Another car crash for diane abbott

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:13 pm

See the time I've made my point, I'm off to get my beauty sleep..nite nite playmates

Clockwork Claret · Post by **Clockwork Claret** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:13 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:So instead lets tax the rich less, the poor more, cut the police some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, cut the NHS some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, sell more arms to Saudis because what could possibly go wrong, suppress inconvenient reports that expose how the aforementioned Saudis fund extremism here, etc. etc.

Aren't the Torys proposing the most investment into the NHS across the main parties?

RocketLawnChair · Post by **RocketLawnChair** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:16 pm

South West Claret. wrote:See the time I've made my point, I'm off to get my beauty sleep..nite nite playmates

Ok! Night

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:18 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:So instead lets tax the rich less, the poor more, cut the police some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, cut the NHS some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, sell more arms to Saudis because what could possibly go wrong, suppress inconvenient reports that expose how the aforementioned Saudis fund extremism here, etc. etc.

If that's what you want. You could vote Tory instead though

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:21 pm

NewForestClaret wrote:Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott, Thornberry, Chakrabati, Watson?

Seriously, running the country?

You're right, well certainly about the first 3, but in all honesty, based on the past 9 months or so: does the team of: May, Boris, Hammond, Fallon, Fox and Davis inspire any greater confidence.
There can never have been a time when we've been faced with such poor choices, and this follows on from an equally appalling choice of candidates in the USA- and that's not turning out very well.

THEWELLERNUT70 · Post by **THEWELLERNUT70** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:24 pm

They should really keep her away from the media along similar lines of what the Tories are doing with Philip Hammond

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:31 pm

They should keep her away from politics

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:50 pm

Clockwork Claret wrote:Aren't the Torys proposing the most investment into the NHS across the main parties?

No.

john'sroseyspecs · Post by **john'sroseyspecs** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:54 pm

"It's that primal idiocy that sucks all intellect into a black hole. If we dropped her on Isis they would uninvent fire." From Twitter. I know Twitter is silly. I'm silly. But come on. Please!. It's stopped being funny. One of the holders of the great offices of state. Diane Abbott

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:31 am

Phillip Hammond got HS2 wrong by over £20 Billion. Theresa May changed one of her manifesto commitments in a couple of days. Their whole manifesto is uncosted waffle. Compared to this shambles Abbott's had a bumper car crash.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:33 am

No problem with Diane Abbott. OK, she's handled the interview like I guess she might have handled an Oxbridge tutorial - where she's had a good night out, rather than done some studying and written the essay. Only the best can do this - and not be embarrassed!

Much, much, better than spending all day pouring over the works of Karl Marx and trying to pretend that you are clever and that any of Das Kapital makes any sense in the real world.

morpheus2 · Post by **morpheus2** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:49 am

One word, two syllables - Positive Discrimination.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:50 am

She does not handle herself well but I can't expect a politician to have a photographic memory of every inquiry and report written over the last 8 months.

This is a 'Gotcha' journalism plain and simple.

"to evade a question to which the interviewee does not know the answer, and where their lack of knowledge would make them appear foolish or uninformed."

Easy to sit there will the full details printed in front of you and harass someone for not being able to recall them verbatim.

I will defend the other side too, I will forgive the PM for not being able to immediately recall the exact numbers of foreign aid to each country, to expect that kind of total recall of all facts and figures is inhuman and simply designed to create the appearance of incompetence rather than genuine investigation of policy or competence.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:25 am

52...'Aren't the Torys proposing the most investment into the NHS across the main parties?

I believe they are..about £8 billion worth.

Thing is, on each of the 113 times they've been asked how they are going to pay for that, they are all incapable of coming up with an answer.

Nothing in that manifesto is costed, we all know that.

If the Tories spent all that money on the NHS [there has to be some doubt about that because hitherto they have shown little interest in funding public services properly..] then taxes would have to rise to pay for it...there is no mention of that in the Tory manifesto either.

The Tory manifesto is deeply insulting, particularly for Tory voters. It's been thrown together cheaply, with a lack of detail and little info on expenditure and tax revenues to pay for it all. The IFS say it will lead to 5 more years of austerity.

- how did this happen?

It happened because 6/7 weeks ago when the thing was being drafted, one J Corbyn was deeply unpopular and the Conservatives had a 21% point lead over Labour. Real complacency and cockiness set in and the Tory hierarchy thought they could get away with almost anything in the manifesto, including unpopular stuff. Tory voters it was thought, would still vote for this stuff because the 'lefty' Labour stuff was just too unpalatable.

