FT General Election Poll 2019

[StanSP]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

I doubt many Brexiteers will bother to vote in it.

This would be an odd tactic if you really wanted something to happen and at the same time, stop something else happen?

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

This would be an odd tactic if you really wanted something to happen and at the same time, stop something else happen?

There is no point in a customs union/sm Brexit and I wouldn't ever vote to remain so what's the point of me voting? 

 

I'll just spoil my ballot and then vote for a pro-Brexit party again at the next election.

[peach0000]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

To be honest it won't really be a "second referendum" - more of a remain walkover, I doubt many Brexiteers will bother to vote in it.

I've got a feeling you're right. I wouldn't participate in it personally. 

[SecretPro]

Hilarious the state of twitter and even on this thread tonight the amount of anger about a 'pro-labour' and 'biassed BBC' because Johnson has a mare of his own making (doesnt answer the questions, bumbles and rambles, sticks to tired taglines, doesn't talk about policies other than brexit). Have these people not been watching the BBC over the last year because until now it has been ridiculously pro-Tory, almost state television with the stuff they have edited, removed, not covered and the lines of questioning on QT and Newsnight. I mean Laura Kuntsberg could literally be Boris Johnsons PA FFS. 

 

Thought Corbyn did well - should be noted he didn't once attack the other parties and their leaders - he was confident enough to talk about labour instead. Says a lot.

[Gordon the Great]

8 hours ago, Salisbury Fox said:

The Scots seemed over represented too I thought. It certainly felt like the woman who praised Labour before asking her question was a plant.

I would say more vegetable than plant!

[Guest MattP]

8 hours ago, SecretPro said:

Hilarious the state of twitter and even on this thread tonight the amount of anger about a 'pro-labour' and 'biassed BBC' because Johnson has a mare of his own making (doesnt answer the questions, bumbles and rambles, sticks to tired taglines, doesn't talk about policies other than brexit). Have these people not been watching the BBC over the last year because until now it has been ridiculously pro-Tory, almost state television with the stuff they have edited, removed, not covered and the lines of questioning on QT and Newsnight. I mean Laura Kuntsberg could literally be Boris Johnsons PA FFS. 

 

Thought Corbyn did well - should be noted he didn't once attack the other parties and their leaders - he was confident enough to talk about labour instead. Says a lot.

 

I don't even know where to start with this - they claimed it was a balanced audience and it clearly wasn't. Some in the audience gave Corbyn a standing ovation onto the stage, Boris was booed - this was before either of them had even opened their mouths.

 

The "question" to Jeremy Corbyn of "I think you are great and are ready to be Prime Minister" was the point when any seriousness was lost.

 

At least their were a few Tories in though, the Lib Dems didn't seem to have a single supporter.

 

Although maybe it's just Labour supporters are loud and obnoxious? 

[Guest MattP]

9 hours ago, StanSP said:

This would be an odd tactic if you really wanted something to happen and at the same time, stop something else happen?

Another reason I'd vote against it is the potential of giving him a get out clause.

 

I'm certainly not having a situation where after implementing the basket case hard left economics on the country him or his supporters can turn around and blame leaving the EU for the consequences of it, nope - it will be fully down to him and his party.

[Nick]

Well I watched the debate and I wanted to be convinced by Swinson - I really wasn’t. Irrespective of audience behaviour, the cold hard truth of the process was that the only person to come out with a semblance of priministerial ability, policy understanding, verbal competency was Jeremy Corbyn which surprised me frankly. 

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Well I watched the debate and I wanted to be convinced by Swinson - I really wasn’t. Irrespective of audience behaviour, the cold hard truth of the process was that the only person to come out with a semblance of priministerial ability, policy understanding, verbal competency was Jeremy Corbyn which surprised me frankly. 

He was good, but in front of an audience cheering ever answer you make he's going to be good - in the same ways he's good talking at his rallies. I mean at one point their was a large cheer for an audience member saying Jeremy has tackled antisemitism all his life

 

Had someone shouted that Boris was a man of honesty and championed the poorest in society, and it was then followed by whooping and clapping he would have cruised through as well.

