'Leadership' debate

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The left wing/Momentum are incredibly well organised. You only have to look at the numbers following JC around the country and the fact that wherever May goes is always publicised and hence there is always a counter demonstration of Corbynistas (JC keeps his speaking engagements secret, restricted to those who are knownto be supporters hence no counter-demo, not that it is in the Tory psyche to demonstrate). It is comfortably within their skill set to manipulate the BBC processes and con them into thinking they have dug up a "representative" audience whereas in reality the audience is choc full of Corbynistas. Its they way they work.

I had always thought that Momentum were a bunch of recent graduates from a former poletechnic, where they got a Desmond or Douglas in something like 'Oasis Studies'. I thought that their tactic was to openly bully and intimidate anyone who did not support Corbyn and Momentum, or any labour candidate who may have expressed doubts about the redemptive power of whole sale nationalisation and nuclear disarmament. I am now suitably chastened. I had no idea how brilliantly organised and effective they are. I am now definitely going to vote labour because Momentem are clearly the only group with the wherewithall to run the country.

 

[Ernest]

Whats the reason for this post ?

My post was a satirical reply linking football with politics as others were doing.

You obviously don't follow my posts on Corbyn. I am a fan of his. He scored a ''beauty'' when he threw the fact that Tories don't know anything about or associate themselves with the people who go to food banks.

That's why I made the statement of getting out my seat and cheered when Jeremy threw that in their faces last night. My postal vote went in the post today and there is no one I would ever dream of voting for in this Election is ''Team Corbyn''

I always knew you were sensible

 

[Weststander]

The left wing/Momentum are incredibly well organised. You only have to look at the numbers following JC around the country and the fact that wherever May goes is always publicised and hence there is always a counter demonstration of Corbynistas (JC keeps his speaking engagements secret, restricted to those who are knownto be supporters hence no counter-demo, not that it is in the Tory psyche to demonstrate). It is comfortably within their skill set to manipulate the BBC processes and con them into thinking they have dug up a "representative" audience whereas in reality the audience is choc full of Corbynistas. Its they way they work.

It's always been the way. Huge demonstrations of rent a mob haters outside Tory conferences and anything to do with New Labour post-Iraq 2003 to 2010. The hatred of mobs towards Farage in the build up to the Referendum.

It really will count for nothing on June 8th. The bitter left made their voting minds up many years ago. Shouting, aggression, 'Tory Scum' banners and manipulating an audience composition .... will never positively persuade floating voters.

The majority of the great UK public don't watch these debates and will vote as they please.

 

[NooBHA]

I always knew you were sensible

Even better that I am in a ''Marginal Seat'' Ernest

 

[Machiavelli]

I'm not sure why you have leapt to the assumption that I don't trust the BBC, or that I have 'a problem with trust in general'. I don't doubt that the BBC intended it to be a balanced audience and, generally, I think their coverage of politics is among the best - if not the best. However, they, or rather their contractor, got it wrong last night. They are not infallible.

Ultimately, the only thing the recruitment company has to go on is STATED political leaning / voting intention and STATED voting record. There is no means of validating stated voting record against actual voting record. You could possibly do the due diligence on someone's social media accounts to check that their political alignment is not contrary to what they have claimed - but this is unlikely to be a commercially viable / practical option. Put simply, if an organised group of people set out to fool the recruitment company, they can do so (and did last night).

I'm immediately retracting my suspicion of lack of trust
This is a thoughtful response, although I think there's a likelier explanation, and that's the 'lefties' tend to be more vocal at such events, rather than the 'shy Tories' who, as the last election demonstrated, are a misunderstood and far larger than credited breed in this country. This might also answer the concerns of [MENTION=5200]Buzzer[/MENTION] who is a conservative (although not necessarily Tory), but isn't shy -- on which I don't really give a toss what the political editor of The New Statesmen (which is a dreadful magazine) 'feels'. B.uzzer doesn't quite understand the position where I'm coming from, which is further illustrated by his accusation that I favour purity.
You might be right in your analysis, or it might be better explained by my claim of the noisy (great unwashed) lefties, but the key point is that neither of our explanations point to the fact that the BBC knowingly selected a partisan audience, which is what many of the usual suspects on here are claiming.
One final point: I quite like Mishal Hussein (sp), but she was a very poor host last night. Not that that didn't contribute to the entertainment.

