UK - December 2019 General Election

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

This is whataboutism. hardly a convincing defence - unless you're claiming that corbyn is despicable but not quite as despicable a Bojo, in which case that would be worth examining. (FWIW, I agree that Boris Johnson has serious flaws)

No, it's not whataboutism. It's showing that the coverage is biased. Even if you think both Boris and Corbyn are unfit for office the coverage is clearly skewed.

Touche.

Yes, there are multiple horrible politicians (on the left, right and SNP).

And this is a false equivalency. Can you name one SNP candidate who has done anything close to what Boris has done and yet receives as little criticism from the press? In fact, can you name one SNP candidate without Googling?

That doesn't invalidate democracy.

Cretins standing for election doesn't invalidate democracy. Cretins getting elected because they lie, the media lie and the electorate aren't smart enough to know they are lying is what invalidates democracy. That elections are decided by who has the most billionaire backers invalidates democracy.

 

[3point14]

No, it's not whataboutism. It's showing that the coverage is biased. Even if you think both Boris and Corbyn are unfit for office the coverage is clearly skewed.

As a very rough litmus tests, let's see how much this turns up in the British press and on the BBC over the next week or so:



https://www.businessinsider.com/bor...phobia-is-a-natural-reaction-2018-8?r=US&IR=T


Johnson has previously claimed that Islamophobia is a "natural reaction" to Islam.

He wrote in the Spectator in 2005 that "the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem."

The prime minister also compared Muslim women to "letterboxes" and bank robbers.

Johnson has dropped a previous pledge to hold an inquiry into Islamophobia within the Conservative party.

 

[Information Analyst]

He is selective about who he calls friends. He'll call genocidal terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah friends and share a podium with them. But would he do the same for Likud? Not a chance, it's boycotts for them.

The man has no moral sense.

I did. It's biased apologetics.

What he actually said:

“Tomorrow evening it will be my pleasure and my honour to host an event in parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I have also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here, so it is going to be only friends from Hezbollah. So far as I am concerned, that is absolutely the right function of using parliamentary facilities, to invite people from other parts of the world so that we can promote that peace, that understanding and that dialogue. And the idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.”

Maybe you'd like to engage with the wider context?

 

[3point14]

What he actually said:

Careful. If people go around quoting his actual words then other people might start to have a grasp on what he's actually said. Where would the press be if they couldn't obfuscate his every word.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

What he actually said:

“Tomorrow evening it will be my pleasure and my honour to host an event in parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I have also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here, so it is going to be only friends from Hezbollah. So far as I am concerned, that is absolutely the right function of using parliamentary facilities, to invite people from other parts of the world so that we can promote that peace, that understanding and that dialogue. And the idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.”

Maybe you'd like to engage with the wider context?

Its a pretty freaking stupid thing to say and doesnt say much about his judgement. On the other hand I'm not sure it's worse or makes him more unfit than say... approving sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia to be used against Yemeni civilians. Or, again, shutting down ******* Parliament because they wouldn't do what you wanted!!!

 

[Giz]

What he actually said:

“Tomorrow evening it will be my pleasure and my honour to host an event in parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I have also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here, so it is going to be only friends from Hezbollah. So far as I am concerned, that is absolutely the right function of using parliamentary facilities, to invite people from other parts of the world so that we can promote that peace, that understanding and that dialogue. And the idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.”

Maybe you'd like to engage with the wider context?

That doesn’t make it better.

If someone invited nazis to speak at parliament, to air their grievances over East Prussia, and called the Nazis their friends ... would you excuse that?

 

[Information Analyst]

That doesn’t make it better.

If someone invited nazis to speak at parliament, to air their grievances over East Prussia, and called the Nazis their friends ... would you excuse that?

Sorry, are you trying to equate the Nazis with the Palestinians, and - presumably - the Poles with Israel?

 

[Giz]

Sorry, are you trying to equate the Nazis with the Palestinians, and - presumably - the Poles with Israel?

An equivalence between the Nazis and Hamas, absolutely.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

An equivalence between the Nazis and Hamas, absolutely.

Jesus. Thats a pretty amazing take. Even for you

 

[bruto]

The Argentines planted about 30 thousand land mines on the Falklands, about two thirds anti-personnel. The mines were concentrated around the most populated areas. The willingness to lay a land to waste and to endanger the lives of the population seems a poor qualification for owning it.

e.t.a. sorry I did not see the above warning in time. Delete if you must.

 

[Garrison]

As a very rough litmus tests, let's see how much this turns up in the British press and on the BBC over the next week or so:



https://www.businessinsider.com/bor...phobia-is-a-natural-reaction-2018-8?r=US&IR=T


Johnson has previously claimed that Islamophobia is a "natural reaction" to Islam.

He wrote in the Spectator in 2005 that "the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem."

The prime minister also compared Muslim women to "letterboxes" and bank robbers.