A lot has changed in 6 weeks and the Tory 'masterplan' has unravelled.

This is way more relevant and indicative than DA's ability to remember some details from a document.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:34 am

Mala591 wrote:Does anyone know why the majority of labour MP's don't like/won't work with Corbyn?
He is obviously a commited socialist and the labour party manifesto is full of genuine socialist ideals. As a non labour supporter I do admire his passion and obvious commitment. I would like to understand the reasons for the current 'political disagreement' in the labour party.

Because he's a moron who has spent his entire Parliamentary career on the back benches achieving nothing and revelling in churlish acts of political vandalism such as inviting the mouthpieces of the IRA into Parliament after the Brighton bombing and also after the Arndale centre bombing.

Coupled with this, he's not just a "committed socialist" he a full-time committed Marxist. His shadow chancellor is a self-proclaimed Marxist. His Shadow Home Secretary is on record saying that every defeat of Britain is a "victory".

He's a stupid contrarian whose policies are so far to the left that most of the sensible Labour MPs are utterly embarrassed of him.

That's why he does not command their respect.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:54 am

He is not a 'moron' Rowls is he.
- is that what you really think.?

The smearing continues...not much of a tactic is it?
Who really cares though, our politics is in the gutter, that's why there'll be another low turnout on Thursday.

Clockwork Claret · Post by **Clockwork Claret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 6:17 am

hampsteadclaret wrote:52...'Aren't the Torys proposing the most investment into the NHS across the main parties?

I believe they are..about £8 billion worth.

Thing is, on each of the 113 times they've been asked how they are going to pay for that, they are all incapable of coming up with an answer.

Nothing in that manifesto is costed, we all know that.

If the Tories spent all that money on the NHS [there has to be some doubt about that because hitherto they have shown little interest in funding public services properly..] then taxes would have to rise to pay for it...there is no mention of that in the Tory manifesto either.

The Tory manifesto is deeply insulting, particularly for Tory voters. It's been thrown together cheaply, with a lack of detail and little info on expenditure and tax revenues to pay for it all. The IFS say it will lead to 5 more years of austerity.

- how did this happen?

It happened because 6/7 weeks ago when the thing was being drafted, one J Corbyn was deeply unpopular and the Conservatives had a 21% point lead over Labour. Real complacency and cockiness set in and the Tory hierarchy thought they could get away with almost anything in the manifesto, including unpopular stuff. Tory voters it was thought, would still vote for this stuff because the 'lefty' Labour stuff was just too unpalatable.

A lot has changed in 6 weeks and the Tory 'masterplan' has unravelled.

This is way more relevant and indicative than DA's ability to remember some details from a document.

Costed in the same way labours manifesto is?
Let's face it the sums are GCSE at best. With Brexit on the horizon and a uncertainty in the economy I can see why the Torys have tried to keep promises 'loose'.

Given labours 0% chance if winning I can see why they've promised the earth and costed it up with daft economics. I'd rather their plan not 'unravel' in reality because we'd have a big problem.

As for the 21point lead. I think that was always a false position. Labour have done well to rally their core vote and bribe a few others with backwards policy (students) but if you look at the Tory share its maintained mid 40s which for me is still a v strong position. And the manifesto will be vindicated.

Burnley Ace · Post by **Burnley Ace** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:15 am

That would get every policeman queuing up for firearms training - Dianne "I've got your back bruv" Abbott as Home Secretary.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:21 am

Let's face it, jezza and diane do have some "history " together, they go back a long way. She must have some kind of hold over him to still be in a job.

Clockwork Claret · Post by **Clockwork Claret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:33 am

claretandy wrote:Let's face it, jezza and diane do have some "history " together, they go back a long way. She must have some kind of hold over him to still be in a job.

Correct. She will know all about his immature views, which hardly seem to have progressed.

I always thought she was reasonably sensible prior to joining the shadow c.

Just shows what exposure does.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:36 am

Clockwork Claret..you say

1] 'Costed in the same way labours manifesto is? ....errr no - are you having some comedy?

Have you looked at both manifesto's..yes or no?

2]' I can see why the Torys have tried to keep promises 'loose'...'

have you any idea what that means? It means if they haven't promised much then they can do WHAT THEY LIKE for five years..

- that's the increasingly useless weak [and hiding] Theresa May with gormless Bullingdon Boy Boris on her right shoulder. Brilliant.

3] 'costed it up with daft economics' - which bits specifically ? - can you please point these out?