 

[Soulman]

Whats the reason for this post ?

My post was a satirical reply linking football with politics as others were doing.

You obviously don't follow my posts on Corbyn. I am a fan of his. He scored a ''beauty'' when he threw the fact that Tories don't know anything about or associate themselves with the people who go to food banks.

That's why I made the statement of getting out my seat and cheered when Jeremy threw that in their faces last night. My postal vote went in the post today and there is no one I would ever dream of voting for in this Election is ''Team Corbyn''

I was pointing out that throwing food banks at the Tories was a bit rich seeing as the food banks were around and started under the Labour watch. I do grant you that the amount of people using them has gone up remarkably.

 

[Surf's Up]

What a load of embarrassing old twaddle. Pure fantasy.

Do you honestly think he can keep his appearance on the show secret enough for the Momentum wing to stuff the BBC audience without one single political commentator getting a whiff of that story? Or was it the oh-so Corbyn-friendly BBC shovelling Momentum members in without them batting an eyelid? Poor tin hat conspiracy theory there.

And what's this 'it's how they work' stuff? What does that even mean? Are you an active member of Momentum and know exactly what they do on a day to day basis - or are you making it up?

It evidently hasn't occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, he won over the audience. No, I guess it hasn't. Sorry, carry on.

Te he he - why oh why is the left so sensitive and so unecessarily aggressive?!!

 

[Soulman]

Te he he - why oh why is the left so sensitive and so unecessarily aggressive?!!

Because they have spent years building their hopes up, going out on shouty and often destructive demos, shouting anyone that opposes them down and insulting them.......
and still they can not get their own way.

 

[amexer]

Why on earth dont any of them mention we are in tremendous debt and this has to be paid back. Whatevever party is in government there cannot be spend spend spend. This can only happen when a good portion of debt is paid of. I have always voted labour but sorry answer is not to just tax the rich. My boss employs 150 plus people. He is wealthy but good luck to him. Sure with corporation tax he pays more tax then the 150 workers put together.
I vote labour but consider NHS as it is, is impossible to fund and would charge £10 to see doctor. Sure loads in politics would agree but vote loser to say. After all I pay to go to dentist. Are there any other countries where health care is 1005 free. I have lived in Germany and France and certainly not there

 

[drew]

Why on earth dont any of them mention we are in tremendous debt and this has to be paid back. Whatevever party is in government there cannot be spend spend spend. This can only happen when a good portion of debt is paid of. I have always voted labour but sorry answer is not to just tax the rich. My boss employs 150 plus people. He is wealthy but good luck to him. Sure with corporation tax he pays more tax then the 150 workers put together.
I vote labour but consider NHS as it is, is impossible to fund and would charge £10 to see doctor. Sure loads in politics would agree but vote loser to say. After all I pay to go to dentist. Are there any other countries where health care is 1005 free. I have lived in Germany and France and certainly not there

Why does the debt 'have' to be paid off? The mistake everyone makes is comparing the national economy to that of a household. A household has a limited earnings lifetime, literally, whereas the national economy goes on and on and on. I appreciate that that the deficit is a different matter but the national debt has been around for centuries. Yes, in and ideal world we wouldn't have a national debt but then we probably wouldn't have as many schools, hospitals, transport infrastructure etc etc.

As for the NHS, the two comparisons you highlight both pay much more of their GDP to healthcare!!!

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

The BBC is publicly funded and made a clear claim that the audience is/was 'representative'. I trust the BBC on this, you quite clearly don't (and probably have a problem with trust in general), but I'm more interested in hearing why you don't trust the BBC.

I'll answer that.

The BBC use a debt collection service, to send out misleading threatening and false letter demanding payment of a license fee as a matter of course.

Secondly there was a major cover up for years, when a number of their presenters where sexually abusing and raping children.

Do you need any more explanation why people don't trust the BBC?

