This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Jeremy Corbyn
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| Hoof Hearted 26 Aug 16 9.32am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
Your constant reference to his appearance says you are strongly influenced by things that should make no difference to you. As JE has suggested, when the public are polled on his stated policies (anonymously) they are almost universally popular. His views are widely shared amongst the public. He struggles with his persona and his media perception. But there's nothing about his political views that make him necessarily unelectable (the closest is probably his views on defense and nuclear weapons). I worked as an IFA all my life and took pride in my appearance. In my experience someone that was scruffy in their appearance were usually not up to scratch with everything in their lives and were not high achievers. He rambles as well when speaking which indicates confusion and uncertainty. And Gusset.... I see Corbyn on BBC and Sky News, listen to him on R4 Today and see articles about him on here and the rest of Tinternet from all sorts of sources right and left leaning. Him and his followers want him to be high profile on social media, so it's difficult not to see his toothless greybeard visog at anytime right now.
|
|
 OknotOK  Cockfosters, London 26 Aug 16 11.06am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
I worked as an IFA all my life and took pride in my appearance. In my experience someone that was scruffy in their appearance were usually not up to scratch with everything in their lives and were not high achievers. He rambles as well when speaking which indicates confusion and uncertainty. And Gusset.... I see Corbyn on BBC and Sky News, listen to him on R4 Today and see articles about him on here and the rest of Tinternet from all sorts of sources right and left leaning. Him and his followers want him to be high profile on social media, so it's difficult not to see his toothless greybeard visog at anytime right now. I said that it was the closest policy towards making him unelectable (and his complete disavowal would certainly make it difficult for me to accept him) but it is a view at least in part shared by up to 30%-35% of the electorate based on polling so doesn't make him totally unelectable. And you've made no attempt to show how any of his other policies make him unelectable except for your frankly weak anecdotal evidence that because he doesn't dress to your standards he must be ineffectual. I wouldn't vote for him (but then I have never voted for Labour at any general election). But pretty much everything you've said to date ties in with the idea that his unelectability is linked purely to his media perception. Which just reinforces the point Nick is making.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| Only 10 a year!! 26 Aug 16 12.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by pefwin
Not used Virgin rail for a while, but.... Never had a problem with Virgin and they have always offered a free Breakfast or wine.
It is quite obvious that you can sit in a reserved seat if it is not taken and if someone comes along with a ticket you move. A silly error. Now he should try using a peak time commuting Southern Train and then he will get my sympathy. There is not even enough room to sit on the floor.
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 26 Aug 16 12.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Johnny Eagles
The nuclear weapons thing is another trope, if you ask me. According to the media, saying you don't want nuclear weapons is the electoral equivalent of saying you want to kill the Queen. But if we had a debate on here, I reckon lots of people - me included - would argue for ditching trident. (It's been compared to spending so much on insuring your house against alien abduction that you can no longer afford insurance for fire and theft, which I happen to agree with.) I accept that ditching trident might be electorally popular (and tie in with his views) but I thought the wider point was on his intention to completely disarm and his refusal to contemplate ever using nuclear weapons. That I think it out of sync with the majority (although not *all*) of the public and is the closest of his stated political policies to making him unelectable. If trident is as required as MPs (and most of the press) seem to make out then they are making a very very poor attempt at justifying it to the public.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
Johnny Eagles  berlin 26 Aug 16 3.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
I accept that ditching trident might be electorally popular (and tie in with his views) but I thought the wider point was on his intention to completely disarm and his refusal to contemplate ever using nuclear weapons. That I think it out of sync with the majority (although not *all*) of the public and is the closest of his stated political policies to making him unelectable. If trident is as required as MPs (and most of the press) seem to make out then they are making a very very poor attempt at justifying it to the public. What do you mean by 'completely disarm'? Unilateralists aren't suggesting we abandon all armed forces. Just that we don't have nucelar weapons. As far as I know, our only ones are Trident. Ergo, we get rid of Trident, we are unilateralists. I may have my facts wrong there, but if 'unilateralist' means getting rid of Trident, given its costs, likelihood of it being needed, ability or willingness to use it if were needed... I think we're better off putting the money saved into tanks and soldiers. But anyway, back to Corbyn. As much as I think there's a media conspiracy against him, I can't help but find the lefty infighting highly amusing. Gonna love it when Corbyn wins in September and the Blairites are stuck with him for good.
