UK in/out referendum on the EU (Brexit vs Bremain)

{{ Wasnt just the anti-semitic stuff he failed to deal with, worse to my mind he didnt even seem to have a grasp of his own policies, who would be effected by his tax plans, or to know the numbers and he cnstantly tried to avoid any direct answers to anything, and the notion the top few percent who pay 50% of the income tax wont just move away because they'd want to help is laughable- no they are rich they arent a charity, and if they move away why should they give a crap about UK public services, they wont be here!
And in fairnes to Andrew Neil he interviewed Sturgeon the day before and was just as attack-dog, difference was she handled it fine and challenged him throughout and answered his questions. Corbyn just seemd hopelessly out of his depth and unprepared. }}

Corbyn is useless when attacked. He is like that in the House as well. He isn't used to it because he has spent his political career being a back-seat agitator, he has no skills when faced with an aggressive full frontal attack. He either goes weirdly quiet or he shouts. This interview has undone any good publicity he has previously got.

{{ Yup this is damaging alright- tomorrows front pages are slaying him. This was a pure gift to the right wing press. }}

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-the-papers-50567551

{{ Andrew Neils interview with Sturgeon as a comparison, he hits her on a few things but compared to Corbyn its night and day }}

Sturgeon isn't a threat to the likes of Neil and he knows that she can hold her own.

The right wingers have well and truly got their knives out for Corbyn, its now become a massacre. But this was expected, they are hounding him with the only ammo they have got. This however could backfire on the right wing because from everything I have heard people understand that this is a stitch up job, and they know that Corbyn is not racist in the slightest. It might actually have the effect of even more anti-Semitism as resentments build up. There was an unbelievable interview on LBC with James Obrien where this muppet equates Corbyn with Hitler. Either she is as thick as mince or she has been groomed by the gutter press.

Corbyn has proof that Johnson is going to sell the NHS to Trump.

{{ Not exactly, theres smoke but no fire. The documents are a list of what the US wants out of a trade deal, but contain nothing saying what the UK would actually agree to (they are premilimery talks not agreements).}}

'They are all preparatory meetings ahead of formal trade talks...One document quotes a UK official saying the talks are helpful in determining the areas the US may want to discuss, while acknowledging the UK would have objections...The document also refers to the US policy of making "total market access" a starting point in any trade talks - but says it is up to other countries to specify anything they want to be excluded from talks.
There is no indication in the documents that the UK team agreed to anything in the talks...Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US...(Boris) said he could give an "absolute cast iron guarantee" the NHS would not be on the table.
He also pointed out the documents had been available online for two months. - BBC

{{Thats not to say it isnt worrying what the US wants, it is, very, especially as they also want changes to food labeling, food standards and even some workers rights, but thats not the same as saying its what the UK would agree to.
For a start it would greatly increase the costs to the NHS and therefore the tax payer, hard to see any government of any shade wanting that or being able to sell it to the people, and it would be so hugely unpopular and unforgivable it would almost certainly end any government that did it. And Boris if nothing else wants to be PM and hang onto power for as long as possible, his entire life has been about that, its very questionable if he would risk that for something he knows the public would slay him for- even Tory voters are majority in favour of the NHS as a public body.
And factually under the Tories private involvment in the NHS has only risen by 2% compared to 7% under Blairs Labour government. As always thing are murkier than they first seem in politics.}}

There is fire, its coming from Johnson's pants.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2019/nov/27/steve-bell-on-donald-trumps-thanksgiving-turkey-cartoon

I actually kinda don't get it.

{{ A comparison of the main parties tax and spend plans- Labours is eyewateringly high!



Labour have also received the highest donations this week- getting a whopping 3 million- problem is its all from one, in my view very dangerous source, its all come from far-left McCluskey and the far-left Unite union- buying those union powers he wants to call strikes all the time and have secondary picketing back.     }}

"Labour has received the firm backing of 163 prominent economists who say the party understands the nation’s deep-seated problems and has devised a “serious programme” for dealing with them."

In a letter published in the Financial Times, the group said Labour’s plans to invest in homes, schools and infrastructure make “basic economic sense”, partly because borrowing costs are at a historic low.
The group, which includes professor David Blanchflower, a former member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee, and Victoria Chick, emeritus professor of economics at University College London, savaged the record of the Conservative and coalition governments.



“We have had 10 years of near-zero productivity growth,” they wrote. 
“Corporate investment has stagnated. Average earnings are still lower than in 2008. A gulf has arisen between London and the South East and the rest of the country. And public services are under intolerable strain – which the economic costs of a hard Brexit would only make worse.”

As the IMF has acknowledged, when interest payments are low and investment raises economic growth, public debt is sustainable.
“At the same time, we need a serious attempt to raise wages and productivity. A higher minimum wage can help to do this, alongside tighter regulation of the worst practices in the gig economy.”

While some sections of the media have portrayed Jeremy Corbyn’s plans as radical, the 163 economists who signed the letter pointed out that a number of Labour’s proposals are considered orthodox in other wealthy social democratic countries.

