Election 2019 - The TV Debates

[aRdja]

4 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Okay, so I clicked on the trending topic you highlight there, and these were the first three tweets, by journalists from The Times, Sky News and podcaster Matt Forde.

 

 

 

 

It's just possible that people see what they want in these things, isn't it.

Here’s the verdict from The Guardian mate. Pro-europe, liberal Guardian.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/22/question-time-leaders-special-who-won-johnson-corbyn-swinson-sturgeon

 

Ouch. When Swinson argued vehemently to be allowed onto the debates, this was not the outing she was hoping for.

 

 

[Rico1304]

Jeremy fucked it right up.  All the ‘great’ minds of the GF think it’s a fucking terrible

idea but now they have to contort to defend his neutrality.  

[aRdja]

19 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Jeremy fucked it right up.  All the ‘great’ minds of the GF think it’s a fucking terrible

idea but now they have to contort to defend his neutrality.  

I am in agreement with Barry here that he should’ve come out and said that he’d back his own deal, but most GF posters actually want him to back remain. What stance do you think he should have taken here then?
 

Also I think you got yourself confused here with all due respect Rico, I haven’t seen anyone here ‘defend’ his neutrality. 

[aRdja]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/22/question-time-leaders-special-boris-johnson-jeremy-corbyn

 

Verdicts from 4 columnists.

 

Owen Jones: Jo Swinson’s performance was a near-calamity.

 

Polly Toynbee: Let’s hope tactical voters block their ears.

 

Martin Kettle: in the light of the mauling that Jo Swinson got from the audience, the Liberal Democrats should reflect that they were lucky she was cut out of the earlier confrontation altogether.

 

Katy Balls: The disastrous performance of the night was Jo Swinson’s.

[Paulie Dangerously]

I've criticised Corbyn for his fence sitting on brexit in the past.  I've even compared him to a fart without a smell. However, considering his clear commitment to having a second EU referendum and abiding by it, whatever the outcome, I think his neutrality is the most sensible thing to do. 

 

I'm not a "ooooo Jeremy Corbyn" anymore but I think he came across really well last night when some of the "questions" were just attacks. 

 

I didn't watch Sturgeon because I can't vote for her. Swinson looked like someone put in an impossible position trying to explain why she is against everything she has previous voted in favour of. 

 

It's the first time I've seen Johnson look genuinely flustered and under the cosh when questioned. Normally he just talks his way over and out of it by Bruce took him to task which, for the BBC, was refreshing. 

 

For anyone who thinks that plants, actors, etc are used in the audience...

 

 

[Mudface]

4 minutes ago, Paulie Dangerously said:

For anyone who thinks that plants, actors, etc are used in the audience...

 

 

Was he the one railing on about Smeeth/ anti-Semitism?

[Paulie Dangerously]

2 minutes ago, Mudface said:

Was he the one railing on about Smeeth/ anti-Semitism?

That's him. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

46 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Jeremy fucked it right up.  All the ‘great’ minds of the GF think it’s a fucking terrible

idea but now they have to contort to defend his neutrality.  

That’s just made up. 

[Mudface]

19 minutes ago, Paulie Dangerously said:

That's him. 

 

Someone lower down in the thread links to his previous appearances. How the fuck does he manage to get on so much?

[Paulie Dangerously]

1 minute ago, Mudface said:

 

Someone lower down in the thread links to his previous appearances. How the fuck does he manage to get on so much?

It's almost as though they want people in who will launch attacks instead of asking questions.

[aRdja]

He’s a Tory rep. The cheek of him, weaponising anti-semitism like that... beyond the pale.

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/08/ryan-jacobsz-to-win-the-next-election-the-conservatives-must-make-better-use-of-their-activists.html

[Mudface]

4 minutes ago, Paulie Dangerously said:

It's almost as though they want people in who will launch attacks instead of asking questions.

Aye. The first half of Corbyn's bit and most of Swinson's were mostly attacks, rather than questions about policy. Johnson, with the help of Bruce at times, just dodged the questions most of the time, which is probably what Swinson should have done.

[Mudface]

3 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

He’s a Tory rep. The cheek of him, weaponising anti-semitism like that... beyond the pale.

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/08/ryan-jacobsz-to-win-the-next-election-the-conservatives-must-make-better-use-of-their-activists.html

Hull West and Hessle. I used to live there, I can well imagine the sort of creature he is.

[Numero Veinticinco]

I just watched Corbyn. I thought he actually did really well. I thought he was poor in the head to head debate, I thought he was an order of magnitude better last night. 

[Bobby Hundreds]

I don't give a fuck what side Corbyn would or wouldn't support. I'd like the option to vote for one of the two options. Leave with a deal or remain. Decide for myself which is better. No deal off the cards, no body was even talking about no deal before the referendum they all said it was madness.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

10 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

He’s a Tory rep. The cheek of him, weaponising anti-semitism like that... beyond the pale.

