thats already being sent to the casual political voyeur..Labour MP's being threatened because they voted with their beliefs..no room for that now..tow the line boy even if its a free vote. Hilary Benn...threatened to keep watching his back on the streets of Leeds.

Whether Hilary Benn is deemed too Blairey within the party membership is irrelevant..last week he made a speech that the casual voter would have liked...been impressed with...if he gets drummed out because of it..what message does that send to the electorate who did watch his speech? These factions have no idea what the electorate get influenced by..they certainly don't get influenced by threats of violence to MP's..in fact threatening MP's to vote one way or another has to be a threat to the political process in general.

In the 80's when militant were in tow...there was more chance of me getting elected than any Labour leader with that shadow...the electorate hated them...that same dislike will grow the more Labour is deemed to be in the grip of that type of person. If it continues..it won't just be Corbyn's weakness that loses them votes..it will be the new militant that loses them more.
 
clivex said:
He supports the ira hamas and hezbollah. Thats strongly on the record.
Click to expand...

depends what you mean by supports Clive...depends what you mean by on the record..our sleazy media's record is that?...shaking hands with Gerry Adams can be viewed as supporting someone according to our media...many have done that ....so they must support him as well then using that criterion.

this whole terroist sympathiser stuff pulls no weight with me personally..and i doubt the electorate as a whole buy it either..or care....and it certainly won't be why he loses the next election imo.....the electorate aren't interested that much in who shakes hands with who or who talks to who.

The poll on the other thread backs up how much interest people have in politics..a few pages back on this thread i said most folk don't give two buggers about politics......only 15 people on here voted in the bombing poll...probably 175 folk on here every day..15 voted..thats probably a similar % of the general public's interest is too. So anything that will swing people in the main needs to be a bit bigger than that Clive. Having people threaten MP's is a bit bigger issue...when it gets main headlines most days. People not thinking the country can be defended is a bit bigger issue than that too.
 
Last edited:
Im sorry but its a lot more than shaking hands. To blame his on the record support of various racist hate preachers and terrorist organisations on the media is absurd. Even when confronted he clearly would not condem ira bombing campaigns. He has financially aupported jew haters too.

You think that if cameron had written cheques to the kkk it should be overlooked?

the idea that this is of no interest to the electorate is madness. He has to win tory votes in tory seats as well as hold onto voters from working class seats with family in the services
 
if everyone believes he is a terrorist sympathiser Clive why was there no one wanting to have anything to do with Cameron calling him one..even his own MP's when asked about it wanted to distance themselves from it..the whole of the house of commons was in uproar about it on the day..the first hour of the debate was filled with people asking Cameron to apologise..i think i counted 15 or so times he was asked to apologise. If he is such a blatant lover of terrorists then why were people outraged to the point they broke in with their speech to reprimand the PM. That doesn't look to me like a belief held even by MPs..never mind disinterested Joe Public. In fact ordinary Joe watching that debate would have got the exact opposite opinion of JC just through the outrage shown by MP's from all parties bar the scared tories who just kept their gobs shut and looked embarrased about about the whole thing.

You may think its a generally held belief..i really don't..of course i might be wrong...but i've never heard anyone pass that opinion on any political show or interview...Cameron is the only person i've known about say it. He also said it at the Tory conference..so thats twice i've heard it..from same chap...maybe a pattern emerging:)

Maybe it is being overlooked Clive..why are people overlooking it is the question if its a generally held belief and election loser.

What % of the electorate do you think hold that view..10%? more? Is it a commonly held belief within the Tory party..because if it is all those who were asked about it that i watched the morning after didn't say they agreed with it..maybe too scared...don't know.

serious question Clive..not being sarky
 
Last edited:
That belief has been widely reported and even columnists on the mild left such as Rachel sylvester have highlighted their belief that his choice of the provisional ira over the sdlp is clear indication of his stance.

