Balance: Jeremy Corbyn's tax return

Skipped

digitalscream said:

I'd say that's a pretty tough sell given that wherever you look on social media, you see Labour supporters wishing murder, disease and personal tragedy on Tories (and not just the politicians, either - I've been a victim of it just for saying "Hang on a minute, be fair..." about personal attacks)...when it's extremely rare to see it the other way round.

I would say the abuse is absolutely even. (Heartfeltdawn is right).
I am simply pointing out that the laser targeted character assasination became a whole new art form in 2011. And I would be very surprised if Lynton Crosby even wanted to deny that. What he did (if he was the main architect) was brilliant. Horrible but brilliant.

digitalscream

Heartfeltdawn said:

digitalscream said: I'd say that's a pretty tough sell given that wherever you look on social media, you see Labour supporters wishing murder, disease and personal tragedy on Tories (and not just the politicians, either - I've been a victim of it just for saying "Hang on a minute, be fair..." about personal attacks)...when it's extremely rare to see it the other way round.

Social media is a bit of a shitstorm for the Tories in this country. On the other hand, social media is the media form which helped UKIP rise to prominence and is also doing a whizzbang job for Master Trump in the US right now. It isn't automatically anti-right wing. 

On the other hand, the Tories don't really need social media when they have so much backing traditionally within the printed press. Newspaper who delight in stories damning immigrants, public sector workers, junior doctors, teachers, unions, the BBC, anything vaguely left-wing. Conservative supporters don't have to jump on Twitter to batter the left: they have enough newspaper friends to do it for them. 

I'm sure someone will come back mentioning the Grauniad and the Mirror and I'll give my usual response: check out the latest ABC circulation. 

I'm not exactly convinced that justifies the abusive nature of an awful lot of non-Tory-supporters.

For example, for the crime of suggesting that David Cameron wasn't the next coming of Satan (bearing in mind I wasn't actually saying anything positive about the Tories), I was told that I should die painfully in a fire, along with my wife, daughter and all of our dogs. Don't think I've ever heard a Tory supporter say anything similar.

Perhaps it's just that Labour (and UKIP) attract a particular brand of asshole?

In any case, my point is that asserting that ad hominem attacks relating to politics are the invention of the Tories is incredibly blinkered and, really, just plain wrong.

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said: The PM will always be criticised - if they're Tory the Guardian and Mirror will attack them and if they're a left-learning leader like Corbyn the right-wing press will be after you. The difference this time is that both men are attracting serious flak from the papers that you would expect should be supporting them. The Daily Mail and Telegraph have published lots of negative press about Cameron and a number of Tory grandees have openly criticised him. Perhaps the Tory faithful don't see Cameron as a real Tory in the same way the left didn't see Tony Blair a true Labour leader. T

Now why would a newspaper owned by the non-dom Lord Rothermere who inherited the Mail through a Jersey trust, and a newspaper owned by two brothers who control it through a Jersey-based company, attack a Prime Minister who has said he would get tougher on offshore tax arrangements? 

Heartfeltdawn

digitalscream said:

I'm not exactly convinced that justifies the abusive nature of an awful lot of non-Tory-supporters.

For example, for the crime of suggesting that David Cameron wasn't the next coming of Satan (bearing in mind I wasn't actually saying anything positive about the Tories), I was told that I should die painfully in a fire, along with my wife, daughter and all of our dogs. Don't think I've ever heard a Tory supporter say anything similar.

Perhaps it's just that Labour (and UKIP) attract a particular brand of asshole?

In any case, my point is that asserting that ad hominem attacks relating to politics are the invention of the Tories is incredibly blinkered and, really, just plain wrong.

Ad homs: absolutely. My position on it is stated above. 

DC is the first Prime Minister to really face trial by social media. Blair missed out and the technology wasn't quite there in terms of mobile phone coverage every anywhere and everywhere when Broon was in office. That a lot of this social media invective is angry and childishly pathetic is indisputable. But go to countries where the political situation is reversed and you have a left-leaning person in power. There's plenty of 'Obama should be shot for being a monkey and his wife looks like a gorilla' commentary there from conservatives. 

