|
Post by serpico on Dec 2, 2019 9:45:41 GMT
The problem lefties have with this is they can’t exploit this incident for their own gain, so they grandstand and pretend to be all outraged instead, but when something like grenfel happens they’re all over the place blaming the evil Tories.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 9:45:47 GMT
So you're saying that bullshit tabloids can get away with spouting shit and exploiting someone's death, just to back up their agenda?..and that even the relatives of the deceased can't point out that they're wrong. The paper needs to be banged to rights for this kind of vile behaviour. They should be shut down for that kind of shit. It's not acceptable and the more people know about that, the better. ] It's pathetic that you would even argue that people can't repost the dads tweet, just because it goes against your agenda. Ban this vile rag! How dare they use a photo of the deceased above a political comment about Boris Johnson. Jack Merritt: London Bridge attack victim described as 'best guy'The hypocrisy is quite unbelievable but typical of Labour. The father (left-leaning atheist) has made a mistake in having a go at the Daily Mail for politicising the event because he's just done exactly that. Guardian
|
|
|
Post by foster on Dec 2, 2019 9:48:09 GMT
So you're saying that bullshit tabloids can get away with spouting shit and exploiting someone's death, just to back up their agenda?..and that even the relatives of the deceased can't point out that they're wrong. The paper needs to be banged to rights for this kind of vile behaviour. They should be shut down for that kind of shit. It's not acceptable and the more people know about that, the better. ] It's pathetic that you would even argue that people can't repost the dads tweet, just because it goes against your agenda. Ban this vile rag! How dare they use a photo of the deceased above a political comment about Boris Johnson. Jack Merritt: London Bridge attack victim described as 'best guy'Did the dad pick out this paper. It sickens me to see you and other posters on here basically saying that papers can print what they want alongside dead people. You need to take a proper look at yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 9:51:07 GMT
The political use of the incident over the weekend proved what we all know deep down, the politicians of both the main parties would sell their own grandmother for power. The left cannot take the high ground as yvette cooper started it, Boris would have been better advised to take a dignified stance instead of getting embroiled. Whoever you plan to vote for, you'll need to hold your nose, as the stench from them all is overpowering. The fact is, and it's too fucking difficult for Labour and its supporters to understand, is that the current government (the Tories) are the people in power who HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM. They can't snipe and attack from a position of back bench safety. As you say Labour were the first to politicise this but Johnson's problem is that he has to respond because, otherwise, people will think that he's got no defence. That's politics. Always has been and always will be.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 2, 2019 10:00:39 GMT
Pretty sure all the papers have printed photos of the victims, should they all be closed down ? Seems low to defend these rags of papers over the relative of the deceased. The dad only pulled up 2 papers as far as I can tell. If you think it's acceptable that's in your character not mine. Printing photos of the victims is pretty standard stuff after a terror attack, No doubt their photos have been in all the papers and on all the online news outlets. It’s obviously the fact they’re in the mail and express accompanied by a story about the prime ministers response which is the issue here for some, I don’t really see the problem, it’s a newspaper reporting the news albeit in their own tabloidy way. I’m for freedom of the press, and that means allowing them to print what they want, the alternative to having a free press is way worse than allowing some distasteful stories.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Dec 2, 2019 10:03:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Dec 2, 2019 10:04:33 GMT
The political use of the incident over the weekend proved what we all know deep down, the politicians of both the main parties would sell their own grandmother for power. The left cannot take the high ground as yvette cooper started it, Boris would have been better advised to take a dignified stance instead of getting embroiled. Whoever you plan to vote for, you'll need to hold your nose, as the stench from them all is overpowering. The fact is, and it's too fucking difficult for Labour and its supporters to understand, is that the current government (the Tories) are the people in power who HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM. They can't snipe and attack from a position of back bench safety. As you say Labour were the first to politicise this but Johnson's problem is that he has to respond because, otherwise, people will think that he's got no defence. That's politics. Always has been and always will be. Johnson could have just responded with an attack on yvette cooper for politicising the issue. That way he would have had the high moral ground. Or he could at least have said he was sad that he was being forced into a reluctant response - instead he launched his own counter attack and ramped the whole thing up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 10:06:56 GMT
What's not too like? Probably the fact that YOU won't have to pay for it - just like all of Labour's giveaways. It'll be your kids and grand kids paying for this, long after Corbyn and McDonnell have gone, during another phase of austerity as a result of an imbalanced tanked economy. You don't understand 'free' do you?
