- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,674
Ahh but TC swap out “stupid for doing so” with “Stupid” and it sounds a whole lot different
Indeed, important difference. Not inherently stupid, just prone to doing stupid things
Off to Mill Road
Ahh but TC swap out “stupid for doing so” with “Stupid” and it sounds a whole lot different
The hilarious part about the opinions on Trump and the people that voted for him is that the majority agree with him (and voted him in) …..and (some) of the minority are reduced to hurling insults and proclaiming loudly their superior intellect…
People know what they are voting for … not the first time the polling has been wrongActually, a yougov poll shortly before the election showed that Kamala Harris's policies were more popular. Problem was people thought they were Trump's policies in many cases.
Harris vs. Trump on the issues: Whose policies do voters prefer? | YouGov
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, we take a deep dive into the policies that registered voters support, the issues they care about, and the candidates they trust to handle them.today.yougov.com
It's almost as if people don't even know what they're voting for.
People know what they are voting for … not the first time the polling has been wrong
It’s incomprehensible in the tiny little NSC left wing bubble I know but those politicians are extremely popular in a lot of places and shocking as it may seem it’s not because everyone else is stupid
But not because they are stupid.Actually, a yougov poll shortly before the election showed that Kamala Harris's policies were more popular. Problem was people thought they were Trump's policies in many cases.
Harris vs. Trump on the issues: Whose policies do voters prefer? | YouGov
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, we take a deep dive into the policies that registered voters support, the issues they care about, and the candidates they trust to handle them.today.yougov.com
It's almost as if people don't even know what they're voting for.
But not because they are stupid.
Maybe we should start voting for policies instead of candidates. That would circumvent the cult of personality we have seen over the last few years. We would need to make sure that the parties followed through on their promises.Actually, a yougov poll shortly before the election showed that Kamala Harris's policies were more popular. Problem was people thought they were Trump's policies in many cases.
Harris vs. Trump on the issues: Whose policies do voters prefer? | YouGov
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, we take a deep dive into the policies that registered voters support, the issues they care about, and the candidates they trust to handle them.today.yougov.com
It's almost as if people don't even know what they're voting for.
Its nothing to do with intelligence of course and you are quite right. However personally I think it is folly to cast one's vote based on story telling and personality (especially as, with Trump that personality is awful).Of course not. Most people aren't that interested in politics, especially when it comes to the detail. It's all about narrative and Trump's a great story teller.
Why would I include Len McKlunky? He's not impactful. Is he even still alive?Perhaps you might include a whole raft of union leaders/members from the last couple of decades … Len McCluskey perhaps… Sharon Graham … too many to mention
And yet people still mention him when the rest of us are slagging off the current plague of right wing tosspots, 'for balance'.Chavez has been dead for over 10 years
I was satirising my conversation with you.Harry, I hope you are not referring to me in your fifth paragraph re the BMA.
I do recall that we discussed the BMA at some time, and from memory, I said that a number of members with hard left views had taken over prominent positions in the association . Again from memory, you disagreed and said you would do some research. I don’t know whether or not you did, but if you had, you would have discovered quite a lot of evidence that this was the case. I believe I also referred you to the Nick Robinson’s ‘Political Thinking’ interview with Dr. Emma Runswick. I don’t know whether you have listened to it or not, but you may find it interesting, if you didn’t.
I was satirising my conversation with you.
In the great scheme of things a few lefties in the BMA is completely irrelevant. It does not 'balance' Trump, Badenough, Orban and the other right wing lunatics that are swarming all over global politics and swamping the imagination of the gullable with their nonsense.
I did find a fat bloke defending your narrative here:
And the Torygraph asks 'the' question here:
Has the militant Left taken over the British Medical Association?
The almighty battle at the heart of the doctors' union might be the real reason you still can't see your GPwww.telegraph.co.uk
The answer is obviously 'no' or the headline wouldn't be a question.
It seems that the militant BMA is a reddit conspiracy.
Junior doctors strike: How a Reddit rebellion took over the British Medical Association
The future of the NHS was on the table but across it, facing the health secretary, were scenes bordering on farce.During talks to avert the most disruptive stwww.thetimes.com
Who knew?