“As economists, and people who work in various fields of economic policy, we have looked closely at the economic prospectuses of the political parties.

“It seems clear to us that the Labour party has not only understood the deep problems we face, but has devised serious proposals for dealing with them.









“We believe it deserves to form the next government.”

The letter was published as a report from the Resolution Foundation concluded child poverty would soar to a 60-year high under the Tories’ plans.
The organisation forecast that a government led by Boris Johnson would take the number of children living in relative poverty from 29.6 per cent last year to 24.5 per cent in 2023-24.
By contrast, Labour’s planned £9bn increase in social security spending would lift 550,000 children out of poverty, the think tank said.
It calculated that since the last Labour government, social security spending has been slashed by £34bn more than would otherwise have been the case.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/general-election-labour-economy-spending-corbyn-boris-johnson-a9218041.html

{{ On the otherhand-

'The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said it was "highly likely" the Tories would end up spending more than their manifesto pledges.
Labour, it warned, would be unable to deliver its spending increases as it has promised.
Neither party was being "honest" with voters, IFS director Paul Johnson said....The IFS also says it is highly likely the party's (Labour's) tax rises would impact, directly or indirectly, on more than just the top 5% of earners... a Labour manifesto pledge to abolish poverty for people in work over the next five years was "not achievable", and a plan to scrap the universal credit benefits payment scheme would be "expensive, disruptive and unnecessary". '

But however you cut it Labours plans are ginormous, fine while lending is low, takes another financial crash and that all changes and our debt would be huge and the austereity needed to fix it would make the last 10 years seem like a picnic- this is exactly what happened last time under Brown labour borrowed (way less than Corbyn wants to) and look at the mess we were left in as a result when the global economy went into depression and recession. Sure if everythng is sunshine and rainbows for the next ten to twenty years we might get away with that level of borrowing and spending but Corbyns tax plans simply dont add up, and in fact have been shown to be false as the Andrew Neil interview demonstrated where the figures clearly show the claim only the top 5% would pay was  patently untrue.

Latest polling shows the Tories winning with a clear majority of over 60 seats though which is equally bad- fortunately the latest polling in Scotland shows the SNP on the verge of a landslide with them predicited to take 48 of the available 59 seats, the Tory vote being halved and Labour all but wiped out in Scotland, predicted to hang onto just a single lone seat.

For me though the biggest issue is who drives Labour, which is McClusky and Unite and Momentum - they are the left wing equivelent to the BNP-  the extremist fringe, instead of the far right they are the far left and just dangerous and damaging, handing them control and power and the keys to no10 is a terrifying prospect I could never vote for.  



edit add- in channel 4s climate debate (Boris and Farage failed to show so were replaced by melting ice sculpters!) Corbyn says to get his tree planting scheme done he will 'pay farmers to plant trees'- another expense that was not in the manifesto or in the 'fully costed' Labour paper, thats at least two major large bills, this and the pensions that are completely uncosted to add to the huge bill. The SNP got to point out that whilst the main Westminster parties are trying to outdo each other in promising who will plant the most trees in the future the Scottish government planted an extra 22 million last year! }}

"For me though the biggest issue is who drives Labour, which is McClusky and Unite and Momentum - they are the left wing equivelent to the BNP-  the extremist fringe, instead of the far right they are the far left and just dangerous and damaging, handing them control and power and the keys to no10 is a terrifying prospect I could never vote for."


On the other hand the Labour party are not violent thuggish racists who want to forcibly remove all non-white immigrants from Britain. Unite and Momentum are nothing like the BNP, the BNP are fascists, equating them with Socialists and McClusky is quite frankly ridiculous.

{{ The extremes at both ends are as bad as each other, Unite and Momentum have backed plenty dodgy groups, violent protestors and left wing tolitareans, they enforce a view that everyone has to agree with what they think or they want to shut you up or get rid of you, the pc Thought Police to its extreme- just wait till you can only use the Labour government controlled, Unite and Mometum monitored, state internet- may as well be in China or Russia with state controlled information. Just because the tactics are different doesnt mean they dont equate in undesirability. In the end when they smash your door down in the middle of the night and put a bag over your head and take you away it doesnt really matter if they are sent by a fascist dictator or a communist one, go far enough right or far enough left and you find they meet and are indistinguishable in practise. Politics isnt a straight line, its a circle.

"Like the Trotskyists of a generation ago Momentum is an entrist organisation that's parasitic on the Labour host. This time, though, the far left has managed to gain control of the party structures and is intent on making life tough for Labour MPs" - The Times

In March 2019, the Electoral Commission (EC) announced that Momentum had been fined £16,700 for multiple breaches of electoral law- wiki

And it was them I have reported on here before who have been trying to unseat and deselect Labour MP's who didn't tow the party line or who publicly critisced Corbyn, including two MP's in Scotland, using smear campaigns and personal attacks to try to unseat them and replace them with lackeys of their own choosing (luckily it failed each time as the local branch who has the final vote were not persuaded to go along with it by the London-centric Momentum). They are the reason all the Blairite and moderate centre left MP's are pretty much gone, either driven out or crossed the floor to the lib-dems or even to set up their own (failed) party, but all of them driven out by the take over of the far left backing Corbyn and financed by the far left leaning McClusky.


