|
Post by wagsastokie on Mar 4, 2020 19:35:26 GMT
To all Labour members you have my deep sympathy If Starmer is the answer after what I've just watched you're in for a long spell in the cold
A typical evasive smarmy lawyer
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 4, 2020 20:35:03 GMT
To all Labour members you have my deep sympathy If Starmer is the answer after what I've just watched you're in for a long spell in the cold A typical evasive smarmy lawyer I can't wait for him to take the role, I have a feeling the press will have a field day
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Mar 5, 2020 9:24:16 GMT
To all Labour members you have my deep sympathy If Starmer is the answer after what I've just watched you're in for a long spell in the cold A typical evasive smarmy lawyer I can't wait for him to take the role, I have a feeling the press will have a field day They'll all fall asleep.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Mar 5, 2020 9:27:48 GMT
Great question to RLB from Neil in last nights interview. 'You gave Corbyn 10 out of 10 after the biggest lose since 1935. What number would you have given him if he'd won?'
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Mar 5, 2020 10:54:28 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 5, 2020 10:58:29 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁 Luckily the Prime Minister is as thick as mince and a lazy fucker so anyone will play reasonably well.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Mar 5, 2020 10:59:44 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁 Luckily the Prime Minister is as thick as mince and a lazy fucker so anyone will play reasonably well. They make Boris look like Kissinger mate.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Mar 5, 2020 11:01:24 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁 Luckily the Prime Minister is as thick as mince and a lazy fucker so anyone will play reasonably well. So your happy with those two fuckwits because it's only Boris? Get ready for 20yrs of wilderness in that case.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 5, 2020 11:16:08 GMT
Sorry I forgot impulsive liar as well. Obviously that's fairly easy to exploit for any half able politician as well.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 5, 2020 11:17:49 GMT
Nice of the candidates to sit with Neil actually.
Who was it Boris subjected himself to in the election again? Pip and Holly and Des O'Connor?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 5, 2020 12:21:19 GMT
Sorry I forgot impulsive liar as well. Obviously that's fairly easy to exploit for any half able politician as well. We talking about wrong daily she has quite a litany from her childhood as the daughter of a docker to working as a lawyer for the NHS painfully exposed by Neill, that racist grandpa and uncle semtex choose her says so much about their judgement.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Mar 5, 2020 12:28:35 GMT
Sorry I forgot impulsive liar as well. Obviously that's fairly easy to exploit for any half able politician as well. We talking about wrong daily she has quite a litany from her childhood as the daughter of a docker to working as a lawyer for the NHS painfully exposed by Neill, that racist grandpa and uncle semtex choose her says so much about their judgement. Well if I had a vote I'd probably go for long Bailey only due to the fact she actually believes in her alleged principles Where as I don't trust Starmer or a word that comes out of his mouth
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 5, 2020 12:32:25 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁 Does Andrew Neil "interview" anyone? Everyone should sidestep him until the BBC realise that they've got it all wrong. Sheer rudeness doesn't make for a good interview and unfortunately the less intelligent fellow interviewers down the food chain seem to think it's the way ahead.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Mar 5, 2020 12:39:07 GMT
I'm watching the Andrew Neil interview with RLB and KS and both are fucking diabolical RLB is particularly shite fuck me what a choice. The tories must be pissing themselves over this bunch of skidmarks 😁 Does Andrew Neil "interview" anyone? Everyone should sidestep him until the BBC realise that they've got it all wrong. Sheer rudeness doesn't make for a good interview and unfortunately the less intelligent fellow interviewers down the food chain seem to think it's the way ahead. That debatable but what's not is the fact he picks up the crap and hypocrisy from those he challenges and from a personal point of view it's about time these weasels are exposed.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 5, 2020 12:47:39 GMT
Does Andrew Neil "interview" anyone? Everyone should sidestep him until the BBC realise that they've got it all wrong. Sheer rudeness doesn't make for a good interview and unfortunately the less intelligent fellow interviewers down the food chain seem to think it's the way ahead. That debatable but what's not is the fact he picks up the crap and hypocrisy from those he challenges and from a personal point of view it's about time these weasels are exposed. I no longer watch his interviews because he no longer interviews. It's become cheap entertainment and you learn nothing about a politician's views or policies. By all means ask difficult questions but it's just become rudeness and baiting. Shame that he's become so shit at interviewing over the years because he's hightly intelligent and knowledgable.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Mar 5, 2020 12:49:09 GMT