So like the ad hom element, being a prick on social media is not a leftie thing or a rightie thing: it's a humanity thing. It doesn't matter if you're a conservative bemoaning liberals, a SJW whining about your safe space, or Indian fans baiting Pakistani cricket supporters with the classic 'Porkistani' line. Social media encourages assholes of all forms. 

NB: that line about dogs, fire, and death: are you sure that wasn't from an email JC claimed to have received from a forumite?

Fretwired

Heartfeltdawn said:

Fretwired said: The PM will always be criticised - if they're Tory the Guardian and Mirror will attack them and if they're a left-learning leader like Corbyn the right-wing press will be after you. The difference this time is that both men are attracting serious flak from the papers that you would expect should be supporting them. The Daily Mail and Telegraph have published lots of negative press about Cameron and a number of Tory grandees have openly criticised him. Perhaps the Tory faithful don't see Cameron as a real Tory in the same way the left didn't see Tony Blair a true Labour leader. T

Now why would a newspaper owned by the non-dom Lord Rothermere who inherited the Mail through a Jersey trust, and a newspaper owned by two brothers who control it through a Jersey-based company, attack a Prime Minister who has said he would get tougher on offshore tax arrangements? 

Cameron's been under attack for years long before the Panama crisis, mostly over Europe, immigration (he promised to cut it whilst in reality it's risen) and cutting the deficit. Lord Rothermere and co don't even live in the UK any more ...

ICBM

Skipped said:

I am not saying that the Media will never find any Sleaze or Dirt on Jeremy Corbyn........ because there isn't any.

Same as with Obama. Given the resources that first Hillary and then the entire Republican establishment and all their media cronies threw at trying to prevent him getting elected in the first place, I am certain he's the cleanest President in US history. If there was even the slightest hint of anything they would have found it by now.

(I'd give Eisenhower and Carter credit for cleannesss too, but only equally, not more so.)

Fretwired

digitalscream said:

I'd say that's a pretty tough sell given that wherever you look on social media, you see Labour supporters wishing murder, disease and personal tragedy on Tories (and not just the politicians, either - I've been a victim of it just for saying "Hang on a minute, be fair..." about personal attacks)...when it's extremely rare to see it the other way round.

The same thing happened to me on a Facebook group I'm a member of .. local Labour activist (I didn't know she was one until later) was criticising Cameron for failing to tax big US companies and accused him of giving them 'mates rates' .. I pointed out that whilst the UK remained within the EU there was nothing Cameron could do. I was called a liar and told the EU has nothing to do with UK tax .. I published a linked to an FT article which explained the problem and which stated the EU had a task group looking into what could be done .. that's when the shit storm hit .. she called in reinforcements and off we went. I quit the group after being threatened ..

I guess that's why people won't admit to being Tories ... 

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

Cameron's been under attack for years long before the Panama crisis, mostly over Europe, immigration (he promised to cut it whilst in reality it's risen) and cutting the deficit. Lord Rothermere and co don't even live in the UK any more ...

Said it many times on this forum, the traditional Tory blocs didn't like Cameron when he became leader. What has occurred in the media is the inevitable push from those traditional types against the more liberal leadership. Gay marriage to immigrants, he's not been hard enough for them. 

Rothermere not living here: not officially perhaps. But the complaints toward Cameron are based on historic gains involving the use of offshore trusts etc. For the Mail to complain about that when its owner clearly made a huge gain via similar means is twisted to my line of thinking. 

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

The same thing happened to me on a Facebook group I'm a member of .. local Labour activist (I didn't know she was one until later) was criticising Cameron for failing to tax big US companies and accused him of giving them 'mates rates' .. I pointed out that whilst the UK remained within the EU there was nothing Cameron could do. I was called a liar and told the EU has nothing to do with UK tax .. I published a linked to an FT article which explained the problem and which stated the EU had a task group looking into what could be done .. that's when the shit storm hit .. she called in reinforcements and off we went. I quit the group after being threatened ..