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
| Hoof Hearted 27 Aug 16 10.33am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
I said that it was the closest policy towards making him unelectable (and his complete disavowal would certainly make it difficult for me to accept him) but it is a view at least in part shared by up to 30%-35% of the electorate based on polling so doesn't make him totally unelectable. And you've made no attempt to show how any of his other policies make him unelectable except for your frankly weak anecdotal evidence that because he doesn't dress to your standards he must be ineffectual. I wouldn't vote for him (but then I have never voted for Labour at any general election). But pretty much everything you've said to date ties in with the idea that his unelectability is linked purely to his media perception. Which just reinforces the point Nick is making. It's not weak, and it's not just the media.... you are deluded. A number of former Labour hopefuls fell foul of their image in public and were shunned by the voting public as a consequence. Foot, Kinnock and Miliband for starters, all either had a problem with their appearance and/or stunts that rendered them as non starters when fighting an election. You just cannot accept that in life people make their minds up about other people by judging their appearance and actions in public. If you think Corbyn is electable as a PM then good for you, but the polls tell another story.
|
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 27 Aug 16 5.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
I wonder if we have a nuclear deterrent with cyber warfare advancing so fast it seems you can hack into anything where there is a computer. The PM's comment that she 'does not accept' that new technology will undermine trident by 2050 - how can she possibly know that. If she is still looking for the red button she thinks she will press lady there isn't one. We are not that stupid (hopefully). 2050 is in 34 years time. So we shouldn't use current technology because of the rather odd idea that cyber technology will supersede it? Glad you aren't in charge.
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 28 Aug 16 8.33am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
It's not weak, and it's not just the media.... you are deluded. A number of former Labour hopefuls fell foul of their image in public and were shunned by the voting public as a consequence. Foot, Kinnock and Miliband for starters, all either had a problem with their appearance and/or stunts that rendered them as non starters when fighting an election. You just cannot accept that in life people make their minds up about other people by judging their appearance and actions in public. If you think Corbyn is electable as a PM then good for you, but the polls tell another story. Right so what it comes down to is I was near enough 100% correct. You have nothing whatsoever to offer on his policies that make him unelectable. It is entirely driven by media perception. I have repeatedly said I think he'll lose any general election. And repeatedly said I wouldn't vote for him. But all anyone has been able to offer as to why he's unelectable is he's a bit scruffy (and your anecdotal "evidence" about high performers always being neat is entirely weak no matter what you say). That may mean he won't be elected. But it's nothing to do with his policies.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| Hoof Hearted 28 Aug 16 8.59am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
Right so what it comes down to is I was near enough 100% correct. You have nothing whatsoever to offer on his policies that make him unelectable. It is entirely driven by media perception. I have repeatedly said I think he'll lose any general election. And repeatedly said I wouldn't vote for him. But all anyone has been able to offer as to why he's unelectable is he's a bit scruffy (and your anecdotal "evidence" about high performers always being neat is entirely weak no matter what you say). That may mean he won't be elected. But it's nothing to do with his policies. Why are you so aggressive? All we are doing is having a discussion about Corbyn's electability prospects - we are not at war!
You contend that his policies are good enough to overcome any image issues which are being orchestrated by the Media. The above link is a BBC story about Ed Balls and how he thinks Corbyn's leadership style as "leftist Utopian fantasy"..... Did the Media force Balls to say that too? Also, if as you say the Media have such a hold on us poor susceptible feeble minded souls that we cannot think for ourselves.... why did the referendum vote for Brexit happen? The Remain camp had the BBC and the rest of the Media in their pocket and we were force fed a diet of economic gloom messages for months! Of course Corbyn's policies are going to appeal to the public in generic terms, but they are not much different to Theresa May's recently published stated aims - stuff like equality for all, lower taxes, greater opportunities, more sunshine, free beer etc. We can all make promises that we cannot keep, so choosing a party to vote for or leader of a party comes down to candidates personalities and how they behave in many peoples minds. As I said Miliband's gurning whilst eating a bacon sandwich and tripping up the steps on the TV debate scuppered his chances of being PM. Neil Kinnock going arse over t1t in the sea all those years ago.... reputation ruined in one second. John Major's affair with Edwina Currie physically made people sick thinking about it, let alone vote for him! People see these events and it may be in their subconscious, but their minds are made up that the person making a fool of themselves, or saying the wrong thing means they cannot possibly run the country if they are that careless. I would also remind you that the public don't always get it right... Blair's image convinced millions to vote for him, and look how that turned out. There's no need for you to be indignant and aggressive about our respective opinions differing - we're just two Palace fans having a political discussion on a website. I haven't belittled your opinion calling it weak or ill thought out - I've just offered my own opinion based on my beliefs and experience. I don't expect you to change your opinion, but I can assure you I won't be changing mine either! All the best. Edited by Hoof Hearted (29 Aug 2016 8.34am)
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 30 Aug 16 10.33am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Why are you so aggressive? All we are doing is having a discussion about Corbyn's electability prospects - we are not at war!