4] 'backwards policy [students]'...what, so we should discourage bright students from doing degrees because they will end up with a minimum £30,000 debt before they start work..?

You're full of good ideas, have you got any more?

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:37 am

Not that much of an issue for me that Abbott couldn't recite verbatim the contents of the report, more that she tried to bluff and bullsh1t her way through it. She's just not very clever and mistakenly thinks she is.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:38 am

20...'his immature views'.. which ones?

Can you be clear on that..some examples?

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:39 am

22..she got an Oxbridge degree...must have summat going on.

Have you got one?

taio · Post by **taio** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:43 am

It's quite unbelievable she could end up in Cabinet position with her being so incompetent. Also brings into question Corbyn's judgement if he thought she'd be an effective shadow Home Secretary.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:46 am

taio wrote:It's quite unbelievable she could end up in Cabinet position with her being so incompetent. Also brings into question Corbyn's judgement if he thought she'd be an effective shadow Home Secretary.

Well, Boris is currently the foreign secretary......

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:49 am

She could be dumped in Minute One of an [unlikely] Labour win..and would be.

- bit like TM is going to dump her Chancellor.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:51 am

I like the idea that the Corbynista's are claiming he would pot her the minute he won an election.

I mean apart from bedding her and then giving her a major role in his party what has he ever done to show he favours the bumbling clown.

ThinLizzy · Post by **ThinLizzy** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:52 am

Imploding Turtle wrote: Still voting Labour of course. There's no other viable option.

Jesus Wept! Some people on here say this clown is intelligent?! If you think Labour are a viable option then you have a lower IQ than my dog Jacky, who is pretty much dumb as a box of rocks!

taio · Post by **taio** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:56 am

hampsteadclaret wrote:She could be dumped in Minute One of an [unlikely] Labour win..and would be.

- bit like TM is going to dump her Chancellor.

She could also be given a Cabinet position quite easily.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:01 am

ThinLizzy wrote:Jesus Wept! Some people on here say this clown is intelligent?! If you think Labour are a viable option then you have a lower IQ than my dog Jacky, who is pretty much dumb as a box of rocks!

So who are you voting for then?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:05 am

This is just like twitter.

Every single right wing paper, commentator and random bots are all saying the same thing, variations on "YOU'LL ALL DIE IF YOU VOTE LABOUR".

Its being ramped up because the Conservatives have run a terrible campaign and given Corbyn a chance.

I don't want either him or May, but we do need something different.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:10 am

You got any answers Clockwork to my queries..? - yer know..based on that stuff you typed earlier?

Clockwork Claret · Post by **Clockwork Claret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:12 am

hampsteadclaret wrote:Clockwork Claret..you say

1] 'Costed in the same way labours manifesto is? ....errr no - are you having some comedy?

Have you looked at both manifesto's..yes or no?

yes

2]' I can see why the Torys have tried to keep promises 'loose'...'

have you any idea what that means? It means if they haven't promised much then they can do WHAT THEY LIKE for five years..

- that's the increasingly useless weak [and hiding] Theresa May with gormless Bullingdon Boy Boris on her right shoulder. Brilliant.

exactly my point. There is a big economic shock coming and it is prudent to keep options open. Whether that is good politics remains to be seen on Thur. I will judge them on their record not the manifesto

3] 'costed it up with daft economics' - which bits specifically ? - can you please point these out?

renationalising water. Maybe DB could run it?

4] 'backwards policy [students]'...what, so we should discourage bright students from doing degrees because they will end up with a minimum £30,000 debt before they start work..?

in its current form its a progressive tax,
people go to uni, earn more after and pay more. Classic progressive policy introduced by a good Labour government. Why change it? It's the biggest cost in their manifesto

You're full of good ideas, have you got any more?

don't vote for Labour..

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:15 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:This is just like twitter.

Every single right wing paper, commentator and random bots are all saying the same thing, variations on "YOU'LL ALL DIE IF YOU VOTE LABOUR".

Its being ramped up because the Conservatives have run a terrible campaign and given Corbyn a chance.

I don't want either him or May, but we do need something different.

It's similar to the 2015 campaign. The left wing in this country are starting with the handicap of having the vast majority of the media against them, and the absolute worst of it in the Mail, Express and Sun scaremongering. It isn't a level playing field yet Corbyn has been brilliant in getting it even remotely close. If we had an impartial press that was doing its job of holding all politicians to account equally, rather than vilifying those who threaten to hurt their bottom line with more taxes and giving multiple passes to those who will help their profits, then Corbyn wouldn't have been 24% behind at the start of this campaign and he'd almost certainly be leading at this point.