I guess that's why people won't admit to being Tories ... 

I happily admit to being a centrist bloke who takes from both sides as he sees fit. Perhaps the current polarization in politics amply shows that a reformed Liberal Democrat party could make a difference. Quite how this will happen with a religious bloke in charge who has been close to anonymous since taking charge is uncertain.   

Axe_meister

I love this kind of thread. It makes me appriciate how privileged we are to be living in the UK/Europe. The fact that we bitch and moan about how much/how little we as a nation to Help people.
Rather than who can we screw/hate/kill/ignore

Heartfeltdawn

Axe_meister said:

I love this kind of thread. It makes me appriciate how privileged we are to be living in the UK/Europe. The fact that we bitch and moan about how much/how little we as a nation to Help people.
Rather than who can we screw/hate/kill/ignore

I disagree. Fuck/screw/hate/kill/ignore you!* 

(*delete as applicable)

:-h

digitalscream

Heartfeltdawn said:

Fretwired said:

The same thing happened to me on a Facebook group I'm a member of .. local Labour activist (I didn't know she was one until later) was criticising Cameron for failing to tax big US companies and accused him of giving them 'mates rates' .. I pointed out that whilst the UK remained within the EU there was nothing Cameron could do. I was called a liar and told the EU has nothing to do with UK tax .. I published a linked to an FT article which explained the problem and which stated the EU had a task group looking into what could be done .. that's when the shit storm hit .. she called in reinforcements and off we went. I quit the group after being threatened ..

I guess that's why people won't admit to being Tories ... 

I happily admit to being a centrist bloke who takes from both sides as he sees fit. Perhaps the current polarization in politics amply shows that a reformed Liberal Democrat party could make a difference. Quite how this will happen with a religious bloke in charge who has been close to anonymous since taking charge is uncertain.   

A reformed Lib Dem party couldn't make any difference at all - the public largely views politics just like a reality TV show. Nobody ever remembers the nice, reasonable, sensible people - only the heroes and the villains.

These days, you have to be at one extreme end or the other (or at least convince people you are) in order to get noticed.

Heartfeltdawn

digitalscream said:

A reformed Lib Dem party couldn't make any difference at all - the public largely views politics just like a reality TV show. Nobody ever remembers the nice, reasonable, sensible people - only the heroes and the villains.

These days, you have to be at one extreme end or the other (or at least convince people you are) in order to get noticed.

So I'll have to be the first bastard Lib Dem leader. Hmmm... if I admit to flirting with narcotics at university, bang one of the Cheeky Girls, and denouce all other politicians as tedious lapdogs, I reckon I've got a chance. 

Policies? Policies schmolicies. Welcome to ad lib politics. 

digitalscream

Heartfeltdawn said:

digitalscream said:

A reformed Lib Dem party couldn't make any difference at all - the public largely views politics just like a reality TV show. Nobody ever remembers the nice, reasonable, sensible people - only the heroes and the villains.

These days, you have to be at one extreme end or the other (or at least convince people you are) in order to get noticed.

So I'll have to be the first bastard Lib Dem leader. Hmmm... if I admit to flirting with narcotics at university, bang one of the Cheeky Girls, and denouce all other politicians as tedious lapdogs, I reckon I've got a chance. 

Policies? Policies schmolicies. Welcome to ad lib politics. 

Not nearly enough, I'm afraid. At the very least, you'll have to promise to behead all immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and sell off all our public services to the Russians.

That should net you close to 100% of the vote.

Heartfeltdawn

Hmmmm. So instead of banging the Cheeky Girls, I need to behead them. 

Politics is easier than I thought. 

MrBump

digitalscream said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

Fretwired said:

The same thing happened to me on a Facebook group I'm a member of .. local Labour activist (I didn't know she was one until later) was criticising Cameron for failing to tax big US companies and accused him of giving them 'mates rates' .. I pointed out that whilst the UK remained within the EU there was nothing Cameron could do. I was called a liar and told the EU has nothing to do with UK tax .. I published a linked to an FT article which explained the problem and which stated the EU had a task group looking into what could be done .. that's when the shit storm hit .. she called in reinforcements and off we went. I quit the group after being threatened ..

