OT GB News

[Trickytreesreds]

It is with most of your posts.
But I just don’t understand your point. Was Farage treated with respect? Yes. Did Dimbleby...the only BBC employee on view...give him an equal opportunity to speak? Yes. Were most of the panellists in favour of staying in the EU? Again...yes, but the reason wasn’t bias...it was stated quite clearly in the previous article you quoted but didn’t read properly. At the time approximately 74% - probably more in 2014 - of Parliament were in favour of remaining in the EU and the QT selection of guests attempted to reflect that balance.
Nothing sinister...no bias...nothing ‘rigged’, it’s just that at the time Farage was part of a minority which ironically is one of the secrets of his brief but enormously damaging success.
I suppose now he’s going to have his own show on GB News that’s okay and totally unbiased in your opinion.

Ok, being more simplistic for you. That was in 2014 before Brexit.
Now it was an opportunity for you to see if that stance changed.
It didn't, I'll tell you that now and that's nothing to do with Farage on it or not.
Even after the vote, the so called representatives of government, half heartedly tried to endorse it along May's version of it.
The very people who voted remain, kept getting brought back to that panel, on the so called side of balance?
Utter tosh. The responses from the audience shows the outcry.

So, the fake attempts at fair representation, resulted in-
1. A Brexit leave vote
2. A European whitewash vote for the Brexit party
3. Johnson romping a national vote

But you still refuse to accept any of that. Apparently for you, that makes us hard right?

* on a side note, we have had the bill go through today, in an attempt to undo our broken assylum system, tied up in EU laws.
The public had immigration, high on its agenda. The rubber boaters have been taking the piss out of this for 2 years now.

Of course, the action groups don't like it. But neither did Labour, trying its best to blcok it.
Another example of why Labour have no clue of what Joe Bloggs wants and why it's as likely of them getting elected as Johnson getting a decent hair cut.

[ramAnag]

rA this twice you've not read what I've written properly, (maybe deservedly so after my Kenco Cup analogy), I didn't say you WERE being partisan, (to quote Marlowe 'you merely imagined it', in response to a question from you I offered the opinion that I WASN'T/AM NOT (which I'm happy to debate)

You appeared to perceive yourself as having greater credibility because you were ‘non partisan’ in comparison to me. I don’t understand that.
I am not a member of any political organisation. I dislike political and religious extremism, have little time for a whole host of individuals, most notably, Johnson, Corbyn, Billy Davies, Trump, Farage, Cummings, Hitler, Putin, Patel, Williamson etc, despise racism, bullying, misogyny and homophobia and loath cheating in sport, cruelty to animals and inconsiderate people. None of that makes me partisan...or more partisan than you...it may make me opinionated but aren’t most who choose to contribute to a forum? Being clearly opposed or supportive of a stance or individual does not (necessarily) make someone’s view less objective or more ‘partisan’.

Neither do I believe that anything more ‘small c conservative’ than my own view is ‘Right Wing’...indeed I have said recently that I do have time for decent ‘one nation’ Tories and described a clear shift to the Right from Cameron to Johnson via May...all done with no change of Government (Party of Governance.)
Johnson and his cronies are undeniably ‘Right Wing’ ...not particularly in simple comparison to my own views but in comparison to any UK administration during my lifetime with the possible exception of Thatcher, and even she had a place for a few decent old school ‘one nation’ embracers.

Anyway...last six overs to watch!

[Andy_Faber]

You appeared to perceive yourself as having greater credibility because you were ‘non partisan’ in comparison to me. I don’t understand that.
I am not a member of any political organisation. I dislike political and religious extremism, have little time for a whole host of individuals, most notably, Johnson, Corbyn, Billy Davies, Trump, Farage, Cummings, Hitler, Putin, Patel, Williamson etc, despise racism, bullying, misogyny and homophobia and loath cheating in sport, cruelty to animals and inconsiderate people. None of that makes me partisan...or more partisan than you...it may make me opinionated but aren’t most who choose to contribute to a forum? Being clearly opposed or supportive of a stance or individual does not (necessarily) make someone’s view less objective or more ‘partisan’.

Neither do I believe that anything more ‘small c conservative’ than my own view is ‘Right Wing’...indeed I have said recently that I do have time for decent ‘one nation’ Tories and described a clear shift to the Right from Cameron to Johnson via May...all done with no change of Government (Party of Governance.)
Johnson and his cronies are undeniably ‘Right Wing’ ...not particularly in simple comparison to my own views but in comparison to any UK administration during my lifetime with the possible exception of Thatcher, and even she had a place for a few decent old school ‘one nation’ embracers.

