[Politics] The General Election Thread

[Simster]

I'm sure he will - he will rip Johnson to pieces. He's the best around by far.

The thing about last night was that Corbyn was asked about:

Antisemitism
His 'neutral' stance on Brexit
WAPSI women
Tax increases for lower paid married people.
ISIS

And he failed to answer any of the questions raised.

He's certainly not a satisfactory leader of the Labour Party, or indeed potential PM

Not having that. He answered antisemitism adequately (in fact I'd say Neill embarrassed himself a bit on this issue), he eventually answered WAPSI women adequately (squirming behind UK assets before eventually conceding it would be funded by borrowing), and he answered on tax increases for lower married people, again after a lot of squirming.

Certainly agree regarding his Brexit position and to lesser extent, ISIS.

He came out of it reasonably well, and there is absolutely no way Boris Johnson will look better than Corbyn. If his manifesto is anything to go by, he hasn't got anything to say.

 

[theonlymikey]

Like the next man, i wouldnt want perma tan comb over anywhere near the NHS, but just for context it was Blair the then Labour PM that invited private firms into the NHS, a fact conveniently forgotten,

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

Conveniently forgetting Corbyn and his policies have nothing to do with Blair.

 

[theonlymikey]

Who are these 'dark forces' .... a rightwing/Jewish conspiracy? Tinfoiltastic ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50561043

This evening and tomorrow's news agenda will probably be full of Boris getting a justifiable roasting from Andrew Neil on many issues including Islamophobia.

Sadly, I don't think it will

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Not having that. He answered antisemitism adequately (in fact I'd say Neill embarrassed himself a bit on this issue), he eventually answered WAPSI women adequately (squirming behind UK assets before eventually conceding it would be funded by borrowing), and he answered on tax increases for lower married people, again after a lot of squirming.

Certainly agree regarding his Brexit position and to lesser extent, ISIS.

He came out of it reasonably well, and there is absolutely no way Boris Johnson will look better than Corbyn. If his manifesto is anything to go by, he hasn't got anything to say.

He'll have plenty to say. Absolutely nothing of any substance, obviously.

Piffle, piffle, faffle, faffle, but Corbyn, waffle, GET BREXIT DONE, waffle, ah look, waffle, BREXIT, piffle, but Corbyn, paffle, THE PEOPLE, waffle, waffle *something Latin*, waffle, but Corbyn, waffle, GET BREXIT DONE, waffle, I say this, waffle, piffle, GET BREXIT DONE, GET BREXIT DONE, waffle, piffle, GET BREXIT DONE

 

[theonlymikey]

If anyone can show any actual evidence of this bias I would be very grateful, one of the most amusing things I read on here recently was a criticism of Laura Kuenssburg ... it's not what she says it was she doesn't say

That criticism is spot on.

 

[Bozza]

Not having that. He answered antisemitism adequately (in fact I'd say Neill embarrassed himself a bit on this issue), he eventually answered WAPSI women adequately (squirming behind UK assets before eventually conceding it would be funded by borrowing), and he answered on tax increases for lower married people, again after a lot of squirming.

Certainly agree regarding his Brexit position and to lesser extent, ISIS.

He came out of it reasonably well, and there is absolutely no way Boris Johnson will look better than Corbyn. If his manifesto is anything to go by, he hasn't got anything to say.

I watched it back earlier this morning, as I didn't know these interviews were on.

The format just doesn't work. Half an hour is completely inadequate for these interviews and the end result was Neill repeatedly badgering Corbyn, and not giving him the space to answer anything adequately. This resulted in numerous instances of both interviewer and interviewee trying to speak over each other.

The end result was that I don't think Corbyn came out of it that badly at all. He may have come out of it better or worse had the interview lasted an hour, allowing Corbyn to more fully respond and Neill to then probe where required. We didn't have any of that though, making for a wasted opportunity.

 

[beorhthelm]

I dont accept that - You seem to be arguing from authority rather than confront the argument. I have found no convincing arguments to demonstrare that her (MMT) arguments are illogical. They seem profoundly logical. Can you give me an example of why they demonstrably wrong?

a couple of obvious arguments. which came first, money or government led monetary policy? would the economy continue if there were no taxes or government spending - yes. if MMT is correct, why haven't any governments anywhere shown this, instead they continue to borrow. the premise of MMT is to say that it looks as if government is creating money though fiscal policy, so we'll say it is. it doesn't, its spending money already created from economic activity. money first, taxes, government spending.

 

[BenGarfield]

I seriously cannot understand how people STILL blame the 2008 global financial crash on Labour. It beggars belief that after all this time there are still people saying it.

It was the ****ing banks!! Just do a bit of reading. Financial institutions the size of small countries bankrupted themselves. Get a grip on reality. If you can make this statement above, how can anything else you've said be taken with any sense?

They were not solely responsible. The economic policy makers broadly on both sides of the Atlantic- Cinton particlarly - failed to control bank lending and the use of complex financial .instruments, lending to people who couldnt repay their loans. The tories would have done exactly the same and offered no objections to the prevailing economic orthodoxy. Pure retrospective hypocracy on their part to blame Labour. I can only remember Vince Cable voicing objections to what was going on at the time - although there were probably others.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

I watched it back earlier this morning, as I didn't know these interviews were on.

