Wellesley
Well-known member
- Jul 24, 2013
- 4,973
thats an awful lot to do in two years. i'd have thought the argument would be Corbyn's strong leadership, but alas not made.
so, where had Corbyn been all this time, has he been using his leadship and appeal to the masses to communicate a better repsonse from government or for individuals to follow? Blair and Brown have chipped in with their views a couple of times.
I'd like to think I would completely rock it.
Well he's been trying to save the NHS, generally defending Human rights and taking on the arms trade.
I suspect he is sensibly taking a back seat on Covid because the only story the media ever want to run is his brother being an anti Vax nutter. When a large section of the press is more interested in the views of a nobody nutjob with no power who happens to be the brother of the ex leader of the opposition than some crazy idea like scrutinising the views of the major parties actual leaders you so lose hope.
Edit: story forgot to answer strong leadership thing. Should be uncontroversial to say Corbyn has a long record of doing what he believes is right rather than popular. So yes I'm 99% certain he would have reacted to the overwhelming evidence much earlier.
Is that strong leadership? I don't really care. Dithering and procrastinating until you've run out of options certainly isn't though.
He had vision....justI would have liked to have seen Marty Feldman have a go at it.
He had vision....just
Boris has made misjudgment after misjudgment the only thing he got correct was buying the vaccines and giving them to the NHS to distribute
There’s some very odd rewriting of history on here….
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Several months ago I started to look back fondly on Theresa May's premiership. She was completely out of her depth, but actually seemed to have a few moral principles. To be honest, pretty much anyone would have done a better job than Johnson.
If you still believe the Cameron lie that Labour caused the worldwide economic crash of 2008 by excessive borrowing, then the history you’re reading is probably a Johnson article from the spectator. It’s utter bollocks, no economists worth their salt believe it to be the case.
Labour did not regulate the banks sufficiently, that was indeed a mistake but we’d have been hit by the financial tsunami from the U.S even if we’d have kept the likes of Goodwin under control.
When the financial Tsunami came, Brown was heroic in his decision making and decisiveness. He has more talent, integrity and capability in one of his scotch turds than c*** Johnson has.
Brown responded well to the economic crash?
He bloody caused It!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
She wax at the Home Office when the Windrush landing papers were destroyed, and started the hostile environment, then allowed Amber Rudd to take the blame. She also tried to invoke Article 50 without Parliament assent. She has as few morals as the present lot.