The labour Leader thread...
- Thread starter easyrider
- Start date
I hate labour but her interview style always winds me up regardless of who she's speaking to, it's awful
/thread!
I don't really care about his personal life, i am more concerned on his ability to provide a credible opposition to the bunch of selfish pigs we have in charge atm.
Thatchers children doing more damage than mommy. Wouldn't she be proud. But we can cover it up with MI5 .....
Thatchers children doing more damage than mommy. Wouldn't she be proud. But we can cover it up with MI5 .....
Well no - I don't think it's about not having principles, it's that his principles towards preferring a socialist system seemed to take preference over the principles of giving his child the best start in life. Which is pretty bad.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 4,255
- Location
- North Sea
Agreed. She just seems needlessly provocative, trying to illicit a reaction from everyone she interviews, regardless of the circumstances.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,086
- Location
- Berkland
LOL, students, gonna be students.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,236
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Corbyn will be 71 if wins the next election.
The best start in this case is at the expense of others, again telling.
You don't have to support educational privilege to be a good parent, neither does it always give them the best start in life (it depends on the framework you judge best).
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2011
- Posts
- 4,418
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Corbyn could be the back bone of a strong opposition offering a real alternative to the Tory way of thinking. What we have at the moment is a selection of political parties all falling over themselves in an effort not the rock the boat, pandering to the ideals that the party in power and the media have sold and the public have bought hook line and sinker.
I want a party that will tell me their vision for the Country, not one that will make a best estimate at what they think I want to hear and then feed it back to me. Don't tell me you believe all the things that I do, tell me what you believe in and then convince me that you're right.
Surely it's better to have a genuine opposition, proferring a genuine alternative as opposed to a party saying "Yes, but wouldn't you prefer all of the same policies but in a slightly redder shade?"
If the Conservatives didn't view Corbyn as a threat, then nobody would be talking about him. The fact of the matter is you can't win an election by trying to out Tory the Tories.
I want a party that will tell me their vision for the Country, not one that will make a best estimate at what they think I want to hear and then feed it back to me. Don't tell me you believe all the things that I do, tell me what you believe in and then convince me that you're right.
Surely it's better to have a genuine opposition, proferring a genuine alternative as opposed to a party saying "Yes, but wouldn't you prefer all of the same policies but in a slightly redder shade?"
If the Conservatives didn't view Corbyn as a threat, then nobody would be talking about him. The fact of the matter is you can't win an election by trying to out Tory the Tories.
Really? I am thinking confirmation bias rather than your much vaunted objectivity.
Everybody owns everything and everybody gets to make decisions about everything. The economy is owned and run collectively either by cooperatives, common ownership or the state owning everything.
On paper it is a fantastic idea, sadly every time it has been tried to be implemented wholesale lots of people have died.
Mainly because the "socialism" that's been tried was actually a front for a dictatorship. And /not/ the benevolent kind.
Stalin, Hitler, etc, all called their regimes "socialist". All went for absolute power and were absolutely insane/corrupt.
Perhaps if you could separate socialism from these kinds of leaders and regimes you might get somewhere. Or maybe socialist ideals inevitably lead to corruption and abuse of power. Who knows.
It sure doesn't seem to have been implemented in a way that benefits the people thus far. But can you blame socialism or should you blame the people responsible for implementing it.
(from the BBC) The 1983 election remains a sore point in Labour political folklore.
Mr Foot campaigned on a platform that included:
■unilateral nuclear disarmament
■higher taxes
■nationalisation of the banks
■withdrawal from the European Economic Community (EEC)
■the abolition of the House of Lords
The Labour manifesto, 700 pages long, and in retrospect rather optimistically entitled The New Hope for Britain, did not bother to summarise the policies but instead simply included everything to avoid a bitter public clash between rival factions.
Seem familiar to anyone?
Mr Foot campaigned on a platform that included:
■unilateral nuclear disarmament
■higher taxes
■nationalisation of the banks
■withdrawal from the European Economic Community (EEC)
■the abolition of the House of Lords
The Labour manifesto, 700 pages long, and in retrospect rather optimistically entitled The New Hope for Britain, did not bother to summarise the policies but instead simply included everything to avoid a bitter public clash between rival factions.
Seem familiar to anyone?