Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?


Sugar Ape
 Share

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?  

218 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?



Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Numero said:

I called it a blog post because it’s on their blog. Of course you’re not willing to back up what you said, because you can’t. It’s disgusting. This is the problem with you lot, you see being accurate as an insult that you have to have a dig over. My unwillingness to bend reality to fit your narrative is actually offensive to you. It’s fucking bizarre. 
 

Anyway. Here’s the blog for that site. Imagine calling the first blog post on the blog a ‘blog post’. What a right wing thing to do. 
 

https://tribunemag.co.uk/blog

 

Edit: By the way, the reasonable, mature, honest thing to do now is say ‘oh, I didn’t realise it was on the blog. Sorry’. I look forward to ‘I’m not part of the problem’, and ‘go pick on someone else’. 

 

 

I didn't even realise they had a blog so fair enough and sorry. I clicked on the article at Tribune magazine and thought of it as a magazine article, (edit : which is my mistake seeing as the magazine is separate.) It's a common thing with you too though to reduce things you don't like to just a "blog post" as if it dismisses anything in it. So fucking what if it's a blog post? It's probably more accurate and relevant than most of the shite the mainstream media are saying.

 

It doesn't support Keir though so it's just a "blog post." Dismiss the whole lot along with so many other reports of Starmer having made a fucking mess of things and bend reality to fit your own narrative instead. Have fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

I didn't even realise they had a blog so fair enough and sorry. I clicked on the article at Tribune magazine and thought of it as a magazine article, which is probably is too really. It's a common thing with you too though to reduce things you don't like to just a "blog post" as if it dismisses anything in it. So fucking what if it's a blog post? It's probably more accurate and relevant than most of the shite the mainstream media are saying.

 

It doesn't support Keir though so it's just a "blog post." Dismiss the whole lot along with so many other reports of Starmer having made a fucking mess of things and bend reality to fit your own narrative instead. Have fun.

It really does undermine the apology when you follow it by doubling down on the bollocks. I didn’t dismiss it because it’s a blog post. I called it a blog post because it’s a blog post. I dismissed it because I think it’s a terrible blog post. I’m not bending reality I’m just calling a blog post that’s a post on their blog a blog post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Numero said:

It really does undermine the apology when you follow it by doubling down on the bollocks. I didn’t dismiss it because it’s a blog post. I called it a blog post because it’s a blog post. I dismissed it because I think it’s a terrible blog post. I’m not bending reality I’m just calling a blog post that’s a post on their blog a blog post. 

 

I wasn't referring to you bending reality by calling a blog post a blog post. I meant the way you dismiss almost anything negative about Starmer and prefer instead to argue with people that support Corbyn by the looks of it.

 

Maybe have a go at one or more of the points in the actual blog post itself if you don't like it instead of just calling it terrible and a blog post without touching on any content at all. If you'd have done that in the first place it might have saved some time and energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red Phoenix said:

 

I wasn't referring to you bending reality by calling a blog post a blog post. I meant the way you dismiss almost anything negative about Starmer and prefer instead to argue with people that support Corbyn by the looks of it.

 

Maybe have a go at one of more of the points in the actual blog post itself if you don't like it instead of just calling it terrible and a blog post without touching on any content at all. If you'd have done that in the first place it might have saved some time and energy.

How does dismissing it bend reality? RP, you’re literally just quoting back something I’ve just said to you without thinking about it. It’s one step away from ‘no, you are’. 
 

As for responding to the entire fuckin’ blog post, is there something specific you want a response to, because I’m not spending three hours responding to every single line and getting sources for everything just to be ignored. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

I didn't even realise they had a blog so fair enough and sorry. I clicked on the article at Tribune magazine and thought of it as a magazine article, (edit : which is my mistake seeing as the magazine is separate.) It's a common thing with you too though to reduce things you don't like to just a "blog post" as if it dismisses anything in it. So fucking what if it's a blog post? It's probably more accurate and relevant than most of the shite the mainstream media are saying.

 

It doesn't support Keir though so it's just a "blog post." Dismiss the whole lot along with so many other reports of Starmer having made a fucking mess of things and bend reality to fit your own narrative instead. Have fun.

Same works for ‘Podcast’. Oh, it’s a podcast, must be bollocks. Or turn you right wing. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Numero said:

As for responding to the entire fuckin’ blog post, is there something specific you want a response to, because I’m not spending three hours responding to every single line and getting sources for everything just to be ignored. 