Since you bring up cameron you should really answer my question.

but leave it at that. Been through this before
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
Since you bring up cameron you should answer my question.
Click to expand...

no problem answering it..yes of course it should be made public..but if that had been the case then i would expect Labour to bury him with it at every touch and turn

and this is why i ask you..why aren't the tories openly attacking Corbyn just on that premis..why did not Cameron say it in the House of commons..why isn't it being using at every opportunity. If there is clear evidence that Corbyn loves terrorists..why did Cameron not only not apologise..why did he not accuse Corbyn face to face in HOC last week.

it seems the Tories have a clear election winner..but only mention it behind closed doors..why is that then Clive?

thats not like the tories..a slur like this is a gift surely..which they would use weekly at least..a new mantra
 
Last edited:
here is an article about it Clive

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...labour-leadership-foreign-policy-antisemitism

from the many comments at the bottom it seems that some people think talking to both sides of an argument to try and resolve it....is better than picking one side..arming it and waiting for the fall out ...an option someone might take without being deemed a sympathiser

so the electorate..if taking the % of those comments as representative ..might not see Corbyn as a sympathiser..but as someone who listens to both sides

now..i'm not passing any view here..but it seems one mans sympathiser is another mans mediator..thats what i seem to get from looking at the comments
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Cameron's done quite a bit to help ISIL, not the least of which was playing a pivitol role in removing their biggest obstacle in Libya, and then trying his level best to repeat it in Syria.

Jihadi Dave, terrorist sympthaiser.

Don't fall for his anti ISIL smokescreen, judge him by his actions. I reckon he's sworn bay'a to the caliphate
 
That's crap ec. Look at the poll as to who the electorate trust to keep them safe from terrorism. It was extremely damning

the saudi thing is getting boring. Al queda attacked Saudis and wants to overthrow the government. Isis too. Yes of course a state is going to fund an organisation that wants to kill it off

i dislike that strand of Islam but Ffs.

And nd if you want to simply blame it as being the "cradle" blame Italians for the ira .. And so on
 
Ec. The level of support for isis in Saudi is tiny. This has been done before . It's 5%. Less than france
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
totally wrong ice.

Shadow cabinet was 15 to 4 against. Naturally they were out under pressure on their jobs
Click to expand...
Are you sure, Clive?

"It was expected that at least half of Mr Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet would ignore his call to oppose the motion, but in what could be a significant boost for Mr Corbyn's faltering leadership, 17 of his front bench team followed him through the voting lobbies, with 11 backing military action".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...but-more-than-a-third-of-labour-a6758166.html
 
Clive's never been one to confuse facts with his opinion. In truth, I think there might be something in semantics of a 'shadow cabinet' and 'front bench team'. I would say that alot of the shadows voted for bombing, whereas shadow spokespersons didn't. Corbyn's structure reminds me a little bit of Mugabe, (without the murdering and torture) he looks increasingly like a puppet being played from behind the scenery

Among the Shadow Cabinet the breakdown was as follows:

For bombing:

Angela Eagle
Tom Watson
Gloria de Peiro
Michael Dugher
Maria Eagle
Lucy Powell
Hilary Benn
Heidi Alexander
Luciana Berger
Chris Bryant
Vernon Coaker

Against bombing:

Jeremy Corbyn
Jon Ashworth
Jon Trickett
John Healey
Lisa Nandy
Kerry McCarthy
Andy Burnham
Diane Abbott
Catherine McKinnell
Ian Murray
Lilian Greenwood
John McDonnell
Seema Malhotra
Nia Griffith
Kate Green
Owen Smith

Abstained

Rosie Winterton (I should point out that custom dictates that Chief Whips abstain in free votes, and the DT's reporting of Winterton abstention as a failure to support the shadow team is simply wrong)


 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
Are you sure, Clive?

"It was expected that at least half of Mr Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet would ignore his call to oppose the motion, but in what could be a significant boost for Mr Corbyn's faltering leadership, 17 of his front bench team followed him through the voting lobbies, with 11 backing military action".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...but-more-than-a-third-of-labour-a6758166.html
Click to expand...

at the famous ppl meeting only three spoke in support and it was also assumed that mcdonell did support despite not speaking up. Read that how you willg. You are not going to resist an opportunity to speak up for an embattled boss if you agree with him in such a scenario. Clearly there was pressure subsequently . That's on the record and has already been linked here.

this is what it is about

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-it-just-doesnt-involve-the-Labour-Party.html
 
Last edited:
Im going to try and see angela Eagles pmq today. Seems like she was a star and took the **** out of corbyn rather nicely

brains humour and pure talent is the way for the real Labour Party to hit back against the far left who have none of those assets. Benn now Eagles . Who next?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top