Jeremy Corbyn

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Nicely put Vince, know to be known as Jeremy double knob.

[Vince Green]

Given his oration during the debate on Syria, Hillary Ben could well be in the running.

Hilary Benn has the 'stage presence' and can speak well that's true but his past politics have been a bit suspect. He could well step up and be a bit more statesman like and less of a bleeding heart socialist in which case he would do it for me. The Syria speech was a turning point for him.

 

He would have a tough fight on his hands within the party though given his public school background.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Vince Green

[felly100]

Public school never did Blair any harm.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Public school never did Blair any harm.

 

Really?

[felly100]

Three general election victories.

[Vince Green]

Three general election victories.

That was then, this is now, Blair is a dirty word in the labour party these days

[oowee]

Put me down for Blair any day centre ground is where most want to be.

[Danger-Mouse]

Put me down for Blair any day centre ground is where most want to be.

 

Popular support for the war criminal eh?

[Gordon R]

I have little time for Tony Blair, but he is the best leader Labour have had in many years. He appealed to the middle ground, which is where elections are won.

 

Far too many simpletons assume they can win by being extreme - e.g. Jeremy Corbyn.

[FalconFN]

I have little time for Tony Blair, but he is the best leader Labour have had in many years. He appealed to the middle ground, which is where elections are won.

 

Far too many simpletons assume they can win by being extreme - e.g. Jeremy Corbyn.

Or indeed Nigel farage.

[Gordon R]

Nigel is far more entertaining than Jeremy. A truly miserable sod.

[FalconFN]

Nigel is far more entertaining than Jeremy. A truly miserable sod.

Very true

[Vince Green]

Lets be honest though, Jeremy has never been a politician, he has always just been a protester. He has never shown any inclination towards formulating policies (even looney left ones) and working to see them through. To be even more honest, he has never really shown any inclination to do any work at all. Not even to promote the politics he claims to espouse. I think he is actually a very lazy man, even now its like he can't really be bothered.

 

He was always happy though to jump on anyone else's bandwagon and get his face in front of the cameras as a free ride. That's been the limit of his effort or his commitment to the cause. He has, very significantly, never created a bandwagon of his own. Much of his activity in the past has been in criticising members of his own party.

 

The OP about him turning up at Liverpool was absolutely typical of the man, only now they have got a result does he want to get in on the act.

 

Nigel on the other hand has created not only a party but a whole political movement from nothing and virtually single handed at that. He has worked tirelessly and against the odds to get us to where we are today, weeks away from an in/out referendum.

 

Whatever your views on the issues, I think we have to give Nigel credit for what he has achieved and see Corbyn for what he really is a bone idle chancer.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Vince Green

[johnphilip]

Lets be honest though, Jeremy has never been a politician, he has always just been a protester. He has never shown any inclination towards formulating policies (even looney left ones) and working to see them through. To be even more honest, he has never really shown any inclination to do any work at all. Not even to promote the politics he claims to espouse. I think he is actually a very lazy man, even now its like he can't really be bothered.

 

He was always happy though to jump on anyone else's bandwagon and get his face in front of the cameras as a free ride. That's been the limit of his effort or his commitment to the cause. He has, very significantly, never created a bandwagon of his own. Much of his activity in the past has been in criticising members of his own party.

 

Nigel on the other hand has created not only a party but a whole political movement from nothing and virtually single handed at that. He has worked tirelessly and against the odds to get us to where we are today, weeks away from an in/out referendum.

 

Whatever your views on the issues, I think we have to give Nigel credit for what he has achieved and see Corbyn for what he really is

you sir are so correct, very well said

[Gordon R]

Vince Green - succinct and accurate.

[rodp]

Lets be honest though, Jeremy has never been a politician, he has always just been a protester. He has never shown any inclination towards formulating policies (even looney left ones) and working to see them through. To be even more honest, he has never really shown any inclination to do any work at all. Not even to promote the politics he claims to espouse. I think he is actually a very lazy man, even now its like he can't really be bothered.

 

He was always happy though to jump on anyone else's bandwagon and get his face in front of the cameras as a free ride. That's been the limit of his effort or his commitment to the cause. He has, very significantly, never created a bandwagon of his own. Much of his activity in the past has been in criticising members of his own party.

 

The OP about him turning up at Liverpool was absolutely typical of the man, only now they have got a result does he want to get in on the act.

 

Nigel on the other hand has created not only a party but a whole political movement from nothing and virtually single handed at that. He has worked tirelessly and against the odds to get us to where we are today, weeks away from an in/out referendum.