Anyway...last six overs to watch!

The conversation about partisanship was actually on another thread:

I stated that...

‘the scientis are significantly more professional, insightful and clear thinking than ANY of the politicians on offer’. Just an opinion, and to expand, HMG tend to bluster and HM opposition tend to just say HMG are wrong without offering viable (indeed any) alternatives

Then you stated ‘That’s certainly true about the Government. Not sure how you’d know about the ‘opposition’... So either you think I DON’T know and I’m just bull****ting, or I do know because I have some insight that others are missing

So I responded

No one ‘knows’ but I’d say my opinion has value because I’m non-partisan
Which is a two-facetted response – the first bit agreeing with you in fact, that I don’t KNOW anything, but the second bit offering the possibility that my approach of taking every spokesman in every interview or every statement at ‘face value’ and assess their credibility on that basis might allow my opinion to have some merit

I don’t see anywhere in that little exchange any attempt by me to judge the partisanship of you or anyone else, merely to explain why I thought I was competent to judge.

If you thought I WAS judging your partisanship, sorry, not my intention. I'd still love an actual answer to my post 1942 on the Covid thread though, I repeat I'm not trying to catch you out

[ramAnag]

Maybe a misinterpretation then. I’ll take a leaf from your book, avoid further tft ping pong and look at post 1942.

[MadAmster]

I'm not getting this "no real opposition" that has cropped up recently. Over the past year or so I've seen Starmer urging Johnson to "cancel Christmas", to "not reopen just yet" or "shut the borders" and more.

More recently they have said that the full reopening of everything without checks etc is reckless and should keep certain measures in place.

Amazing, really, that someone who lives abroad has seen/read all of this and UK residents haven't [wink]

[Andy_Faber]

I'm not getting this "no real opposition" that has cropped up recently. Over the past year or so I've seen Starmer urging Johnson to "cancel Christmas", to "not reopen just yet" or "shut the borders" and more.

More recently they have said that the full reopening of everything without checks etc is reckless and should keep certain measures in place.

Amazing, really, that someone who lives abroad has seen/read all of this and UK residents haven't [wink]

Maybe I'm looking for someone who can carry an argument through having some degree of a force of personality/gravitas - Blunket, Ashdown, Prescott (for allI thought he talked crap), Blair, any number of folk who made you (well me at least) sit up and listen when they spoke. THEN it was up to them to win the argument. In comparison I think most of the curent crop of HM opposition are EFL1

[ramAnag]

Agree with MA, Starmer can, and in my opinion will, carry the argument through with force of personality and ‘gravitas’. He has made his arguments well but is on a hiding to nothing at the moment for two reasons, 1) Johnson has a huge majority so can just resort time and time again to accusing his opposite number of negativity. 2) The Labour Party that Starmer inherited was a shambles, largely because of the mess which Corbyn created.

[Andy_Faber]

Agree with MA, Starmer can, and in my opinion will, carry the argument through with force of personality and ‘gravitas’. He has made his arguments well but is on a hiding to nothing at the moment for two reasons, 1) Johnson has a huge majority so can just resort time and time again to accusing his opposite number of negativity. 2) The Labour Party that Starmer inherited was a shambles, largely because of the mess which Corbyn created.

I think Starmeris OK if a bit too polite. I was thinking a level down - Angela Rayner comes over like someone on a YTS attachment and as for Anneliese Dodds, dumping her could prove to be a masterstroke.

[ramAnag]

Angela Rayner is what she is...an unmarried te enage mother from a part of the world I am very familiar with.
She is a northern lass who speaks her mind...not always very articulately.
Having said that, she probably has a great deal more in common with her constituents than Boris Johnson has with most of his ‘subjects’.
She may have been brought up the hard way and have the northern vowels to support that...but she’s stuck with her kids - not easy as a 16 year old mother - and at least she knows how many children she has which wouldn’t appear to always be the case with our Eton and Oxford educated ‘is it six or seven this week’ PM.

[swaledale]

Angela Rayner is what she is...an unmarried te enage mother from a part of the world I am very familiar with.
She is a northern lass who speaks her mind...not always very articulately.
Having said that, she probably has a great deal more in common with her constituents than Boris Johnson has with most of his ‘subjects’.
She may have been brought up the hard way and have the northern vowels to support that...but she’s stuck with her kids - not easy as a 16 year old mother - and at least she knows how many children she has which wouldn’t appear to always be the case with our Eton and Oxford educated ‘is it six or seven this week’ PM.

I find both of those people engaging politicians actually, certainly a lot more real than the current bunch.