 

[Yoda]

More pantomime than theatre. Absolutely nothing more than mob induced hysteria at times

No different to Prime Ministers Questions in Parliament then

 

[Gritt23]

May missed the bun fight, rudeness, incompetence of Dimbleby in mismanaging the whole affair (not bias, just too weak and softly spoken), and a bunch of kids shouting over each other on stage who purport to be visionaries leading us. A wise move.

Some obsess about these leaders debates, most notably the TV media who like to think that they set the agenda. It's always the same - infantile put-downs, in between promising the earth.

I learnt far more from the brilliant grillings by the cerebral and very direct Andrew Neil.

I tend to agree with this. These are NOT the most informative forums for me, and completely agree that the Andrew Neil interviews told us far more.

I do think it's a shame when leaders don't turn up to these, but they are hardly a corner stone of our political tradition. They came about when we had media-savvy leaders on both sides, who fancied their chances of charming the tv audience. I think Clegg when came out as a "big winner" in the first one in 2010, suddenly every smaller party fancied their chances of "doing a Clegg" and jumping huge % points in the polls at a stroke.

This sort of thing is made for the likes of Blair, but he was all style and very little substance, hardly a great example of how the winner in these debates makes a great leader. The current crop do not have a media-friendly personality between them, so maybe these debates should be consigned back to the show boating politics of America, from where they came. Give me the Andrew Neil interviews over these every day of the week.

 

[Gritt23]

No different to Prime Ministers Questions in Parliament then

Yep. And I rarely tune into that either, as it is pretty unlikely to decide my vote.

 

[portlock seagull]

No different to Prime Ministers Questions in Parliament then

Below even that!

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

May missed the bun fight, rudeness, incompetence of Dimbleby

Eh? Dimbleby? He's certainly undergone a huge transformation!

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I'll answer that.

The BBC use a debt collection service, to send out misleading threatening and false letter demanding payment of a license fee as a matter of course.

Secondly there was a major cover up for years, when a number of their presenters where sexually abusing and raping children.

Do you need any more explanation why people don't trust the BBC?

Yeah, but apart from these minor issues.....

 

[Deleted member 2719]

The audience was specially selected by a polling company to be 'representative' of the country, in terms of:
-- political party support, and undecided voters
-- support for/against Brexit
Given that, why are you so convinced that the audience was largely Momentum/Corbyn cheerleaders?

Yeah right.

Do you really believe that or are you just on a wind up

 

[TSB]

I'll answer that.

The BBC use a debt collection service, to send out misleading threatening and false letter demanding payment of a license fee as a matter of course.

Secondly there was a major cover up for years, when a number of their presenters where sexually abusing and raping children.

Do you need any more explanation why people don't trust the BBC?

I know how you feel.
I still don't trust those Germans.

****ing pathetic reasoning.

FWIW: The audience was chosen by Comres. A pollster. Not the bbc. Morons.

 

[Soulman]

A column written by the Labour leader, jezbollah Corbyn, in October 2014 for the Communist Party newspaper Morning Star was cited as evidence he attended a ceremony in Tunisia “where wreaths were laid… on the graves of [those] killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991”. Mr Corbyn described the event as “poignant”. He wrote: “After wreaths were laid at the graves of those who died on that day and on the graves of others killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991, we moved to the poignant statue in the main avenue of the coastal town of Ben Arous, which was festooned with Palestinian and Tunisian flags.”


Among those buried at the cemetery visited by Mr Corbyn is Atef Bseiso, who was head of intelligence for the PLO and was involved in the murder of 11 Israeli athletes and coaches as part of the infamous terrorist operation in Munich. The visit came just 12 months after Mr. Corbyn assumed leadership of the Labour Party. During the Middle East trip, the man seeking to be prime minister also attended a conference alongside members of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.


Simon Johnson, chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, said: “In light of today’s news reports, it is high time that Jeremy Corbyn clarifies his views regarding Palestinian terrorism. At first sight, attending a wreath-laying ceremony of a known terrorist, who led one of the most notorious acts of international terrorism, the attack on the Munich Olympics, would appear to be beyond the pale”.

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/jer...henning-dz356f92t?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1903081

https://order-order.com/2017/05/29/corbyn-attended-terror-conference-honouring-munich-killer/