That debatable but what's not is the fact he picks up the crap and hypocrisy from those he challenges and from a personal point of view it's about time these weasels are exposed. I no longer watch his interviews because he no longer interviews. It's become cheap entertainment and you learn nothing about a politician's views or policies. By all means ask difficult questions but it's just become rudeness and baiting. Shame that he's become so shit at interviewing over the years because he's hightly intelligent and knowledgable. "...he picks up the crap and hypocrisy from those he challenges ..." He does. But it is true that, like most interviewers these days, he interrupts an answer much too soon. Yes, he cuts through the crap but there were several instances in the Wrong Daily interview where she was trying to develop a point but just couldn’t make her way through the interruptions. I’d agree with wagastokie above that, out of her and KS, she came across as the much better candidate.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 5, 2020 12:49:17 GMT
Does Andrew Neil "interview" anyone? Everyone should sidestep him until the BBC realise that they've got it all wrong. Sheer rudeness doesn't make for a good interview and unfortunately the less intelligent fellow interviewers down the food chain seem to think it's the way ahead. it's about time these weasels are exposed. Couldn't agree more, however..... Still, the brave lad took on the might of the Schofield interrogation in between segments on pubic lice and lemon drizzle cake.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Mar 5, 2020 12:59:33 GMT
it's about time these weasels are exposed. Couldn't agree more, however..... Still, the brave lad took on the might of the Schofield interrogation in between segments on pubic lice and lemon drizzle cake. Sheik, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that virtually all of your contributions on this board are anti-Tory (fair enough) but you very rarely offer an alternative view, policy or opinion. Just as a matter of interest, who is your favoured candidate in the Labour Leadership contest? And, equally, who do you think is the least credible? (you could also tell us why if you fancy)
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Mar 5, 2020 13:04:22 GMT
I no longer watch his interviews because he no longer interviews. It's become cheap entertainment and you learn nothing about a politician's views or policies. By all means ask difficult questions but it's just become rudeness and baiting. Shame that he's become so shit at interviewing over the years because he's hightly intelligent and knowledgable. "...he picks up the crap and hypocrisy from those he challenges ..." He does. But it is true that, like most interviewers these days, he interrupts an answer much too soon. Yes, he cuts through the crap but there were several instances in the Wrong Daily interview where she was trying to develop a point but just couldn’t make her way through the interruptions. I’d agree with wagastokie above that, out of her and KS, she came across as the much better candidate. Again that's debatable he asks a question and they waffle on philabusting not answering anything. Too long politicians of all persuasions have dodged questions, yes he can be abrasive but its borne from exasperation at the lack of answers. Edit: see today's Daily Politics, he asked a simple question on policy for the labour leaders and the lady gave an answer to a completely different one. So he asked again and the same shite so he asked again and told her she was not answering the question he asked! it's bullshit. Dont go on if you cant give a straight answer it's not hard.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 5, 2020 13:49:57 GMT
Couldn't agree more, however..... Still, the brave lad took on the might of the Schofield interrogation in between segments on pubic lice and lemon drizzle cake. Sheik, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that virtually all of your contributions on this board are anti-Tory (fair enough) but you very rarely offer an alternative view, policy or opinion. Just as a matter of interest, who is your favoured candidate in the Labour Leadership contest? And, equally, who do you think is the least credible? (you could also tell us why if you fancy) I post loads of stuff around policy. Not really arsed who gets it particularly at this point, just glad that Phillips and Thornberry didn't make the ballot. I have a problem with Nandy as she now preaches unity after refusing to serve in the shadow cabinet. I get all the literature and Starmer is talking a good game but I'm not sure I believe him. I think a woman will play well against Johnson's boorish oafishness and I have most in common with RLB. Basically I haven't decided yet. I think people will be surprised at how well a fresh face will play against Johnson. I watch PMQ's and he's alarmingly poorly briefed, Corbyn has schooled him on foreign affairs, the benefits system and even the withdrawal agreement in recent weeks
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Mar 5, 2020 14:02:14 GMT
How's this being covered in the US?