 

Nope not really bothered, I was just linking it for others to read if they wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Same works for ‘Podcast’. Oh, it’s a podcast, must be bollocks. Or turn you right wing. 

No, no. Let’s not be dishonest. Nobody has an issue with podcasts or blogs. People have an issue when you only get your information from podcasts or blogs or twitter. Podcasts and blogs and twitter can range from insightful, specialist commentators who are experts in their field, to the more usual bloke down the pub who has no deep understanding about any issues he’s bleating about. 
 

Read a fuckin’ textbook once in a while, guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Nope not really bothered, I was just linking it for others to read if they wanted to.

I enjoyed and agreed with most of the article*. I thought Starmer was the right man for the job but then the other candidates were piss poor. I just dont see the need for him to fight a needless fight against Corbyn which has already been won, the anti semitism issue has been addressed. Its futile and draining. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* sorry blog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Numero said:

Podcasts and blogs and twitter can range from insightful, specialist commentators who are experts in their field, to the more usual bloke down the pub who has no deep understanding about any issues he’s bleating about. 
 

Read a fuckin’ textbook once in a while, guys. 

 

I think the editor of Tribune that wrote the "blog post" I linked has a decent enough understanding of what's going on. Feel free to disagree though, which you surely will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

I enjoyed and agreed with most of the article*. I thought Starmer was the right man for the job but then the other candidates were piss poor. I just dont see the need for him to fight a needless fight against Corbyn which has already been won, the anti semitism issue has been addressed. Its futile and draining.

 

I preferred RLB but looking at the state of things I'm not sure how much better she'd have done. Labour's a real mess and it's hard to see how things will be resolved any time soon. If it carries on like this maybe a split is a real possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red Phoenix said:

I think the editor of Tribune that wrote the "blog post" I linked has a decent enough understanding of what's going on. Feel free to disagree though, which you surely will.

I think it’s a biased post based on his evident bias towards Corbyn that he has displayed through the blog. Blogs are great insofar as you don’t even have to pretend you have anything approaching a standard of impartiality, integrity, impartiality or, well, any standard at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Numero said:

I think it’s a biased post based on his evident bias towards Corbyn that he has displayed through the blog. Blogs are great insofar as you don’t even have to pretend you have anything approaching a standard of impartiality, integrity, impartiality or, well, any standard at all. 

 

He's mainly reporting on CLP's across the country supporting Corbyn having the whip reinstated from what I can see, even though party officials are trying to stop that from happening apparently. It doesn't seem like democracy in Labour is going too well if that's what's actually happening.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

It seems a few are trying to out 'righty' each other rather than out lefty each other reading the last few pages.

 

Genuine question, not just for Gnasher but for anyone else who likes to throw out accusations of being right-wing.

 

My understanding of right-wing politics is that it is mainly about the preservation of existing hierarchies, slowing or stopping progressive ideas, appealing to tradition and even advocating for a reversion to the ways of the past.

 

How many people here does that apply to, really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Have stopped going in to the comments, same 10 people saying the same things on every thread and basically stopping any new posters being bothered to get involved.

 

I was more interested in the main article. 

Well, I’d have to read the 112 page rule book, but fuck that. I don’t trust that site as far as I can throw them. No matter what the content, they’re just not a good source. But I’ve no idea if it’s correct. I read the comments to see if anybody was talking about the actual rule book, but it descended into Israel conspiracies, CIA, Israel lobby bullies, and saying he’s the first illiterate lawyer. 

 

One commenter did link this though, which seems to be an article extolling the virtues of Corbyn’s ability to withdraw the whip from MPs that don’t fall in line. 
 

https://skwawkbox.org/2016/12/21/corbyn-has-right-to-withdrawthewhip-from-watson-or-other-mps-heres-the-proof/

 

In short... blogs ain’t to be trusted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Genuine question, not just for Gnasher but for anyone else who likes to throw out accusations of being right-wing.

 

My understanding of right-wing politics is that it is mainly about the preservation of existing hierarchies, slowing or stopping progressive ideas, appealing to tradition and even advocating for a reversion to the ways of the past.

 

How many people here does that apply to, really?

Havnt you described conservatism?

 

If you want to team up with a fellow right wing looney toon I suggest you read a few of AoTs posts, he thinks workers should lose all rights and Britain should declare war on Belgium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...