 

Whatever your views on the issues, I think we have to give Nigel credit for what he has achieved and see Corbyn for what he really is a bone idle chancer.

Yup, like Farage or not he's been there, done it and got the tee shirt. Corbyn meanwhile, has been nowhere, done nothing and still dresses in rags.

[henry d]

 

What are you on about?

 

I'm assuming you understand the meaning of the word fallacious?

In which case perhaps you could explain how the argument of Corbyns preferred company and supported causes is in any way fallacious?

 

 

As I stated in my original post, it's the company he keeps, and those he supports.

Above is your post, yes?

OK, lets go back a step? It is fallacious to argue that someone is in the same as the people they keep company with. For instance should anyone who spends lots of their time with killers, paedophiles, sex offenders, be likened to them? No, we call them prison officers and social workers etc.

Your argument about Corbyn being like the company he keeps is therefore on very shaky ground unless you have something more substantial than your original post

[Gordon R]

henry d - you might have a point, but your examples are those where people are paid to be in that company.

 

Corbyn choses his own friends - none too wisely in my opinion.

[henry d]

henry d - you might have a point, but your examples are those where people are paid to be in that company.

 

Corbyn choses his own friends - none too wisely in my opinion.

 

Absolutely, however it needed to be simple so as to be easily understood

[poontang]

Above is your post, yes?

OK, lets go back a step? It is fallacious to argue that someone is in the same as the people they keep company with. For instance should anyone who spends lots of their time with killers, paedophiles, sex offenders, be likened to them? No, we call them prison officers and social workers etc.

Your argument about Corbyn being like the company he keeps is therefore on very shaky ground unless you have something more substantial than your original post

 

A fallacious argument would be deceptive or misleading. I therefore stand by my previous comment re the factual and well documented meetings and platforms voluntarily shared with many of the world's ne'er do wells. I would also point to some of his appointments as leader of the Labour party, and his inner circle of friends and confidents.

I really can't be bothered to list all of his 'indiscretions' as a quick Google search will give you all the answers you need.

 

I don't know of many people who would voluntarily champion and support another person or group if that person did not have very similar views, or at the very least sympathy with those views.

[chris1961]

How sad a politician stooping so low just to get noticed

[henry d]

 

A fallacious argument would be deceptive or misleading. I therefore stand by my previous comment re the factual and well documented meetings and platforms voluntarily shared with many of the world's ne'er do wells. I would also point to some of his appointments as leader of the Labour party, and his inner circle of friends and confidents.

I really can't be bothered to list all of his 'indiscretions' as a quick Google search will give you all the answers you need.

 

I don't know of many people who would voluntarily champion and support another person or group if that person did not have very similar views, or at the very least sympathy with those views.

 

No the argument was fallacious because of the flawed logic, please have a read... http://www.fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html

Edited May 11, 2016 by henry d

[achosenman]

henry d, sorry your logic...well isn't.

 

Prison officers along with social workers do not champion, make speeches in support of, or generally espouse solidarity with the scumbags you use as an example. The same cannot be said of Corbyn.

 

Atb

[grrclark]

Intersting philosophical argument around the definition of a word and how it should be applied in context. Like all the best philosophical arguments I think that both sides are both right & wrong.

 

Through both inference and voluntary association then the argument of JC supporting a group of individuals who subscribe to a polarised ideology to suggest that he shares similar views is entirely valid, but it is not absolute. He may support the ideal of their cause, but of course he may not support the mechanism by which they seek to pursue that ideal.

 

In any respect for a party leader and prospective prime minister it does demonstrate huge naivety on his part as popular perception doesn't really concern itself with the semantics of terminology. In fairness he did choose to associate himself with those causes when he was an MP with no reasonable expectation that he could rise to the lofty heights that he has.

 

Now he is in the high profile job he is very much trying to distance himself from those political hot potatoes because he knows that it does his image no favour. That is, to my mind at least, the most illuminating factor about the integrity of JC and his principles. Like those others that he and his supporters wish to pillory he has divested his previously deeply held and vaunted principles in favour of popularity and mass market acceptance. Principle is great when courting controversy which he has done his entire political career.

 

The 'principled' JC is showing himself as being so easily bought and sold at the market stall of political popularity, just like the rest of them.

Edited May 11, 2016 by grrclark

[TIGHTCHOKE]

JC still the best thing since sliced bread!

 

 

 

How to make your party unelectable in one easy step, add a joke candidate to your leadership election!