I don't think it matters, because only one side of the electorate cares about bigotry and only one party is held to a decent bar which will inevitably be raised. There is no incentive to be better even though I agree that morally this is something that can't be ignored, morally.
Disillusionment is a thing. If people who are not happy with the status quo are only ever givin the choice of your "No Change" or the opposition's "Even Worse" you're eventually going to start losing them, either to apathy or to a third party.
I would think this is a especially true in the UK, where unlike the US there are actual viable third parties that can win elections and have MPs in Commons. From what I understand, smug certainty that Scotland would never vote "against their interests" for the blatantly Anglophile Tories was a part of what led to Labour losing almost all their seats in Scotland to the SNP in the last decade.
You could say "beating Johnson is too important to let genuine moral outrage prevent you from voting Labour for a winnable seat," and maybe you're right, but it would be much better for Labour in the long run to expel the antisemitic fuckers in their party ASAP and make the message clear that party standing is not going to protect younif you start spouting conspiracies about Zionist plots.
the funny thing about that corbyn book thing is that it tells u more about a different failing than anti-semitism - that he does not read fucking anything
You know, that idea had never occurred to me. Especially because his forward mentions the contents of the book. But yeah, maybe he never read the book at all and was just lying when writing the forward or didn't even write it himself.
Labour's anti-semitism issue is like the emails/honesty issue for Clinton - nothing is ever good enough but the media will always derive incredible pleasure over bullying out more responses and attempts to fix the problem, thus legitimizing even more equally obsessive coverage of the issue. I lack the capacity to discern where the real magnitude and extent of the issue ends and the hysterics and anti-Labour bias begins.
I don't see how the two are anything alike. Clinton's problems were a bunch of bullshit the media harped on about for ages because they hate her. Labour's anti-semitism issues seem to be extremely real and non-trivial, unless you are saying the report quoted above is lying.
+10
Options
TavIrish Minister for DefenceRegistered Userregular
In 3 minutes he eviscerated Johnson more than 3 years of the opposition versus May and then Johnson.
Nah, Johnson played him for a fool, no one but politics junkies will pay attention to this.
Maybe...I also would assume that there's a bunch of other questions that'd get asked, especially about why this took so long.
With a point being made at the same time, that this whole thing is still about honesty.
consistent labour bounce observable in last few days of polling, i would say something like 3%, perfectly timed to make the yougov MRP less helpful than everybody wanted it to be
Labour's anti-semitism issue is like the emails/honesty issue for Clinton - nothing is ever good enough but the media will always derive incredible pleasure over bullying out more responses and attempts to fix the problem, thus legitimizing even more equally obsessive coverage of the issue. I lack the capacity to discern where the real magnitude and extent of the issue ends and the hysterics and anti-Labour bias begins.
I don't see how the two are anything alike. Clinton's problems were a bunch of bullshit the media harped on about for ages because they hate her. Labour's anti-semitism issues seem to be extremely real and non-trivial, unless you are saying the report quoted above is lying.
This but then the other way around.
Ok not really because yeah the Clinton thing was overhyped as hell, but it is just silly to see the comparison be contradicted like this. You don't have to assume the whole report is lies to question the interpretations of parts of it. For one it keeps putting in objections to the IHRA definition as straight examples of antisemitism. Plenty of bias there.
You don't have to think the issue is trivial to recognize the way it is pushed. The Clinton comparison specifically is apt because there is very little talk about the same issue in the Conservative party.
Labour's anti-semitism issue is like the emails/honesty issue for Clinton - nothing is ever good enough but the media will always derive incredible pleasure over bullying out more responses and attempts to fix the problem, thus legitimizing even more equally obsessive coverage of the issue. I lack the capacity to discern where the real magnitude and extent of the issue ends and the hysterics and anti-Labour bias begins.
I don't see how the two are anything alike. Clinton's problems were a bunch of bullshit the media harped on about for ages because they hate her. Labour's anti-semitism issues seem to be extremely real and non-trivial, unless you are saying the report quoted above is lying.