|
|
|
Post by foster on Dec 2, 2019 10:07:48 GMT
Seems low to defend these rags of papers over the relative of the deceased. The dad only pulled up 2 papers as far as I can tell. If you think it's acceptable that's in your character not mine. Printing photos of the victims is pretty standard stuff after a terror attack, No doubt their photos have been in all the papers and on all the online news outlets. It’s obviously the fact they’re in the mail and express accompanied by a story about the prime ministers response which is the issue here for some, I don’t really see the problem, it’s a newspaper reporting the news albeit in their own tabloidy way. I’m for freedom of the press, and that means allowing them to print what they want, the alternative to having a free press is way worse than allowing some distasteful stories. Doesn't sit right with me that the dad is being picked out for sending a political message, when all's he's done is defended his dead son from being used in relation to something he was against. This goes beyond paper and party politics for me. I don't like it, and I wouldn't like it if it was one of my kids.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 10:09:00 GMT
The fact is, and it's too fucking difficult for Labour and its supporters to understand, is that the current government (the Tories) are the people in power who HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM. They can't snipe and attack from a position of back bench safety. As you say Labour were the first to politicise this but Johnson's problem is that he has to respond because, otherwise, people will think that he's got no defence. That's politics. Always has been and always will be. Johnson could have just responded with an attack on yvette cooper for politicising the issue. That way he would have had the high moral ground. Or he could at least have said he was sad that he was being forced into a reluctant response - instead he launched his own counter attack and ramped the whole thing up. It wouldn't have made no difference whatsoever to the people who want to make a meal of this so he's got nothing to lose by making Labour look the bunch of cunts they really are.
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Dec 2, 2019 10:09:59 GMT
surely even the most naive of potential voters can see whats happening here ?... Treating the electorate as idiots should be enough to ensure it rebounds on them.
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Dec 2, 2019 10:14:29 GMT
Johnson could have just responded with an attack on yvette cooper for politicising the issue. That way he would have had the high moral ground. Or he could at least have said he was sad that he was being forced into a reluctant response - instead he launched his own counter attack and ramped the whole thing up. It wouldn't have made no difference whatsoever to the people who want to make a meal of this so he's got nothing to lose by making Labour look the bunch of cunts they really are. I don't agree, he has got something to lose, an 11 point lead in the polls. Yes labour are cunts and he is confrontational by nature, but he needs to take the heat out of the debates, not stoke them up. He is winning, he needs to run down the clock not try and score another.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Dec 2, 2019 10:16:20 GMT
What's not too like? Probably the fact that YOU won't have to pay for it - just like all of Labour's giveaways. It'll be your kids and grand kids paying for this, long after Corbyn and McDonnell have gone, during another phase of austerity as a result of an imbalanced tanked economy. You don't understand 'free' do you? Pretty sure he's taking the piss, Square?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Dec 2, 2019 10:27:27 GMT
What's not too like? Probably the fact that YOU won't have to pay for it - just like all of Labour's giveaways. It'll be your kids and grand kids paying for this, long after Corbyn and McDonnell have gone, during another phase of austerity as a result of an imbalanced tanked economy. You don't understand 'free' do you? I'm sorry but you are completely wrong - our children and their children will not be paying for it. Oh no. It's the magic money tree that is funding this and all those other wonderful policies Labour have put forward.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Dec 2, 2019 10:31:31 GMT
surely even the most naive of potential voters can see whats happening here ?... Treating the electorate as idiots should be enough to ensure it rebounds on them. They are hoping to reprise their 2017 election tactic of seducing the young voter with promises of freebies. Not a bad strategy. Us old cynics can see through it. But they aren't trying to get our vote with this tactic.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Dec 2, 2019 10:41:01 GMT