The format just doesn't work. Half an hour is completely inadequate for these interviews and the end result was Neill repeatedly badgering Corbyn, and not giving him the space to answer anything adequately. This resulted in numerous instances of both interviewer and interviewee trying to speak over each other.

The end result was that I don't think Corbyn came out of it that badly at all. He may have come out of it better or worse had the interview lasted an hour, allowing Corbyn to more fully respond and Neill to then probe where required. We didn't have any of that though, making for a wasted opportunity.

Good analysis. Neill's badgering and interrupting tactics are stupid and make for a fairly pointless exercise.

He will obviously do exactly the same to Johnson and try and make him look bad for not apologising for Tory racism and not being able to explain the detail of exactly how a selected manifesto pledge will be delivered.

 

[Blue3]

Who are these 'dark forces' .... a rightwing/Jewish conspiracy? Tinfoiltastic ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50561043

This evening and tomorrow's news agenda will probably be full of Boris getting a justifiable roasting from Andrew Neil on many issues including Islamophobia.

However Boris Johnson has yet to agree to an interview with Andrew Neil and with TV scheduling needing some forward planning it's quite possible this interview will not happen also Boris has declined to attend tomorrow nights Channel 4 leaders debate.

Dark forces take a look at Andrew Neil's past and his historical connections with the Conservative Party

 

[Steve in Japan]

I watched it back earlier this morning, as I didn't know these interviews were on.

The format just doesn't work. Half an hour is completely inadequate for these interviews and the end result was Neill repeatedly badgering Corbyn, and not giving him the space to answer anything adequately. This resulted in numerous instances of both interviewer and interviewee trying to speak over each other.

The end result was that I don't think Corbyn came out of it that badly at all. He may have come out of it better or worse had the interview lasted an hour, allowing Corbyn to more fully respond and Neill to then probe where required. We didn't have any of that though, making for a wasted opportunity.

I also watched this morning, and I am not sure how Corbyn could have come out of it much worse than he did. Tetchy, evasive and clueless on public finances. In a race to the bottom, that was a strong showing I thought.

 

[Blue3]

Good analysis. Neill's badgering and interrupting tactics are stupid and make for a fairly pointless exercise.

He will obviously do exactly the same to Johnson and try and make him look bad for not apologising for Tory racism and not being able to explain the detail of exactly how a selected manifesto pledge will be delivered.

At this moment in time there is no scheduled date for Andrew Neil to interview Boris Johnson

 

[Blue3]

I also watched this morning, and I am not sure how Corbyn could have come out of it much worse than he did. Tetchy, evasive and clueless on public finances. In a race to the bottom, that was a strong showing I thought.

Being short on knowing the detail is usually somthing associated with Boris

 

[JC Footy Genius]

So why is he avoiding apologising for his parties failure to control anti Semitic behaviour in its ranks?

Because he's not leadership material, never was. The buck stops with the leader, finding a form of words to defuse the question eg 'Of course, I am sorry for the very real hurt felt by people in the Jewish community and our initial inadequate response in dealing with this issue' would have ended/contained that line of questioning. Interesting to see if Boris has a prepared response for a similar line of questioning re Islamophobia/racism.

 

[Blue3]

Once the Tories sell our NHS we will be able to start looking back on the pre Johnson era as the good old days while sitting in a waiting room waiting for the quotation for selling a kidney to pay for the wife's medication

 

[JC Footy Genius]

However Boris Johnson has yet to agree to an interview with Andrew Neil and with TV scheduling needing some forward planning it's quite possible this interview will not happen also Boris has declined to attend tomorrow nights Channel 4 leaders debate.

Dark forces take a look at Andrew Neil's past and his historical connections with the Conservative Party

I stand corrected, thought it was on tonight.

Andrew Neil has been grilling and mauling politicians of all political persuasions for years.

 

[A1X]

Like the next man, i wouldnt want perma tan comb over anywhere near the NHS, but just for context it was Blair the then Labour PM that invited private firms into the NHS, a fact conveniently forgotten,

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

Sorry, maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand what point you're trying to make. Especially in relation to the quoted post.

 

[A1X]

Once the Tories sell our NHS we will be able to start looking back on the pre Johnson era as the good old days while sitting in a waiting room waiting for the quotation for selling a kidney to pay for the wife's medication

I wonder how many Brexiters will be telling us it's all fine and dandy "because we knew what we were voting for" when that happens?

 

[Simster]

I also watched this morning, and I am not sure how Corbyn could have come out of it much worse than he did. Tetchy, evasive and clueless on public finances. In a race to the bottom, that was a strong showing I thought.

The accepted narrative on public finances appear to me to be that Labour are expected to cost everything to the penny, whereas the Tories aren't. So much so, that they find money for all sorts of shocking wastes of money - a billion to bribe the DUP here, tens of millions to raise awareness of the Brexit deadline that wasnt happening there. How the hell are these things missed before they are elected? And why aren't they held to account in future elections?

Let's be even handed on this - Neill found ONE thing that wasn't costed in their manifesto (those women's pensions) and he was mercilessly chased for an answer. Where do you start with the Conservative manifesto, which has all the financial gravitas and detail of a church parish bulletin leaflet?

 

[RossyG]

Once the Tories sell our NHS we will be able to start looking back on the pre Johnson era as the good old days while sitting in a waiting room waiting for the quotation for selling a kidney to pay for the wife's medication

So far, only one NHS hospital has ever been privatised and that was by Labour. It was the Tories who nationalised it again.

It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?