'Ed Balls is a perfectly decent man (shock horror)' blog discussion

Flyboy152

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Probably because this thread is about Ed Balls?

Also, neither Cameron or Clegg did what Ed Balls specifically did.

No, what they did was even worse. But that is besides the point. If you are equating "flipping" homes with getting away with rape, you have to be prepared to accept that Cameron and Osborne (I didn't mention Clegg), are just as guilty.

kar999

Flyboy152 wrote: »

No they weren't, for example:......

Is not reporting, it is offering opinion (and a weak one at that). So my "opinion" stands. I might accept their rhetoric, if they had any history, qualification and/or experience with commentating on national and/or global economic affairs, but I somehow don't think they do.

What a pedantic response. I can understand you dont like the "opinion" of this journalist but you selectively ignore the actual quotes from Balls. You also selectively fail to respond to the main thrust of my previous post....

"It would add to the debate if you could elaborate on what part of the article, or direct quotations from Ed Balls, you found unacceptable or inaccurate please.
Some constructive comments from yourself, to support a counter arguement, might add to the credibility of both Ed Balls and yourself."

So is the "opinion" below, about the recent GDP figures, from the well read and respected Political Betting website any more acceptable?

"The shadow chancellor had little choice but to strike a low-key, positive tone. Labour’s economic reputation is so damaged it cannot yet say “I told you so” or risk crying wolf. It was progress for Labour to be heard at all. And so long as Labour’s own economic policy is unclear; the party is not in a position to sustain a robust attack on the government."

Or how about the latest polls (end Jan) on Labour and the economy as reported in The Guardian and elsewhere?

"Which party is most likely to run the economy well? 38% say Conservatives, to Labour's 28%. If Labour were in power would the economy perform better? Here 35% say less well, 24% better."

Ed Balls changes his mind about the economy and the defecit more than his socks and labours current economic policy is basically that of Alistair Darlings pre-election woeful irresponible old labour boom and bust mess comprising little more than a blank piece of paper.... unless of course anyone can tell me differently.

Flyboy152

kar999 wrote: »

What a pedantic response. I can understand you dont like the "opinion" of this journalist but you selectively ignore the actual quotes from Balls. You also selectively fail to respond to the main thrust of my previous post....



So is the "opinion" below, about the recent GDP figures, from the well read and respected Political Betting website any more acceptable?

"The shadow chancellor had little choice but to strike a low-key, positive tone. Labour’s economic reputation is so damaged it cannot yet say “I told you so” or risk crying wolf. It was progress for Labour to be heard at all. And so long as Labour’s own economic policy is unclear; the party is not in a position to sustain a robust attack on the government."

Or how about the latest polls (end Jan) on Labour and the economy as reported in The Guardian and elsewhere?

"Which party is most likely to run the economy well? 38% say Conservatives, to Labour's 28%. If Labour were in power would the economy perform better? Here 35% say less well, 24% better."

Ed Balls changes his mind about the economy and the defecit more than his socks and labours current economic policy is basically that of Alistair Darlings pre-election woeful irresponible old labour boom and bust mess comprising little more than a blank piece of paper.... unless of course anyone can tell me differently.

You might have had a credible point to make, if you hadn't been silly and suggested I "write to the author of the article and complain." Ignoring the journalist third-rate opinion and dressing it up as, "They were meanly [sic] reporting," and accusing me of pedantry, hasn't done your case any favours either.

kar999

It's good to see irony is still alive and well in political debate these days so I'm glad you spotted my "silly" suggestion .... (Stems from the good old phrase of my youth "I must write a letter to The Times" when anyone wanted to complain.)

It's a shame however that the replies still dont include responses to my previous questions but diversionary tactics about editorial credibility. Maybe that's why I suggested pendantry when there are real issues not being answered.

I'm broad shouldered enough not to be personally bothered whether you consider I've done my case any favours or not. Labours woeful irresponsible economic past policies and the dire mess we are in now sadly speak for themselves, as does the recent actions and words of the undecisive Ed Balls.

IMHO it's only the blinkered, dire hard labour supporters and those in defecit denial that have any faith in Labours current lack of any meaningful direction and policy.

I rest my case...... thanks