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/08/ryan-jacobsz-to-win-the-next-election-the-conservatives-must-make-better-use-of-their-activists.html

He seems to have a bit of a hard on for Mr. Corbyn. 

 

https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-financial-interests/parliamentary-commissioner-for-standards/complaints-and-investigations/allegations-the-commissioner-has-rectified/rectifications-2018-19/

[Brownie]

1 hour ago, Barry Wom said:

He's been fence sitting trying not to tell anyone quite how he feels about Europe since the outset. I think he should declare like the last referendum the party will get free direction in how they campaign. He needs to say what he wants us to do and back it. The 1st thing that jumped into my mind when he said something like "I will remain neutral, so it allows me to bring the country together afterwards which ever way the referendum goes", was "I'm not falling for the same trick as Cameron and losing my job if I fall the wrong side of the argument" . He will be prime minister. A prime minister needs to lead. He needs to have a position. He needs to take the position that he feels will be right to help deliver his policies for the country and his government. He can't be neutral. At this point I care little if his position is leave or remain, but he needs to have a point of view and he needs to bring forward his arguments on why he has that point of view. He doesn't want to because the Tories have a clearer Brexit policy so he doesn't want brexit on the agenda.  

 

From a personal point of view, whilst I was (am ?) an incredibly staunch remainer, I think the whole Brexit project is a fucking disaster, I genuinely believe we've gone past the point of no return with Europe. If we were to stay now, our voice would be drastically diminished because of everything that has happened the last 3 years. We'd be able to guide nothing in Europe. Brexit has already fucked us and now it's about achieving the best outcome from the shit position these Tory cunts have put us in. I would say this is a national crisis and the idea that a future prime minister can have no position on this I find absolutely impossible balance. We're going to need a very smart and creative solution to get us out of this mess. We're in this mess because a majority of "the people" didn't (and I believe still don't) know what they voted for last time. A position of "I'll go with whatever the people want" is just an absolute abdication of duty to me. 

Fair enough if you think that mate but i’ve been behind this stance since the very start and have argued in support of it plenty of times.

 

If he came out on either side he would instantly alienate a shit load of people he’s trying not to lose. I think this position is the most effective way of keeping as many votes on both sides; we’re in a campaign after all and that’s what his job is.

 

History will ultimately judge whether it’s right or not.

[Brownie]

22 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I just watched Corbyn. I thought he actually did really well. I thought he was poor in the head to head debate, I thought he was an order of magnitude better last night. 

Agree with this.

[Barrington Womble]

2 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Fair enough if you think that mate but i’ve been behind this stance since the very start and have argued in support of it plenty of times.

 

If he came out on either side he would instantly alienate a shit load of people he’s trying not to lose. I think this position is the most effective way of keeping as many votes on both sides; we’re in a campaign after all and that’s what his job is.

 

History will ultimately judge whether it’s right or not.

So what you've said there is exactly why I said before I knew why he was taking this position. I do get it, I just really disagree with it. But here's the thing for me, I don't believe you can please all of the people all of the time - his position is attempting to do that in my.opinion. I've no doubt he would fuck people off if he picked a side, I just expect leaders to lead. If they don't want to lead, if they don't want to have a position, we don't need them. Let's just let the civil service run the country like a corporation and stop wasting our time and money with politicians and our supposed democracy. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Agree with this.

He hit on social values and, as a social democrat, I’m obviously going to get behind that agenda. I get ramped up when people talk about improving lives. There’s stuff I disagree with him on, but that’s fine. I disagree with the others more. I will, as I normally always do, voting for whenever most likely keeps the Tory out. 

[Rushies tash]

2 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Jeremy fucked it right up.  All the ‘great’ minds of the GF think it’s a fucking terrible

idea but now they have to contort to defend his neutrality.  

Knowing Cameron's position didn't work out too well for him did it? I think Corbyn's pragmatism is the most sensible option. He can then act on the results of any referendum without accusation of bias or hypocrisy.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Watching Swinson. She comes across as incredibly duplicitous. 

[Rico1304]

Just now, Rushies tash said:

Knowing Cameron's position didn't work out too well for him did it? I think Corbyn's pragmatism is the most sensible option. He can then act on the results of any referendum without accusation of bias or hypocrisy.

We know his position on every subject but this one. Brexit is going to be a disaster for the poorest people he’s supposed to be so worried about.  To be neutral is fucking dumb. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

We know his position on every subject but this one. Brexit is going to be a disaster for the poorest people he’s supposed to be so worried about.  To be neutral is fucking dumb. 

Yeah, you Tory voting cunt, you give a fuck about the poorest people. You voted for a referendum to save yourself a couple of pounds per week, yet you want to crow about Brexit and poor people. Go. Fuck. Yourself. 

[Aventus]

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

We know his position on every subject but this one. Brexit is going to be a disaster for the poorest people he’s supposed to be so worried about.  To be neutral is fucking dumb. 

Well maybe the deal he's planning on negotiating will make sure the poorest people are looked after, regardless of the outcome of the second referendum.