Why stop at ‘free’? Why not pay us to use public transport? If demand could be increased in that way, they would have to employ more drivers, more maintenance staff, build more busses and trains (hopefully in the UK), build factories to build them in, lay more rail tracks and roads. Many of the people doing this work could be coming off the Social or, if they are already in work, they may create a vacancy below them. The savings for DHSS could be huge and, of course, all these people would now be tax payers. And, going back to the start of this post, if we were all being paid to use public transport we’d have a bit more money in our pockets to spend in the shops, so retail outlets win as well. Win, win, win situation. You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Dec 2, 2019 10:56:12 GMT
surely even the most naive of potential voters can see whats happening here ?... Treating the electorate as idiots should be enough to ensure it rebounds on them. They are hoping to reprise their 2017 election tactic of seducing the young voter with promises of freebies. Not a bad strategy. Us old cynics can see through it. But they aren't trying to get our vote with this tactic. It might work. An ex work colleague of mine(aged 23), who didn't vote in the referendum and had no interest in politics, has suddenly become an expert on economics and posts on Facebook with utter certainty that Labour's claim of only the top 5% being asked to pay for their policies is true. "Don't let the Tories scare you" was the meme. I'm sure he'll be loving the latest freebie.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 2, 2019 10:58:49 GMT
Day before election: Labour are planning to issue everyone a credit card linked to the the bank account of Jacob Rees Mogg.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 2, 2019 11:01:45 GMT
I like it how all the same people who immediately politicised Grenfel are now telling us not to politicise London bridge. Thats unfair it was at least 35 minutes until they had completed investigations and made their decision the tories were to blame. What is interesting is that in normal times they would be screaming transphobe at the father for retweeting the perfectly reasonable point below.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 2, 2019 11:05:46 GMT
Yes the lad working in Stoke tescos walking or taking the bus to work is going to subsidise stockbrokers travelling into London. I am holding out for a free unicorn.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 11:08:27 GMT
surely even the most naive of potential voters can see whats happening here ?... Treating the electorate as idiots should be enough to ensure it rebounds on them. They are hoping to reprise their 2017 election tactic of seducing the young voter with promises of freebies. Not a bad strategy. Us old cynics can see through it. But they aren't trying to get our vote with this tactic. Cynical and a little short sighted if I may say so. The time for a complete reform of our economic model is now, particularly around the green economy to negate the looming crisis, and with government borrowing available at an all time low. I absolutely accept that any "giveaways" on the back of the grey manifesto book will be seen as cynical electioneering, but maintaining the status quo whoever takes the reigns will be disastrous. It's equally unhelpful for people to sneer from their comfortable lifestyles about them "giving away free stuff" when there is clearly an alternative path. Countries like Germany, and parts of Scandinavia have already shown this. Economists backing LabourNew Stateman
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 2, 2019 11:09:09 GMT
Why stop at ‘free’? Why not pay us to use public transport? If demand could be increased in that way, they would have to employ more drivers, more maintenance staff, build more busses and trains (hopefully in the UK), build factories to build them in, lay more rail tracks and roads. Many of the people doing this work could be coming off the Social or, if they are already in work, they may create a vacancy below them. The savings for DHSS could be huge and, of course, all these people would now be tax payers. And, going back to the start of this post, if we were all being paid to use public transport we’d have a bit more money in our pockets to spend in the shops, so retail outlets win as well. Win, win, win situation. You know it makes sense. The funny thing is this is pretty much Essex's fabled multiplier effect that he swaers by, even explained in this way he probably wont see the pisstake.....