[Nick]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

He was good, but in front of an audience cheering ever answer you make he's going to be good - in the same ways he's good talking at his rallies. I mean at one point their was a large cheer for an audience member saying Jeremy has tackled antisemitism all his life

 

Had someone shouted that Boris was a man of honesty and championed the poorest in society, and it was then followed by whooping and clapping he would have cruised through as well.

Irrespective of audience, (and I have particular issue with his lack of an outright positive position in tackling of antisemitism within his party) He was the only capable candidate.

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Irrespective of audience, (and I have particular issue with his lack of an outright positive position in tackling of antisemitism within his party) He was the only capable candidate.

Can you judge capability from that though ?  
 

im trying to keep an open mind on all of this but the fact that he allowed his manifesto to be so over the top on promises tells me that he’s either a very bad judge or simply a plain liar like the rest of them ........

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Can you judge capability from that though ?  
 

im trying to keep an open mind on all of this but the fact that he allowed his manifesto to be so over the top on promises tells me that he’s either a very bad judge or simply a plain liar like the rest of them ........

He can't win a majority - so anything in the manifesto can be tossed away as "negotiation" when he forms a coalition. 

[Lionator]

50 minutes ago, MattP said:

He was good, but in front of an audience cheering ever answer you make he's going to be good - in the same ways he's good talking at his rallies. I mean at one point their was a large cheer for an audience member saying Jeremy has tackled antisemitism all his life

 

Had someone shouted that Boris was a man of honesty and championed the poorest in society, and it was then followed by whooping and clapping he would have cruised through as well.

The difference is that Corbyn has been an anti racism campaigner for all of his life. His flaws to a lot of people are his strengths to others. I get why people don't like him, I mean he has communicated with enemies of the British state in the past, but he would argue that they're no longer an 'enemy' due to active conversation. 

 

Boris on the other hand would never be whooped and clapped for that because he is a serial, compulsive liar. 

16 minutes ago, MattP said:

He can't win a majority - so anything in the manifesto can be tossed away as "negotiation" when he forms a coalition. 

This is true. Although a Labour government in coalition with the Lib Dems is my preference as it can basically be a reigned in version of Corbynism. 

[Guest MattP]

11 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The difference is that Corbyn has been an anti racism campaigner for all of his life. 

But he hasn't has he? If he had been that all life Jews wouldn't be preparing to flee the country if he was elected. Anti-racists are anti-racism all the time, they don't make exceptions for certain minority groups jus because a lot of them have a few quid.

 

I actually had a read into his apartheid protesting the other day and he was even disowned by the mainstream of that for supporting a radical group like the AAM who proposed 'one bullet, one settler" rather than the official ANC affiliate anti-apartheid campaigners. That famous picture of him being arrested is from one of those rallies. 

 

(FWIT I don't believe he genuinely belved that - but it's another example if his staggering naivety)

 

For a man of peace it's amazing how many times he found the most violent wing of whatever cause he felt was worth fighting. 

[Nick]

21 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Can you judge capability from that though ?  
 

im trying to keep an open mind on all of this but the fact that he allowed his manifesto to be so over the top on promises tells me that he’s either a very bad judge or simply a plain liar like the rest of them ........

I can only judge capability in terms of the debate, comparatively with those competing for the same job. If it were an interview panel and me the interviewer (allbeit I accept the questions were not the same and were not equal ops and those asking them were inconsistent despite every candidate getting critical questions regarding prejudice, discrimination and changing political positions), based on answers around their own policies, behaviours/conduct and not just soundbyting and having non specific baseless generalist answers that sway into criticising others to deflect from their own political knowledge and ability - Corbyn would get appointed. And when I say he’s capable - that’s the base benchmark as in ‘able to fulfill the role’ - not an endorsement, just that he was the only candidate that presented as appoint-able and meeting the threshold of criteria which demonstrated enough for me to be even considered as a Prime Minister of a country.