Bad day for Boris the Cowardly Lion yesterday, not only was he replaced by a block of ice on the channel 4 debate he's thrown all the toys and the pram out the pram over it, threatening Channel 4, claiming they have broken rules by being impartial and biased against Boris by doing so, and more worryingly saying if relelected they'd have to look again at Channel 4's commission.
On top of that Boris is running scared of doing his interview with Andrew Neil as all the other leaders have agreed to do and Corbyn and Sturgeon have already done, and is weasling out of it and he has banned the Daily Mirror (one of the few tabloid Labour supporting papers) from his Campaign Bus and the press pack on it.}}

'Stanley Johnson - the father of Boris Johnson - appeared on the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme this morning.
Asked about a viewer's tweet calling his son "Pinocchio", Stanley Johnson replies: "Pinocchio, that requires a degree of literacy which I think the great British public doesn't necessarily have."

The presenter asks what he means by that.

"I don't want to get into that... they couldn't spell Pinocchio if they tried," says Mr Johnson.

"Well can you spell Pinocchio?" he adds.

"I think it is utterly absurd and wrong that you can read out on air a tweet coming in from one of your readers on air which calls the prime minister a liar... I think it's amazing you can do that."- BBC

{{ The upper classes never fail to display how little they understand or know about the working classes.  Boris views us no differently, its in his blood to view the lower classes as an exploitable resource, slightly above cattle in intelligence but below a good horse. }}}

Well Boris certainly thinks that single mothers are the root of all evil and working class men are plebs to be crushed. But that's the extreme right wing for you. I don't remember Corbyn or McClusky ever insulting working people in a classist or sexist manner. I have only ever heard them champion the rights of the working classes, the poor, the vulnerable and everyone who isn't born with a silver spoon in their mouths. If I have to live under a 'dictatorship' I will settle for a Socialist one rather than a dictatorship run by Trump's Poodle.

That utter c*** Johnson has already tried to make political capital out of two people dying on Westminster Bridge. F*** Him!

I don't remember Corbyn or McClusky ever insulting working people in a classist or sexist manner.- Figg

{{Just because the tactics are different doesn't make them better. In some ways the tactics of the far left are worse than the far right, the far right are obvious, the far left devious. They seek to control language and so thought. Dissenting voices are silenced by intimidation, bullying, misinformation and smear campaigns (as we have already seen in Unite tactics to deselect dissenting MP's) and by making any line of thought they don't want to hear unacceptable by law or social pressure.

Today's attack is a great example, the majority of Muslims in the UK are normal peaceful folk, this is a provable fact backed up by the statistics. But point out that the majority of terrorist attacks in the UK, such as today's, are carried out by Muslims, also a provable fact backed up by statistics and you are censored, called racist and attacked for stirring up hate. Only one set of facts is allowed, the set that backs up the desired narrative.
But you cannot address a problem if you are unwilling to acknowledge the most basic facts about it to begin with.

Things are bad enough in this country with the Thought Police, a Tory MP who during a hustings with a Sikh Labour MP said the guy was 'talking out his turban' a not very clever but not particularly heinous comment, being simply a variant on saying someone is talking out the top of their head or their hat is now under investigation by the police who are treating it as a 'hate crime' (a phrase which even sounds Orwellian), and the Sikh community are shouting racism.
And under a far left government this sort of micro policing of what folk say and think will only increase and get worse and worse, wait till they have control over the entire UK internet network with their plans to have a single government controlled internet.

Its these games with words the left play that Orwell warns against in 1984, its Doublethink. Like nationalization, in theory a company is taken away from private ownership and being answerable to its shareholders (who are anyone who wants to buy shares in it) and instead becomes the property of everyone. But in practice what really happens is control is put in the hands of a very few, often unaccountable civil servants, with less voices having a say than when it was private and had shareholders to answer to.
Control passes from many to few but its done in the name of taking from the few for the many. Classic doublethink. More stuff is nationalized less and less people have a say in the running of things and more and more control and power is focused on the few in Government and who run the government. And its taken further away from the actual people in whose name it is being done.
Same with broadband plan, it offers to give internet access to all for free to increase the flow of information whilst in reality it removes consumer choice from everyone and puts monopoly control of information in the hands of the government. }}}

I don't agree with that. The 'Thought Police' today are more likely to come from Guardian reading middle-class Twitterati, the Lily Allen types who are offended on a daily basis by the smallest thing. The type who have tried to censor humour.

Dude used a Narwhal tusk...hero!

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2019/dec/01/ben-jennings-on-boris-johnson-and-the-london-bridge-attack-cartoon

That's great.