What would make him not thick, in your eyes?
And are you talking about achievements? As in, becoming your party's leader for example?
Theresa May's Conservatives
Jeremy Corbyn's Labour
Tim Farron's Liberal Democrats
Paul Nuttall's UKIP
2 people's Greens
Nicholas Durgeon's Scottish Nationalists
Satan's Sinn Fein
Dr Ian Paisley's DUP
Some other bunch of nonces
I'm foreign, but I wish I were an Englishman
What would make him not thick, in your eyes?
And are you talking about achievements? As in, becoming your party's leader for example?
In forty years, Lewis will be telling people of his achievements on this board to complete strangers.
Corbyn's a bloke who signs petitions and whinges about things to adoring crowds, and became leader by accident. If you compare him to previous giants of the left like Michael Foot there's no intellectual comparison whatsoever.
Yeah. That.
My favourite Corbyn story is from his days as a backbench MP when he had someone or other in his office, offered them a cup of tea, they accepted, he made it and then drank it himself. Absent-minded local activist.
First pledge in the manifesto is "A cup of tea."Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
He was asserting dominance.
I don't like Diego Costa so from now on all his goals are scored by accident.
I think the fact he "became leader by accident" is what makes him appealing. Politics is shit and has been for a long time, but its developed into the ridiculous in the past two years. Corbyn comes across as that friendly, caring, IRA-supporting regular guy we all know and love. It seems like such an easy choice. Then again, I don't mind if the country goes tits up; Jersey will probably be alright.
The country is gonna nose dive off a fucking cliff regardless of who's in control, but I'd rather the shabby, old hippy drug dealer leads us off said cliff than a Thatcher-light dried up retched old cunt.
It's a fair charge.
Corbyn doesn't appear to have changed a single opinion since he was about 18. It seems he developed a particular world view and has steadfastly held on ever since. Foreign policy basically boils down to peace is good, war is bad, 'not the West' are the good ones, the West themselves are very bad. Domestic policy is public sector great, private sector evil.
For comparison's sake, Michael Foot was bonkers, but he was still a serious, intellectual heavyweight on the issues.
It suggests a lack of intellectual rigour and an unwillingness to consider nuance and balance on issues when your default position is that everyone who disagrees with you is an immoral warmongering imperialist.
Do your thing Boydy.
You've just described the majority of the country, so its understandable. Hence nukes, nukes and more nukes.
I don't follow a party, I'd vote for whomever I feel will do the best for the country and those I care about, and in the past few years I've seen the Tories systematically batter the ever living fuck out of those people, hence Labour.
Corbyn as PM is like giving the Forest Green manager the England job because he plays good football.
May is more Steve Bruce. He's fucking shit, but at least he's been there and seen it.
Who on here has even ever voted for someone they thought was genuinely good and not just the least bad option?
Nope, never. Its all playground level these days, buzzwords, catchphrases, how they look, can they eat a fucking bacon sarnie.
"Strong and Stable Leadership in the National Interest (tm)". I'm calling it. Coalition government. Pity Corbyn wobbled on the nuclear 'issue'. He could've just said, "We have conventional weapons, dickhead." and dropped the mic. Or questioned why the fella suggested North Korea had the range and Iran had the intent to launch one at us. Given how Trump reacted in Syria, we could just let him take the moral high ground on that situation.
You can't, really. Corbyn can obfuscate on defence issues all he likes, but if he clearly articulated his actual views he'd basically be writing the Tory attack ads for him.
His policy of saying "they'll go ahead because the party voted for it, but you all know there's no chance I'm using it" is just stupid.
He's a pacifist and has been his whole life. Which is fine, but "talking" isn't a solution to everything and if you're not prepared to use the military to defend the country then you can't really be PM.
Corbyn is the face that scores the goals (Costa). He's relying on giants like Abbott (Kante) and McDonnell (Hazard) for all the build up play and building the game.
Ruth Davidson to replace the spineless freak May?
His stance on nuclear weapons is spot on. If someone was to use one on us we're beyond fucked anyway.