This but then the other way around.
Ok not really because yeah the Clinton thing was overhyped as hell, but it is just silly to see the comparison be contradicted like this. You don't have to assume the whole report is lies to question the interpretations of parts of it. For one it keeps putting in objections to the IHRA definition as straight examples of antisemitism. Plenty of bias there.
You don't have to think the issue is trivial to recognize the way it is pushed. The Clinton comparison specifically is apt because there is very little talk about the same issue in the Conservative party.
What the hell are you even talking about?
In the end, Clinton handled emails in a way that was not great but also not against the rules or law. The press and her political opponents made a HUGE deal out of it though.
Labour's anti-semitism problem is very very real. It is not at all like Clinton's email scandal because it's an actual thing that actually happened and is actually pretty bad. It is not, from anything I can see here, being overhyped. It's legitimately bad.
Again, unless you are deciding to complete dismiss the report talked about above. Which, frankly, it seems like you are in order to try and hold some sort of line here so you can claim this is mostly the press being unfair rather then it actually being a legitimate issue. You want to very roundaboutly claim the report is bullshit and this is all overhyped.
But the reality is that even just all the stuff highlighted there is fucking bad. And I've seen no reason, from you or anyone, to cast any serious doubts on it.
Guardian blog, on a poll in Scotland projecting likely results.
Seat projections from the poll see the SNP up from 35 to 46, Tories down from 13 to 8, the Lib Dems sticking at 4 and Labour losing all but one of their 7 Mps.
The SNP nabbed Remain voters and lost very few Leave voters, and are thus doing very nicely, thank you very much. More than one seat is still very marginal, though.
I guess he didn't say it, then. It makes sense, I suppose, as "people of colour" is a construction of words he probably wouldn't naturally use, on the grounds that it's too sensitive and PC.
Damn. I want his barely in place mask to slip very badly, like his father's did when he said people were too stupid to spell Pinocchio.
I guess he didn't say it, then. It makes sense, I suppose, as "people of colour" is a construction of words he probably wouldn't naturally use, on the grounds that it's too sensitive and PC.
Damn. I want his barely in place mask to slip very badly, like his father's did when he said people were too stupid to spell Pinocchio.
The man has publicly used the word 'piccanniny' within recent memory. If outright racism was gonna bump his polling he'd have hit zero long ago.
I guess he didn't say it, then. It makes sense, I suppose, as "people of colour" is a construction of words he probably wouldn't naturally use, on the grounds that it's too sensitive and PC.
Damn. I want his barely in place mask to slip very badly, like his father's did when he said people were too stupid to spell Pinocchio.
More than one person reckons he said "people of colent", as if it was a mid-syllable correction to a Freudian slip
Which is hearsay, but seems plausible
0
Options
HerrCronIt that wickedly supports taxationRegistered Userregular
I'm just wondering what in the name of fuck having immigration "democratically controlled" would mean.
Does everyone pile into the immigration office and are made to dance while baking a cake and the public will vote on whether or not you get to live in the UK?
In 3 minutes he eviscerated Johnson more than 3 years of the opposition versus May and then Johnson.
Nah, Johnson played him for a fool, no one but politics junkies will pay attention to this.
Maybe...I also would assume that there's a bunch of other questions that'd get asked, especially about why this took so long.
With a point being made at the same time, that this whole thing is still about honesty.
Johnson incapable of uttering a sentence that doesn't include the phrase "get Brexit done", and Robinson naturally not shutting the soundbites down like he said he would.
Posts
Disillusionment is a thing. If people who are not happy with the status quo are only ever givin the choice of your "No Change" or the opposition's "Even Worse" you're eventually going to start losing them, either to apathy or to a third party.
I would think this is a especially true in the UK, where unlike the US there are actual viable third parties that can win elections and have MPs in Commons. From what I understand, smug certainty that Scotland would never vote "against their interests" for the blatantly Anglophile Tories was a part of what led to Labour losing almost all their seats in Scotland to the SNP in the last decade.
You could say "beating Johnson is too important to let genuine moral outrage prevent you from voting Labour for a winnable seat," and maybe you're right, but it would be much better for Labour in the long run to expel the antisemitic fuckers in their party ASAP and make the message clear that party standing is not going to protect younif you start spouting conspiracies about Zionist plots.
You know, that idea had never occurred to me. Especially because his forward mentions the contents of the book. But yeah, maybe he never read the book at all and was just lying when writing the forward or didn't even write it himself.
I don't see how the two are anything alike. Clinton's problems were a bunch of bullshit the media harped on about for ages because they hate her. Labour's anti-semitism issues seem to be extremely real and non-trivial, unless you are saying the report quoted above is lying.
well this went straight for the jugular
But does it work? Does it move the needle? My guess is no.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Nah, Johnson played him for a fool, no one but politics junkies will pay attention to this.
Steam | XBL
Maybe...I also would assume that there's a bunch of other questions that'd get asked, especially about why this took so long.
With a point being made at the same time, that this whole thing is still about honesty.
This is my parent's constituency.
What has two thumbs, hit them up for a bowl of chili, and went canvassing for the LibDems last night?
Steam: adamjnet
This but then the other way around.
Ok not really because yeah the Clinton thing was overhyped as hell, but it is just silly to see the comparison be contradicted like this. You don't have to assume the whole report is lies to question the interpretations of parts of it. For one it keeps putting in objections to the IHRA definition as straight examples of antisemitism. Plenty of bias there.
You don't have to think the issue is trivial to recognize the way it is pushed. The Clinton comparison specifically is apt because there is very little talk about the same issue in the Conservative party.
What the hell are you even talking about?
In the end, Clinton handled emails in a way that was not great but also not against the rules or law. The press and her political opponents made a HUGE deal out of it though.
Labour's anti-semitism problem is very very real. It is not at all like Clinton's email scandal because it's an actual thing that actually happened and is actually pretty bad. It is not, from anything I can see here, being overhyped. It's legitimately bad.
Again, unless you are deciding to complete dismiss the report talked about above. Which, frankly, it seems like you are in order to try and hold some sort of line here so you can claim this is mostly the press being unfair rather then it actually being a legitimate issue. You want to very roundaboutly claim the report is bullshit and this is all overhyped.
But the reality is that even just all the stuff highlighted there is fucking bad. And I've seen no reason, from you or anyone, to cast any serious doubts on it.
The SNP nabbed Remain voters and lost very few Leave voters, and are thus doing very nicely, thank you very much. More than one seat is still very marginal, though.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Why bother with a dog whistle when you can just be racist openly?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
EDIT: From Channel 4
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
white has always only meant ethnic groups the majority approves of
Damn. I want his barely in place mask to slip very badly, like his father's did when he said people were too stupid to spell Pinocchio.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Quite, but actually using the phrase 'people of colour' is taking it to the next level.
It must be nice to get paid for deadpan comedy like this.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Would that we had something as pithy as the American "D to go forwards, R to go backwards".
Steam | XBL
PRNDL
*chefs kiss*
The man has publicly used the word 'piccanniny' within recent memory. If outright racism was gonna bump his polling he'd have hit zero long ago.
I - I finally understand politics!
More than one person reckons he said "people of colent", as if it was a mid-syllable correction to a Freudian slip
Which is hearsay, but seems plausible
Does everyone pile into the immigration office and are made to dance while baking a cake and the public will vote on whether or not you get to live in the UK?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
What's the reputation of Metro? I'm not familiar with it. Good news source, trash, other?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
A lot of copy is reproduced across both papers because there isn't a huge amount of overlap in their readership
Metro is a bit more clickbaity in tone and less racist
There's a handful of these out there. Not nearly enough, but worth GIS'ing "Jeremy or Boris meme".
Steam | XBL
There isn't enough alcohol in the world.
Steam | XBL
Steam | XBL
Steam | XBL