the snap general election thread

posh*spice

Fella wrote: »

Generally I try to be just a little more civil than whoever I'm talking too.

You chose to have a pop for the 2nd time today so it was pretty careless of you to do it in such an amusingly illiterate way.

Put him and his sock puppets on ignore - he's a troll that wants to get you banned.

Arklight

It speaks volumes how hate filled and vile those who are still supporting Tories on this thread have become.

Thrugelmir

Arklight wrote: »

It speaks volumes how hate filled and vile those who are still supporting Tories on this thread have become.

We all just want what's best for our families. When the Labour party again have viable policies for addressing the real issues. Then perhaps more people will start listening again.

sevenhills

LHW99 wrote: »

One can't be certain on the timing, but going from the record of recent previous Labour governments (Wilson / Callaghan, Blair), they have managed to get there in the end.

I am not sure you can say xxx party is the same now as it was 30+ years ago.

kinger101

Fella wrote: »

I'd argue that most are but not all. or at the very least you can rise above instinctive bias if you want to.

But let's make this much easier. If I'm so biased quote some of the times I've
defended crap stuff done by either side.

I never said you are "so biased". I said everyone had biases, and we're not always aware of them. But yes, overcoming a conscious bias would be possible.

It would be nice if you could be more polite to other members of the forum. Although you've not directed insults at me, you have it others. You'd do well to read the forum rules.

kinger101

Arklight wrote: »

It speaks volumes how hate filled and vile those who are still supporting Tories on this thread have become.

Both you and the person you're referring to a new here. It would be nice if you could show some respect for those with different views. The majority of the people who post on here of any political persuasion keep it polite.

Fella

kinger101 wrote: »

I never said you are "so biased". I said everyone had biases, and we're not always aware of them. But yes, overcoming a conscious bias would be possible.

It would be nice if you could be more polite to other members of the forum. Although you've not directed insults at me, you have it others. You'd do well to read the forum rules.

That wasn't really directed at you, it just came out that way due to a series of ppl saying "biased" and not one of them even bothering to produce one iota of justification.

If you read what I post you'll see I'm pretty much at least as polite as anybody I respond to and generally more so.

Edit: Still happy to see examples. of me being biased (still not seen any).

Fella

Arklight wrote: »

It speaks volumes how hate filled and vile those who are still supporting Tories on this thread have become.

You're the main hate filled person on here. You haven't even worked out yet that after the election rich people will still be rich and poor people will still be poor.

The only difference is that if Corbyn wins the poor will be a lot poorer. The rich will still be rich.

ukcarper

Fella wrote: »

No I've been at work so not seen it.

However I wouldn't dispute that the Daily politics take an equally hard line with Labour & the Tories (or anybody else for that matter).

What I would dispute is whether this is good reporting. The Daily politics will tear into either side with equal ferocity. Sometimes this is fair enough, e.g. it might be some Labour MP with a ridiculously unfunded policy, or maybe some Tory claiming a U-turn isn't a U-turn, that kind of stuff.

In general however, I would argue all day long that what's being proposed by the two parties is not simply two equal but different arguments, therefore they should not be treated equally. The Tories are proposing a boring but stable steady-as-you are scenario. They've deliberately been vague on figures because they intend full well to raise certain taxes & don't want to say what. But basically they'll continue to try to repair the still-broken economy. It's a bad manifesto & low on detail but nobody with half a brain doubts this is their intention.

By contrast, the Labour manifesto is a ludicrous work of fiction that would cripple the country in about 6 different ways. They want to apply 1970s policies in a world that's moved on 50 years. It just won't work. It won't nearly work. All the companies big enough to count are Global & none of them will stay in the UK for any other reason than it's in their interests to do so. A Labour Govt would see public spending go through the roof whilst Corp tax receipts disappeared, quicker than you can spit. And that's just the economic side. Corbyn's sympathy towards terrorist groups, and by proxy his projection of guilt onto their victims is truly despicable and utterly irrefutable. And his inner clique are some of the worst people in Britain, let alone politics.

So why exactly, should Corbyn be given the same even-handed treatment as the Tories or the Libdems? He is an extremist, peddling dangerous, utterly deceitful & potentially ruinous policies. The simple fact is he's able to do these things because of a technicality that uber-moron Ed Miliband introduced that allows the Labour party to be overrun by it's most extreme 5%. As far as I'm concerned, Corbyn, his supporters, and every one of their ridiculous policies should be given a hundred times more scrutiny & disdain than anything any of the remotely legitimate parties are peddling.

I think this post show bias. I agree that the Labour manifesto doesn't stand up to scrutiny and deserves to be criticised. But the vagueness iof the Tory manifesto also deserves to be scrutinised as we haven't the slightest idea of what a better off pensioner is, also at first there wasn't a cap on social care and now there is but we have no idea what it is.

wotsthat

Fella wrote: »

That wasn't really directed at you, it just came out that way due to a series of ppl saying "biased" and not one of them even bothering to produce one iota of justification.

If you read what I post you'll see I'm pretty much at least as polite as anybody I respond to and generally more so.

Edit: Still happy to see example of me being biased (still not seen any).

You proved the BBC were biased based on a 5 minute clip. You didn't spend a further 5 minutes seeing how the BBC subsequently reported it because your bias had been fed.

The BBC actually reported it as Diane Abbott moment which, if anything, was somewhat harsh.

Plus you said you weren't biased which shows a misunderstanding of what bias is. I bet you think advertising and marketing has no effect on you either.