[SecretPro]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

But he hasn't has he? If he had been that all life Jews wouldn't be preparing to flee the country if he was elected. Anti-racists are anti-racism all the time, they don't make exceptions for certain minority groups jus because a lot of them have a few quid.

 

I actually had a read into his apartheid protesting the other day and he was even disowned by the mainstream of that for supporting a radical group like the AAM who proposed 'one bullet, one settler" rather than the official ANC affiliate anti-apartheid campaigners. That famous picture of him being arrested is from one of those rallies. 

 

(FWIT I don't believe he genuinely belved that - but it's another example if his staggering naivety)

 

For a man of peace it's amazing how many times he found the most violent wing of whatever cause he felt was worth fighting. 

😂 Jesus wept, get a grip. That will not happen. Meanwhile on here some posters are perfectly happy with 'Letter boxes, watermelon smiles and tank-topped bum-boys' to the point they are laughing along. There is clear evidence that racism is at a greater level within the Tory party than in the Labour party but certain parts of the media continue to beat Corbyn with the anti-Semitism stick because it helps whatever agenda they are usually pushing. 

 

Also unreal that majority of the media and those lapping up the Tories horseshit can't seem to differentiate between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism either. They are not one and the same, by a long shot. 

[Guest MattP]

Just now, SecretPro said:

😂 Jesus wept, get a grip. That will not happen. Meanwhile on here some posters are perfectly happy with 'Letter boxes, watermelon smiles and tank-topped bum-boys' to the point they are laughing along. There is clear evidence that racism is at a greater level within the Tory party than in the Labour party but certain parts of the media continue to beat Corbyn with the anti-Semitism stick because it helps whatever agenda they are usually pushing. 

 

Also unreal that majority of the media and those lapping up the Tories horseshit can't seem to differentiate between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism either. They are not one and the same, by a long shot. 

You can laugh all you want, but when things like that are happening it should concern you.

 

https://www.thejc.com/comment/columnists/jews-leaving-the-uk-britain-because-of-antisemitism-1.479616

 

I'll entertain you on the last point though.

 

When Jeremy Corbyn shares platforms with known holocaust deniers like Paul Eisen, when lays wreaths at the black September graves - which part of that comes under "anti-zionism" rather than "anti-semitism"?

 

Also, what gives you the right to tell Jews what antisemitism is, why are you allowed to define it but not them?

 

If black people or Muslims think Boris is racist then that is up to them and their call to make.

[Lionator]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

You can laugh all you want, but when things like that are happening it should concern you.

 

https://www.thejc.com/comment/columnists/jews-leaving-the-uk-britain-because-of-antisemitism-1.479616

 

I'll entertain you on the last point though.

 

When Jeremy Corbyn shares platforms with known holocaust deniers like Paul Eisen, when lays wreaths at the black September graves - which part of that comes under "anti-zionism" rather than "anti-semitism"?

 

Also, what gives you the right to tell Jews what antisemitism is, why are you allowed to define it but not them?

 

If black people or Muslims think Boris is racist then that is up to them and their call to make.

Different Jewish people are going to have different interpretations as to what offends them, part of the issue is that there's not one definition of what anti-semitism is. The press will always amplify the people at either end of the spectrum (Jews who are hypervigilant to possible anti-semitism and those Jews who don't think that anti-semitism is an issue in Labour). The right answer probably lies in the middle.

 

But if we're playing that game then (unless you're Jewish) what gives you the right to call Mr. Corbyn anti-semitic? 

 

[Lionator]

The same people who throw the term 'project fear' around re Brexit are the exact same people who are employing 'project fear' against Labours economic plans.

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

Different Jewish people are going to have different interpretations as to what offends them, part of the issue is that there's not one definition of what anti-semitism is. The press will always amplify the people at either end of the spectrum (Jews who are hypervigilant to possible anti-semitism and those Jews who don't think that anti-semitism is an issue in Labour). The right answer probably lies in the middle.