Johnson has dropped a previous pledge to hold an inquiry into Islamophobia within the Conservative party.

Well Muslims are all evil monstrous terrorists according to the Daily Mail etal so that is perfectly fine. Suggest that Israel building more settlements in the West bank is a bad idea and you are clearly a Nazi.

The entire Tory argument for Brexit is propped up by Xenophobia and racism, but we're all supposed to ignore that.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Yes, they should (but only if one is in a precarious position with regard to the next election and one needs a rousing victory to get reelected and so have slowly reduced the defence cover in the area over a few years to attempt to induce an invasion in the hopes of remaining PM)

And sold the Aircraft Carriers needed to mount an intervention to foreign governments.
Who remembers that Maggie had flogged off the navy and if the Argentinians had waited six months it would have been too late to pull out of the deal and there wouldn't have been a fleet?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

That's clearly not true, any more than saying that all Australians are descended from convicts, because a lot of the early inhabitants were. The population of the Chagos Islands were augmented by later incomers the same way the Falklands were.

Every nation has incomers. That's a good thing. But the founding people were those slaves. They were the people who established the settlement. It would be hard to call them colonisers.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Boris is going to chicken out of being interviewed by Andrew Neil. So basically the BBC is going to give prime time coverage to Neil grilling every other candidate and talking over them with his ******** accusations and not the Tories.

That sounds fair and impartial.

 

[Rolfe]

The Tories were wetting themselves about a couple of clips Neil tweeted out from his interview with Sturgeon. Both clips were entirely of Neil himself ranting at nothing, not a word of Sturgeon herself.

 

[Giz]

Jesus. Thats a pretty amazing take. Even for you

They are both rabidly anti Semitic anti-democracy inhumane aggressors who dream of genocide?

Hamas are just as evil. They differ in that they are less powerful and even more contemptible (in the way they use their kids as human shields).

 

[KDLarsen]

Boris is going to chicken out of being interviewed by Andrew Neil. So basically the BBC is going to give prime time coverage to Neil grilling every other candidate and talking over them with his ******** accusations and not the Tories.

That sounds fair and impartial.

Labour and the rest of the parties needs to hammer out some "What is Boris afraid of?" messaging, rather quickly. Just two weeks left now and while Labour have recovered slightly in the polls, they still have a mountain to climb, if they're to deny Johnson an overall majority. At least the Brexit Party Ltd. vote appears to have cratered.

I'm fortunate enough to have a three day weekend starting on the friday after the election, so hopefully I'll be able to find some all-night election coverage. In 2017 the Danish public service broadcaster carried the BBC1 coverage until 6 AM, but it doesn't appear to the case this time around.

 

[The Don]

The Labour Party is changing its approach to campaigning in the last two weeks. Apparently they have been surprised by the failure of the LibDem's "Stop Brexit" message in England and Wales and they're not losing support to that. Now they're going to attempt to court Leave voters in Leave constituencies by being more pro-Brexit:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50580699

Personally I think this is a terrible idea. IMO they will lose more Remain supporters than they will gain Leave supporters.

That said, Labour is the only possible alternative to the Conservatives in my constituency so I will be voting Labour despite my HUGE misgivings over their Brexit policy.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Interesting quote on the future of UK healthcare by Boris Johnson’s in his 2003 book “Boris Johnson: Lend Me Your Ears”:-

There is a moral point. If NHS services continue to be free in this way, they will continue to be abused like any free service. If people have to pay for them, they will value them more. Above all, there is an economic point. In a very modest way, this extension of private funds into the NHS would help the Chancellor’s straitened circumstances.

 

[Rolfe]

The SNP just made it easier for a lot of people not to have to hold their noses while voting for them in this election. They left out the bit of the manifesto where they effectively say they will allow any man who signs a bit if paper to become a woman and have access to all women's single-sex spaces and categories.

The resident wokemaidens, who seem to have lost a battle over this one, are running around telling all their rainbow-haired friends that it's all fine, nothing to see here, this is a devolved matter and not relevant to a Westminster manifesto and we'll press right ahead with it in Holyrood, you'll see.

But the missing policy paragraph was present in the 2017 manifesto, and also, interestingly, in the June EU election manifesto. The omission is a positive decision, it's not just not there because it's devolved. I think there's a bit of a split high up, and somebody or somebodies in a position of influence have been able to get it through what a toxic vote-loser this policy is. People are beginning to catch on to what is intended, which isn't clear from the anodyne wording, and there's a lot of concern. I think there's some realisation that there are a lot more angry women and parents among the electorate than there are terminally woke SJWs.

I also believe the bit about supporting an amendment to the 2010 Equalities Act (which is reserved as it happens) to change the definition of female to include biological males has been dropped. There's a long way to go before sense returns to this debate, especially with Nicola Sturgeon being right up there with the rest of the wokemaidens absolutely gagging to surrender all women's rights to men, but it's a straw in the wind. And I believe something similar has happened in the Labour party too.