Lovely old research.
Yeah, I didn't explain that very well.I haven’t seen these pieces you have chosen to show, but I have read a large article that was in the Sunday edition of the Times a while back, the Nick Robinson article with Emma Runswick I referred to and a number of letters to the Times from unhappy doctors.
Satirising our conversation? Hmm. I will say no more for danger of upsetting our usual NSC relationship.
General Secretary of Unite. Hardliner- not a fan of StarmerWhy would I include Len McKlunky? He's not impactful. Is he even still alive?
Not heard of Sharon. She must be really pivotal in the weft of history.
Presumably I will have heard of her by the time that happens.General Secretary of Unite. Hardliner- not a fan of Starmer
Oh she’s a problem alright Harry no doubt about it. My guess is she will push her luck with this Government and may even have a part to play in it’s downfall.
Hi Harry,Yeah, I didn't explain that very well.
(I am surprised there hasn't been a deluge of letters from irritated well-paid GPs criticizing the BMA. This would hardly prove a point, however. They are a different breed to the young hospital doctors. I say 'young'. My 34 year old colleague whose marriage was at risk due to his long hours and relatively low income associated with his status, who emigrated to Canada to save the situation, may have a different take on the BMA and the tutting GPs and their letters to the Telegraph. I wonder if the rank and file doctors will be refusing the pay rise that the BMA has 'won' for them?).
(I suspect an hour over a beer would be needed to resolve our 'perspective issue' on this occasion. Possibly two )
McCluskey writes at some length about something called Unite’s “leverage strategy”, organised by Graham This, he explains, is the strategy his union adopted when disputes were at their most intractable, or could not be settled by strike action alone. If a company sacked one of McCluskey’s shop stewards or reneged on a union recognition agreement, its chief executive could expect protesters outside their golf club, and the firms with whom they did business would be pressured too. When the construction giant Balfour Beatty withdrew from an agreement with unions in 2012, Unite sent its friends in the US Teamsters union to occupy the chief executive’s office in Dallas.Presumably I will have heard of her by the time that happens.
OK, I'll look her up.
"Graham was elected the general secretary of Unite on 25 August 2021 with 46,696 votes, 37.7% of the votes cast, less than 4% of the membership,[25] and took office on 26 August.[26][27][28] In September 2021, she wrote in The Guardian that Unite should focus more on fighting "for jobs, pay and conditions" rather than "hoping for the election of a Labour government to solve our members' problems".[29] The same month, she warned Keir Starmer that he had "lost touch with reality" because of his intention to change the Labour Party leadership election rules.[30] On 9 February 2022, following the controversial treatment of workers at Labour-led Coventry Council, she stated that all remaining Labour funding was "under review".[31] Starmer said that the Labour Party would not be "influenced by threats".[32] In 2023, Graham's confrontational approach to the Labour Party led to the New Statesman naming her as the eleventh most powerful Left Wing figure in the UK that year.[33]"
Eleventh most powerful left wing figure.....back by a tumescent 4% of her union. Crikey. If you imagine that this person will lead her 4% into a General Strike, and bring down the Labour government, I salute your negativity. Or optimism, depending on your heart's desires .
(Did I just see Sir Kier raise one eyebrow? )
2012 you say?McCluskey writes at some length about something called Unite’s “leverage strategy”, organised by Graham This, he explains, is the strategy his union adopted when disputes were at their most intractable, or could not be settled by strike action alone. If a company sacked one of McCluskey’s shop stewards or reneged on a union recognition agreement, its chief executive could expect protesters outside their golf club, and the firms with whom they did business would be pressured too. When the construction giant Balfour Beatty withdrew from an agreement with unions in 2012, Unite sent its friends in the US Teamsters union to occupy the chief executive’s office in Dallas.
He describes her as “the best organiser in the whole of Europe”. So much so that she once managed to close a toll bridge in Toronto after Unite wound up in dispute with its Spanish operator, who had sacked a shop steward working in London. I wonder if McCluskey would write that now.