I guess that's why people won't admit to being Tories ... 

I happily admit to being a centrist bloke who takes from both sides as he sees fit. Perhaps the current polarization in politics amply shows that a reformed Liberal Democrat party could make a difference. Quite how this will happen with a religious bloke in charge who has been close to anonymous since taking charge is uncertain.   

A reformed Lib Dem party couldn't make any difference at all - the public largely views politics just like a reality TV show. Nobody ever remembers the nice, reasonable, sensible people - only the heroes and the villains.

These days, you have to be at one extreme end or the other (or at least convince people you are) in order to get noticed.

I'm not so sure about that.  LibDem membership rose massively after their election pummeling.  I joined, having been a pathetic, wishy washy Lib/Lab supporter all my adult life.  I think that the rise in membership suggests that there is a core of people that believe in having a solid middle ground party available for voters, if only for democratic purposes.

Not sure how that will translate for the next election but my gut feeling is that LibDems will do ok.  I mean, they couldn't do any worse...

Fretwired

MrBump said:

I'm not so sure about that.  LibDem membership rose massively after their election pummeling.  I joined, having been a pathetic, wishy washy Lib/Lab supporter all my adult life.  I think that the rise in membership suggests that there is a core of people that believe in having a solid middle ground party available for voters, if only for democratic purposes.

Not sure how that will translate for the next election but my gut feeling is that LibDems will do ok.  I mean, they couldn't do any worse...

I think the Lib Dems will recover and do well and could hold the balance of power in 2020. I think we're in for a hung parliement.

Heartfeltdawn

MrBump said:

I'm not so sure about that.  LibDem membership rose massively after their election pummeling.  I joined, having been a pathetic, wishy washy Lib/Lab supporter all my adult life.  I think that the rise in membership suggests that there is a core of people that believe in having a solid middle ground party available for voters, if only for democratic purposes.

Not sure how that will translate for the next election but my gut feeling is that LibDems will do ok.  I mean, they couldn't do any worse...D

Having disaffected Tories and Labour supporters joining the Libs says little about the party itself. At least the rise in Labour membership was being driven by some kind of ideology as part of the Corbyn movement. The same can't be said for Tim Farron. There's also the small fact that their party membership is lower than the Green Party. 

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-missing-6000-lib-dems/21653

Fretwired said:

I think the Lib Dems will recover and do well and could hold the balance of power in 2020. I think we're in for a hung parliement.

Noted for future 2020 debates

I'm making no predictions until after the referendum. 

Fretwired

Heartfeltdawn said:

Noted for future 2020 debates

I'm making no predictions until after the referendum. 

Fair enough - I can see moderate Labour voters moving to the Lib Dems and some left-leaning Tory voters (Cameron supporters) doing likewise when Boris becomes leader and the Tories lurch to the right. If Corbyn is still Labour leader there will be a big hole in the centre which the Lib Dems can fill. Lots of votes in the centre of British politics.

digitalscream

Heartfeltdawn said:

There's also the small fact that their party membership is lower than the Green Party. 

That doesn't really say much - membership of the Green Party isn't really any indicator of political leanings. The fact is that most of their candidates don't even know what their policies are; it's just a general "Hey, let's save the planet!" thing, and that's all their members think they do.

The decision-making process on what makes up their policy list is hilarious - as I found out when I questioned our local Green candidate on the whole "Women won't go to prison, because they're hard-done-to. Even murderers...it's not their fault they have hormones" thing.

After initially denying it existed, his first response was "The website's out of date, because we can't afford for somebody to update it". After that, when confronted with evidence that it was fully up-to-date and recently added, his response was, "Oh, don't pay any attention to that - most of those policies can just be added to the list by anybody who shows up to our meetings. It's not something we'd actually do". Bloody frightening.

Incidentally, when I finally got him to admit this was one of their priority policies for action within 6 months of being elected, he deleted the entire Facebook conversation and had a go at me over private messages for trying to sabotage his chances.