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Dec 2, 2019 11:23:33 GMT
Why stop at ‘free’? Why not pay us to use public transport? If demand could be increased in that way, they would have to employ more drivers, more maintenance staff, build more busses and trains (hopefully in the UK), build factories to build them in, lay more rail tracks and roads. Many of the people doing this work could be coming off the Social or, if they are already in work, they may create a vacancy below them. The savings for DHSS could be huge and, of course, all these people would now be tax payers. And, going back to the start of this post, if we were all being paid to use public transport we’d have a bit more money in our pockets to spend in the shops, so retail outlets win as well. Win, win, win situation. You know it makes sense. The funny thing is this is pretty much Essex's fabled multiplier effect that he swaers by, even explained in this way he probably wont see the pisstake..... A pisstake? From moi? How very dare you And yes, Essex's 'multiplier effect' did actually pop in to my head while I was typing it.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Dec 2, 2019 11:26:18 GMT
I'm on the verge of voting for labour, just holding out until they announce that all beer in pubs will be free then I'm in.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Dec 2, 2019 11:31:40 GMT
And if Johnson did nothing people would say he’s putting the nation in danger “why isn’t he doing anything about the other 74 terrorists on our streets” the problem is Johnson did the blame game trying to shirk his parties responsibility instead of politisising it he should have said we will work with all parties to try and get to the bottom and instigate an inquiry after the election. instead he acted like a child as usual!!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Dec 2, 2019 11:33:27 GMT
They are hoping to reprise their 2017 election tactic of seducing the young voter with promises of freebies. Not a bad strategy. Us old cynics can see through it. But they aren't trying to get our vote with this tactic. Cynical and a little short sighted if I may say so. The time for a complete reform of our economic model is now, particularly around the green economy to negate the looming crisis, and with government borrowing available at an all time low. I absolutely accept that any "giveaways" on the back of the grey manifesto book will be seen as cynical electioneering, but maintaining the status quo whoever takes the reigns will be disastrous. It's equally unhelpful for people to sneer from their comfortable lifestyles about them "giving away free stuff" when there is clearly an alternative path. Countries like Germany, and parts of Scandinavia have already shown this. Economists backing LabourNew StatemanHere's a little more cynicism - a bunch of leftie economists support Labour's plans ain't mush of a surprise. I suspect most of them are based in academia rather than the real world apart from possibly doing a few (over)paid stints on the BBC (which is hardly the real world).
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Dec 2, 2019 11:34:50 GMT
I'm on the verge of voting for labour, just holding out until they announce that all beer in pubs will be free then I'm in. Yes - but wait till you see what they charge for using the toilets.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Dec 2, 2019 11:39:11 GMT
The problem lefties have with this is they can’t exploit this incident for their own gain, so they grandstand and pretend to be all outraged instead, but when something like grenfel happens they’re all over the place blaming the evil Tories. there are things that that can be said n this by Labour and they could if they wanted to really attack Johnson but that is not corbyns style he says "they go low we go high"
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Dec 2, 2019 11:41:20 GMT
The problem lefties have with this is they can’t exploit this incident for their own gain, so they grandstand and pretend to be all outraged instead, but when something like grenfel happens they’re all over the place blaming the evil Tories. there are things that that can be said n this by Labour and they could if they wanted to really attack Johnson but that is not corbyns style he says "they go low we go high" Are we talking debt or inflation here?
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 2, 2019 11:43:47 GMT
And if Johnson did nothing people would say he’s putting the nation in danger “why isn’t he doing anything about the other 74 terrorists on our streets” the problem is Johnson did the blame game trying to shirk his parties responsibility instead of politisising it he should have said we will work with all parties to try and get to the bottom and instigate an inquiry after the election. instead he acted like a child as usual!! He’s only stated the truth, is he not ? People are bound to ask questions of how this came to be and this terrorist was let out early under a 2008 labour law that means automatic release halfway through a sentence. It doesn’t reflect badly on Corbyn per-se as he wasnt even in power at the time.
|
|