I do enjoy this prevailing stance from the right of 'he wouldn't use nuclear weapons?! What an unfit leader'
Because of course the first thing we should do when feeling threatened is to wipe Moscow or Tehran off the map.
And who would actually use nuclear weapons against us? ISIS don't have the backing or organisation whilst North Korea don't have the range. Meanwhile Iran's got a moderate in charge. You threaten for leverage. You act when you're already fucked.
A commitment to destroying all life on earth seems to me a strange qualification for high office.
So you WOULDN'T nuke another country? How can this person lead our nation!
I'm sure Teresa would. Then change her mind and say she won't fire it. Before selling the codes to China.
By the time anyone's decided to push the button, Trump will have already struck with convention weapons. Then we'll all look at him like, "WTF, mate!?"
Just watched last nights Question Time. May is fucking awful, I can see why she fucked the debates off. Jezza it is.
You all realise he's going into the ejection with a manifesto that says they're going to spend the money building it anyway? Why would you do that and then refuse to countenance using them?
He said he wouldn't fire first tbh.
He said he would do everything he could to avoid having to make the choice, which sounds like the only sensible way of dealing with them to me.
Only May will be ejected.
Because the manifesto's clearly a lie. If he got into power there's no way he'd renew it
As for last night, I thought Corbyn was pretty good. He's come on leaps and bounds in the last 12 months.
Theresa May is increasingly useless and has almost zero substance, to the point where were it not for a couple of deal breakers I'd consider voting Labour.
British (and Western) nuclear strategy has always been retaliatory (as in not going first). It's the reason we have submarines in the first place. If you don't believe in it you don't believe in it. If you do believe in it you would be willing to use them. Where Jezza fell to bits was waffling on about peace conferences and disarmament, as if nobody had ever thought of that before, which also feeds into the feeling that he would also be a complete mimsy where more likely threats were concerned.
No first use is his policy.
Who's going to invade you, or drop some bombs on you anyway? Such a minor thing to worry about. That and the IRA shite are nothing but distractions to avoid dealing with the things that matter.
At the moment? No-one. But it'd be incredibly short sighted to bin trident off because that's where we are right now.
It's not so much invasions. If the European Union starts giving it the big'un about Gibraltar (or Argentina with the Falklands), the only acceptable response would be to tell them to get fucked; but, given his record in these areas (which is another indicator that he is a bit thick), it's highly likely that he would have them round for a bum before selling the locals out.
He'd be forced to, because there's no majority in the Commons for abolition and having stood on a manifesto to renew it he couldn't get abolition through the Lords anyway.
In effect, his policy is spend billions and billions of quid on an advanced defence system and make it abundantly clear to everyone that you won't use it under any circumstances whatever. Lewis is right - he talks as if "talking and negotiation" is somehow new and innovative.
It's fine for people with no responsibility to advocate this sort of thing, but you can't have a pacifist as prime minister. He's basically an appeaser, because if there other side kick off he simply wouldn't be prepared to take the steps needed.
For all his "principles", he simply can't admit his real views on defence in the course of the campaign because he'd be eaten alive
He knows it too, hence his obfuscation.
Jez doesn't really believe in self determination where he perceives an imperialist Western intent. Precedent demonstrates this, given he'd have left the Falklands in the hands of the junta and supported the reunification of Ireland through coercion. He hasn't changed his mind.
No, he's made it "abundantly clear" there will be no first use.
"If the other side kick off" is exactly when he would use it.
You'd need to be an idiot to believe this.
Yeah I enjoyed talking too mate.
Sorry, but you really would.
Grand Seethe
Northern Ireland has nothing to do with Britain, same with Gibraltar, same with the Falklands.
You'll be voting in your own self-interest next.
Seen Corbyn's bit about nuclear attacks.
I agree with his point, but the whole point of a deterrent is that people think we were willing to use it. I mean shit.
"There's nothing that could compel me to use nuclear weapons" is a perfectly reasonable stance, given the incredible ramifications of using that technology.
Frankly, on the topic of nuclear weapons, there are only two even vaguely reasonable positions for any sane person to take, which are "never under any circumstances" and "not unless someone else used them first". And even then, the latter needs to be said with very serious trepidation.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote