At least you tried to defend the Tories, the problem they have is either people that support them aren't really engaged in politics enough to debate the detail, or are embaressed to admit they support them.
Or generally can't be arsed to get in a debate about having read a thousand times they are selfish, self-serving uncaring supporters of a nasty party, I would assume. Don't really blame them for thinking 'meh, you crack on'.
Except it really wasn't like that Barts. You admitted you hadn't read most of the debate on here so your analysis is a bit unfair imo.
Those supporting the Tories, and there were plenty albeit less than those did not, had every opportunity to both put their point across without the silly labelling and name calling you suggest. Which was few and far between and cut both ways.
The bigger problem was 1) the lack of any credible wider improvements to point to within the last 7 years around the policy areas discussed and 2) the stats are so easily available now it's very easy to knock someone's simpistic argument down that, "Labour overspent last time" or "Labour encouraged a benefits culture" or whatever and 3) it was an awful, negative campaign and manifesto that was hardly likely to get Tory supporters shouting from the rooftops.
Everybody gets the hump that their Confirmation Bias is exposed basically.
Just my impression Bournemouth, and not just formed over recent weeks but a longer period of time. I'm not a supporter of any of the main parties btw, but I personally found it all a big turn off (as you know I'd happily never have politics on here). Happily read anyone's views and take on board, when it's just slagging off and demonising the 'opposition' then it all gets a bit shit for me. Appreciate its not fully a one-way street, but it was started to get a bit too weighted for me bearing in mind our membership is pretty much a 50:50 split. Just my view mate
At least you tried to defend the Tories, the problem they have is either people that support them aren't really engaged in politics enough to debate the detail, or are embaressed to admit they support them.
Or generally can't be arsed to get in a debate about having read a thousand times they are selfish, self-serving uncaring supporters of a nasty party, I would assume. Don't really blame them for thinking 'meh, you crack on'.
Why not defend themselves and their beliefs - I think the right have a very narrow view of things if they believe attacks are aimed in one direction. Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser for instance - how vile and low is that? - find me something on a par with that lie.
Just my impression Bournemouth, and not just formed over recent weeks but a longer period of time. I'm not a supporter of any of the main parties btw, but I personally found it all a big turn off (as you know I'd happily never have politics on here). Happily read anyone's views and take on board, when it's just slagging off and demonising the 'opposition' then it all gets a bit shit for me. Appreciate its not fully a one-way street, but it was started to get a bit too weighted for me bearing in mind our membership is pretty much a 50:50 split. Just my view mate
Fair enough boss, I don't agree with the overall impression it had reduced just to slagging off the Tories any more than the reverse and I still think the standard of discussion on here is pretty bloody good comparatively so you should take some pride in that it doesn't stoop to that tbh.
The reason why Tories get more flak than Labour is simply because they have been in power and people are judging them on their record. Ed Miliband got a lot of flak because he and his front bench had served under Brown and as such carried that baggage with him. Corbyn is a lot more difficult to criticise because none of his team were particularly tainted by previous administrations and his manifesto was so well written it was hard to criticise. The worst people could do was repeat tabloid lies that he was Gerry Adams' best man and he sang at Gaddafi's daughter's birthday party. Although there was a dedicated team of about 5 Lifers who provided 24/7 coverage of whenever Diane Abbott scratched her arse.
The reason why Tories get more flak than Labour is simply because they have been in power and people are judging them on their record. Ed Miliband got a lot of flak because he and his front bench had served under Brown and as such carried that baggage with him. Corbyn is a lot more difficult to criticise because none of his team was particularly tainted by previous administrations and his manifesto was so well written it was hard to criticise. The worst people could do was repeat tabloid lies that he was Gerry Adams' best man and he sang at Gaddafi's daughter's birthday party. Although there was a dedicated team of about 5 Lifers who provided 24/7 coverage of whenever Diane Abbott scratched her arse.
This is exactly the point - Maybe our leader missed those posts. I like to think I and others was putting an economic case as well as a social one and trying to explain Labour's policies for instance. There were only three Conservative supporters who tried to explain beyond personal insults and a simple we can't afford it!
At least you tried to defend the Tories, the problem they have is either people that support them aren't really engaged in politics enough to debate the detail, or are embaressed to admit they support them.
Or generally can't be arsed to get in a debate about having read a thousand times they are selfish, self-serving uncaring supporters of a nasty party, I would assume. Don't really blame them for thinking 'meh, you crack on'.
Why not defend themselves and their beliefs - I think the right have a very narrow view of things if they believe attacks are aimed in one direction. Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser for instance - how vile and low is that? - find me something on a par with that lie.
At least you tried to defend the Tories, the problem they have is either people that support them aren't really engaged in politics enough to debate the detail, or are embaressed to admit they support them.
Or generally can't be arsed to get in a debate about having read a thousand times they are selfish, self-serving uncaring supporters of a nasty party, I would assume. Don't really blame them for thinking 'meh, you crack on'.
Comments
Those supporting the Tories, and there were plenty albeit less than those did not, had every opportunity to both put their point across without the silly labelling and name calling you suggest. Which was few and far between and cut both ways.
The bigger problem was 1) the lack of any credible wider improvements to point to within the last 7 years around the policy areas discussed and 2) the stats are so easily available now it's very easy to knock someone's simpistic argument down that, "Labour overspent last time" or "Labour encouraged a benefits culture" or whatever and 3) it was an awful, negative campaign and manifesto that was hardly likely to get Tory supporters shouting from the rooftops.
Everybody gets the hump that their Confirmation Bias is exposed basically.