You contend that his policies are good enough to overcome any image issues which are being orchestrated by the Media. The above link is a BBC story about Ed Balls and how he thinks Corbyn's leadership style as "leftist Utopian fantasy"..... Did the Media force Balls to say that too? Also, if as you say the Media have such a hold on us poor susceptible feeble minded souls that we cannot think for ourselves.... why did the referendum vote for Brexit happen? The Remain camp had the BBC and the rest of the Media in their pocket and we were force fed a diet of economic gloom messages for months! Of course Corbyn's policies are going to appeal to the public in generic terms, but they are not much different to Theresa May's recently published stated aims - stuff like equality for all, lower taxes, greater opportunities, more sunshine, free beer etc. We can all make promises that we cannot keep, so choosing a party to vote for or leader of a party comes down to candidates personalities and how they behave in many peoples minds. As I said Miliband's gurning whilst eating a bacon sandwich and tripping up the steps on the TV debate scuppered his chances of being PM. Neil Kinnock going arse over t1t in the sea all those years ago.... reputation ruined in one second. John Major's affair with Edwina Currie physically made people sick thinking about it, let alone vote for him! People see these events and it may be in their subconscious, but their minds are made up that the person making a fool of themselves, or saying the wrong thing means they cannot possibly run the country if they are that careless. I would also remind you that the public don't always get it right... Blair's image convinced millions to vote for him, and look how that turned out. There's no need for you to be indignant and aggressive about our respective opinions differing - we're just two Palace fans having a political discussion on a website. I haven't belittled your opinion calling it weak or ill thought out - I've just offered my own opinion based on my beliefs and experience. I don't expect you to change your opinion, but I can assure you I won't be changing mine either! All the best. Edited by Hoof Hearted (29 Aug 2016 8.34am) I wasn't being aggressive. If you interpret calling your 'evidence' that scruffy people aren't high achievers "weak" as being aggressive, then fine. It wasn't intend as such. It was just pointing out that is weak evidence. It can't possibly be described as strong evidence (there may actually be strong evidence to support that view, but your personal experience is not it). I don't contend his policies are good enough to overcome image issues. Exactly the opposite. I am saying that unfortunately all that is rendering him unelectable *is* the image issues. Whether I agree with his policies or not, almost all proper polling evidence does show that his views are actually popular and would secure overwhelming support if not associated with him. I have said repeatedly I don't think he'll win an election and I wouldn't vote for him. But it appears that the only reason anyone can give for not voting for him is driven by that public perception. Which is a pretty lousy reason for not voting for him. On Ed Balls, I haven't read the detail of what he has said. And can't say I have any intention of buying his autobiography so doubt I ever will. But from what has been publicised he seems to damn Corbyn's policies without actually specifying any of the policies he is actually referring to. And I don't think anyone is paying too much attention to Ed Balls anyway (other than people who watch Strictly Come Dancing). On the rest of your post, I agree. People are often deemed as losers for aesthetic faults or accidents (although I am pretty sure Major would have lost with or without his affair being revealed). And it is wrong. We should be able to make decisions based on policy but we don't. Like you say, Blair was the archetypal media savvy politician - looked and acted exactly as people thought a primer minister should - and look where that got us. So maybe people should try and do things differently. Edited by OknotOK (30 Aug 2016 10.34am)
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| Hoof Hearted 30 Aug 16 10.59am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