 

But if we're playing that game then (unless you're Jewish) what gives you the right to call Mr. Corbyn anti-semitic? 

You are pretty out of touch on this.

 

The definition is very clear - pretty much everyone uses the IHRA definition of it, Labour may have dragged their heels on it but even they accepted it eventually. 

 

There are very few Jews these days who don't believe he is an antisemite though. Over 90% in one poll said he was.

 

I remember seeing a poll once saying about 75% of the public thought Tommy Robinson was racist, that's better numbers than Corbyn has and I don't think we say the answer is "somewhere in the middle" with him. 

 

Last point - I've never actually called him an antisemite, I've said he's probably naive. He's guilty of allowing antisemitism to flourish though. 

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The same people who throw the term 'project fear' around re Brexit are the exact same people who are employing 'project fear' against Labours economic plans.

To be fair. The same finance experts saying Brexit will be a disaster are also saying Corbyn will be. The CBI, the IMF.

 

Maybe they are both right?

 

The economists on the Times podcast were laughing at the elasticity predictions in the costings of the Labour manifesto. 

[Nick]

Just now, MattP said:

You can laugh all you want, but when things like that are happening it should concern you.

 

https://www.thejc.com/comment/columnists/jews-leaving-the-uk-britain-because-of-antisemitism-1.479616

 

I'll entertain you on the last point though.

 

When Jeremy Corbyn shares platforms with known holocaust deniers like Paul Eisen, when lays wreaths at the black September graves - which part of that comes under "anti-zionism" rather than "anti-semitism"?

 

Also, what gives you the right to tell Jews what antisemitism is, why are you allowed to define it but not them?

 

If black people or Muslims think Boris is racist then that is up to them and their call to make.

I’m think I’m bowing out here Matt but I’ll say this, the candidates who spent a lot of their allocated time last night slandering and demonising others rather than being able to back themselves were not taken seriously.

 

You spend 90% of your time and rhetoric in here demonising Corbyn with the same tired labels from the same sources. I’m not traditionally a Jeremy Corbyn or Labour supporter but I’m attempting to be objective at least. Please tell me what you liked and was credible about your preferred candidates performance in terms of their political abilities and world view. If you are able to do this without mentioning Jeremy Corbyn, the BBC and left wing audiences (I think those areas of your rhetoric of hatred you’ve well addressed) I’ll certainly read your reply with interest.

 

 

 

[Guest MattP]

5 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I’m think I’m bowing out here Matt but I’ll say this, the candidates who spent a lot of their allocated time last night slandering and demonising others rather than being able to back themselves were not taken seriously.

 

You spend 90% of your time and rhetoric in here demonising Corbyn with the same tired labels from the same sources. I’m not traditionally a Jeremy Corbyn or Labour supporter but I’m attempting to be objective at least. Please tell me what you liked and was credible about your preferred candidates performance in terms of their political abilities and world view. If you are able to do this without mentioning Jeremy Corbyn, the BBC and left wing audiences (I think those areas of your rhetoric of hatred you’ve well addressed) I’ll certainly read your reply with interest.

When someone who has the past record and history of Jeremy Corbyn is a potential PM of this country it can't be talked about enough. 

 

We are in 2019 and more than half of a minority group are thinking about leaving the country if he becomes the PM. If that were the same situation with a Tory PM in reverse you would probably be doing the same as me and you would be right to do so.

[Salisbury Fox]

21 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The same people who throw the term 'project fear' around re Brexit are the exact same people who are employing 'project fear' against Labours economic plans.

The IFS you mean?

[Nick]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

When someone who has the past record and history of Jeremy Corbyn is a potential PM of this country it can't be talked about enough. 

 

We are in 2019 and more than half of a minority group are thinking about leaving the country if he becomes the PM. If that were the same situation with a Tory PM in reverse you would probably be doing the same as me and you would be right to do so.

Failed.