But it's all about protecting their profit margin and not about the people any more. And that's why we're getting ever more right-wing. Driving fear and hatred into the electorate is the only way the right-wing media can keep socialists from being elected. We deserve it and we deserve everything that follows. A privatised NHS leading to people dying because they can't pay medical bills. More terrorism because police cuts save money and dead terror victims or terror are a useful propaganda tool to keep the fear alive.

We're becoming Little America.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:15 am

If you want to hear a repeat performance abbott is on radio 4s woman's hour at 9am this morning for a 2 hour home affairs special. Lets see if she fairs better than jezza who got skewered on his "free" childcare costs.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:20 am

I agree with you Lancaster..bearing in mind how useless and out of touch and Marxist he is....makes you wonder what they are all worried about and why they target him incessantly.

It has been a shocking election campaign...smearing and slagging off Corbyn... while hiding the increasingly useless and weak PM from proper debates, real people, walks down the High St or through the market in case Mrs Brown from Bromsgrove asks her a slightly tricky question..truly pathetic.

Yes I'm sure 28 European leaders will be ******** themselves when she sits down with them, and tells 'em how it's gonna be with the Brexit.

We deserve the politicians we get.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:21 am

They have all been screwed on various stuff this election, all of them.

Its just people like you don't acknowledge that it happens to people you want to win.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:23 am

Spot on Hampstead

And don't get me started on President Trump conduct over the last three days.

How the hell can anybody rely on anything that involves him in any way if you are serious about what is the best for the UK.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:27 am

85...you drive me mad on here IT but that is an accurate and perceptive post.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:19 am

I think you're right Hampstead - it could be a low turnout particularly if the bad weather continues.

It looks like a relatively modest Tory win, but there were some jitters in the business community at the end of last week. Early discussions around relocation, one client halted investment programme, and another client has asked me if I want to be paid in Euros dependent on the outcome.

Don't panic!!!!

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:24 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Spot on Hampstead

And don't get me started on President Trump conduct over the last three days.

How the hell can anybody rely on anything that involves him in any way if you are serious about what is the best for the UK.

Where the **** has Theresa May been in defending the London Mayor? Is she worried that if she defended him against Trump she'd lose votes? She's probably right, but just watch as she decides to finally defend him either on or after Electionday, when it won't cost her any votes. Because that's leadership.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:26 am

Breaking news, dianne abbott has pulled out of woman's hour due to being "unwell".

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:27 am

That sounds sinister.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:30 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:So instead lets tax the rich less, the poor more, cut the police some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, cut the NHS some more because it's not like we've needed them recently, sell more arms to Saudis because what could possibly go wrong, suppress inconvenient reports that expose how the aforementioned Saudis fund extremism here, etc. etc.

You know she isn't competent to be home secretary.
All the above are not things we should do, no.
But you still Know she isn't competent to be Home secretary, why deflect.
She isn't going to be competent to sort any of the above.
If Labour and their policies are the answer, JCs should put somebody in that role who is.
If not the Labour party should put somebody in JCs place who will.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:35 am

BleedingClaret wrote:You know she isn't competent to be home secretary.
All the above are not things we should do, no.
But you still Know she isn't competent to be Home secretary, why deflect.
She isn't going to be competent to sort any of the above.
If Labour and their policies are the answer, JCs should put somebody in that role who is.
If not the Labour party should put somebody in JCs place who will.

I'm not deflecting. We don't know she's not good enough to be Home Secretary, only that she's awful on TV. But we do know that Theresa May isn't good enough to be Prime Minister based what she's actually done in that job, not based on how bad she is on TV. That's ntot o say i'm comfortable with Abbott as Home Secretary, but i find it hard to believe that she can **** it up as royally as Theresa May has.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:36 am

Guich wrote:That sounds sinister.

What, you think she's been killed or something?

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:39 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:What, you think she's been killed or something?

I didn't say that

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:40 am

OK. but "sinister" implies something kind of evil. I just thought it was a odd word to use and wanted to have fun with it.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:44 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:OK. but "sinister" implies something kind of evil. I just thought it was a odd word to use and wanted to have fun with it.

It's just my imagination running wild. She does a few shocking interviews, then a couple more unauthorised, then pulls out at short notice feeling 'unwell'. Could it be all those slurs about John McDonnell could have some substance?

It'd make a decent political drama