Just wondering, since we have to endure rolling coverage of the choice of an opposition party's leader from their country.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 5, 2020 15:08:28 GMT
We talking about wrong daily she has quite a litany from her childhood as the daughter of a docker to working as a lawyer for the NHS painfully exposed by Neill, that racist grandpa and uncle semtex choose her says so much about their judgement. Well if I had a vote I'd probably go for long Bailey only due to the fact she actually believes in her alleged principles Where as I don't trust Starmer or a word that comes out of his mouth She believes in her principles so much she spent 7 years working as a lawyer effectively privatising parts of the nhs, she is an empty shirt. I dont particular have any time for Starmer and there are questions to ask about his time as DPP but when he was a lawyer / barrister I believe he also undertook regular pro bono work whereas wrong daily seems to have only ever done things to advance her own position.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Mar 5, 2020 15:33:07 GMT
Well if I had a vote I'd probably go for long Bailey only due to the fact she actually believes in her alleged principles Where as I don't trust Starmer or a word that comes out of his mouth She believes in her principles so much she spent 7 years working as a lawyer effectively privatising parts of the nhs, she is an empty shirt. I dont particular have any time for Starmer and there are questions to ask about his time as DPP but when he was a lawyer / barrister I believe he also undertook regular pro bono work whereas wrong daily seems to have only ever done things to advance her own position. I think I'd be prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt on that one. If the only way to order infrastructure was to use a PFI, then that is that. She wasn't a politician and not in a position to change anything. I would prefer her to Starmer who, as far as I can make out, is just a sheep in sheeps clothing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2020 22:42:59 GMT
Sheik, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that virtually all of your contributions on this board are anti-Tory (fair enough) but you very rarely offer an alternative view, policy or opinion. Just as a matter of interest, who is your favoured candidate in the Labour Leadership contest? And, equally, who do you think is the least credible? (you could also tell us why if you fancy) I post loads of stuff around policy. Not really arsed who gets it particularly at this point, just glad that Phillips and Thornberry didn't make the ballot. I have a problem with Nandy as she now preaches unity after refusing to serve in the shadow cabinet. I get all the literature and Starmer is talking a good game but I'm not sure I believe him. I think a woman will play well against Johnson's boorish oafishness and I have most in common with RLB. Basically I haven't decided yet. I think people will be surprised at how well a fresh face will play against Johnson. I watch PMQ's and he's alarmingly poorly briefed, Corbyn has schooled him on foreign affairs, the benefits system and even the withdrawal agreement in recent weeks To be honest I think I agree with most of that. I voted Nandy but only because of my general worries for the other 2. Starmer I don't believe, same as yourself. I think PMQs are the sort of thing people either don't bother to watch, or they watch and agree with whatever they agreed with at the start, so I'm not sure how much effect that would have. People seem way more entrenched in their views, and I can see RLB as an easy target for the press, with Starmer a bit too 'wet wipe' to make a genuine go of it.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 10, 2020 8:09:13 GMT
Lisa Nandy on GMTV ripped apart by PM, trying to defend Dawn Butler on saying babies born without a biological sex then refusing to answer whether it's fair that men can self identify as women to compete in sport against women potentially the next Labour leader and they wonder why their historical voter base has rejected them, a party full of loons, for the many not just the few.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 10, 2020 8:18:09 GMT
Lisa Nandy on GMTV ripped apart by PM, trying to defend Dawn Butler on saying babies born without a biological sex then refusing to answer whether it's fair that men can self identify as women to compete in sport against women potentially the next Labour leader and they wonder why their historical voter base has rejected them, a party full of loons, for the many not just the few. These kind of conversations make you wonder if there's anything more important for politicians to be focusing on. I mean, it's not like we have issues with medical care, immigration, poverty, homelessness, coronavirus or flooding to deal with is it.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Mar 10, 2020 8:50:24 GMT
Lisa Nandy on GMTV ripped apart by PM, trying to defend Dawn Butler on saying babies born without a biological sex then refusing to answer whether it's fair that men can self identify as women to compete in sport against women potentially the next Labour leader and they wonder why their historical voter base has rejected them, a party full of loons, for the many not just the few. Cant think of a more serious charge than that against a potential future pm. Its scandalous. You clown.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Mar 10, 2020 9:18:33 GMT
Lisa Nandy on GMTV ripped apart by PM, trying to defend Dawn Butler on saying babies born without a biological sex then refusing to answer whether it's fair that men can self identify as women to compete in sport against women potentially the next Labour leader and they wonder why their historical voter base has rejected them, a party full of loons, for the many not just the few. Cant think of a more serious charge than that against a potential future pm. Its scandalous. You clown. If she can't or won't answer whether Usain Bolt should be allowed to race in the women's 100m then how can any sensible person believe she can have a reasonable answer to any question that's put to her. I suspect you would back her despite any loony idea she comes out with which would make you the clown.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Mar 10, 2020 9:30:42 GMT
Climate of fear overcoming common sence, people in the public eye cant say anything for fear of being labled. Is that really the kind of political debate we want where you can no longer have a point of view because others call you names. Dawn Butler was just nuts saying babies are born with no biological sex, Charles Darwin would have been destroyed by "modern" activists.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Mar 10, 2020 9:32:56 GMT
Cant think of a more serious charge than that against a potential future pm. Its scandalous. You clown. If she can't or won't answer whether Usain Bolt should be allowed to race in the women's 100m then how can any sensible person believe she can have a reasonable answer to any question that's put to her. I suspect you would back her despite any loony idea she comes out with which would make you the clown. Johnson never answered any question and when he decided to do so he lied.And all the fanatical right voted for him. You clown.
|
|