I wasn't being aggressive. If you interpret calling your 'evidence' that scruffy people aren't high achievers "weak" as being aggressive, then fine. It wasn't intend as such. It was just pointing out that is weak evidence. It can't possibly be described as strong evidence (there may actually be strong evidence to support that view, but your personal experience is not it). I don't contend his policies are good enough to overcome image issues. Exactly the opposite. I am saying that unfortunately all that is rendering him unelectable *is* the image issues. Whether I agree with his policies or not, almost all proper polling evidence does show that his views are actually popular and would secure overwhelming support if not associated with him. I have said repeatedly I don't think he'll win an election and I wouldn't vote for him. But it appears that the only reason anyone can give for not voting for him is driven by that public perception. Which is a pretty lousy reason for not voting for him. On Ed Balls, I haven't read the detail of what he has said. And can't say I have any intention of buying his autobiography so doubt I ever will. But from what has been publicised he seems to damn Corbyn's policies without actually specifying any of the policies he is actually referring to. And I don't think anyone is paying too much attention to Ed Balls anyway (other than people who watch Strictly Come Dancing). On the rest of your post, I agree. People are often deemed as losers for aesthetic faults or accidents (although I am pretty sure Major would have lost with or without his affair being revealed). And it is wrong. We should be able to make decisions based on policy but we don't. Like you say, Blair was the archetypal media savvy politician - looked and acted exactly as people thought a primer minister should - and look where that got us. So maybe people should try and do things differently. Edited by OknotOK (30 Aug 2016 10.34am) I agree with your sentiments in the last paragraph but people will still be making political decisions on image and actions rather than substance long after we've gone.... because it is human nature to do so probably?
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 30 Aug 16 11.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
I agree with your sentiments in the last paragraph but people will still be making political decisions on image and actions rather than substance long after we've gone.... because it is human nature to do so probably? Almost certainly. And then probably moaning about how out of touch politicians are, how they never fulfill their promises, and will say anything to get elected. And then refusing to contemplate electing anyone who doesn't fit into the same paramaters time and time again.... :'( Ad nauseum. I'd actually be interested to know if the data suggests Owen Smith (or anyone else in the Labour party) is more electable. They all seem a bit crappy to me.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 30 Aug 16 11.20am |
|
|---|---|
|
Many Labour members being told they can't vote in the leadership election for spurious reasons. The party ain't doing themselves any favours.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 30 Aug 16 11.25am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
Almost certainly. And then probably moaning about how out of touch politicians are, how they never fulfill their promises, and will say anything to get elected. And then refusing to contemplate electing anyone who doesn't fit into the same paramaters time and time again.... :'( Ad nauseum. I'd actually be interested to know if the data suggests Owen Smith (or anyone else in the Labour party) is more electable. They all seem a bit crappy to me. one of the smuttiest comedy dialogues on a 70's vinyl record I've ever heard between Derek and Clive (aka Peter Cook and Dudley Moore) I managed to download some of the dialogues on mp3 recently and enjoyed them immensely especially the Horse Racing commentary.... hilarious!
|
|
| Stuk Top half 30 Aug 16 11.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
Almost certainly. And then probably moaning about how out of touch politicians are, how they never fulfill their promises, and will say anything to get elected. And then refusing to contemplate electing anyone who doesn't fit into the same paramaters time and time again.... :'( Ad nauseum. I'd actually be interested to know if the data suggests Owen Smith (or anyone else in the Labour party) is more electable. They all seem a bit crappy to me. Neither of them can win a GE as the entire Labour party is a running joke. Corbyn couldn't even get the 35 votes needed to be nominated to become leader until the last few did it out of sympathy/idiocy/for a laugh. They picked the wrong Miliband and then should've gone for Benn.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Hoof Hearted 30 Aug 16 11.45am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Neither of them can win a GE as the entire Labour party is a running joke. Corbyn couldn't even get the 35 votes needed to be nominated to become leader until the last few did it out of sympathy/idiocy/for a laugh. They picked the wrong Miliband and then should've gone for Benn. Diane Abbott's presence would have tainted them too Stuk.......... LOL
|
|
| Stuk Top half 30 Aug 16 11.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Diane Abbott's presence would have tainted them too Stuk.......... LOL She can't disappear from public life quickly enough for me. All MPs should have a maximum number of years they're allowed to stand I reckon.
Optimistic as ever |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.