I feel sorry for her now. Can't believe the incompetence of the people running the Labour Party election campaign in continuing to let her be interviewed. Having said that I thought that was a really nasty slimey piece of 'gotcha' reporting.
Oh god - that's amazing. I literally just choked on my dinner.
We all share different views and opinions. That's so ridiculous it transcends politics. That's just an absolute joke of a person making a twat of themselves on TV. The fact that she is such a prominent person in the main opposing party to the government - and we have to be honest a party with a real chance of power....... I can't believe it.
Why the hell has Corbyn not fired her on the spot for basically not performing to the standards required. Just get her out the way so she can't do any damage.....
I can't believe people are so blind to this. If we had a cabinet with her and Jeremy Corbyn then it will be a global embarrassment.
I feel sorry for her now. Can't believe the incompetence of the people running the Labour Party election campaign in continuing to let her be interviewed. Having said that I thought that was a really nasty slimey piece of 'gotcha' reporting.
She could be Home Secretary on Friday - do you not think she ought to know at least something about the report?
I feel sorry for her now. Can't believe the incompetence of the people running the Labour Party election campaign in continuing to let her be interviewed. Having said that I thought that was a really nasty slimey piece of 'gotcha' reporting.
She could be Home Secretary on Friday - do you not think she ought to know at least something about the report?
So he actually love terrorists? He was out there celebrating the day after Manchester? Utterly stupid and offensive sentiment to endorse given the last couple of weeks. Put some reality check goggles on.
There are plenty of posters on here that I disagree with but I still respect their views due to the passion they bring to debates, their humour or the authenticity of their stories. I don't find any of those positive traits in you so I really don't give a toss what you think Fiiish.
So he actually love terrorists? He was out there celebrating the day after Manchester? Utterly stupid and offensive sentiment to endorse given the last couple of weeks. Put some reality check goggles on.
There are plenty of posters on here that I disagree with but I still respect their views due to the passion they bring to debates, their humour or the authenticity of their stories. I don't find any of those positive traits in you so I really don't give a toss what you think Fiiish.
Doesn't change the fact you endorsed something that was offensive and utterly false and you know you can't defend it so you resort to personal attacks instead.
Diane Abbott is a liability to the party - she would be less so if she kept her mouth shut. I haven't forgiven her for sending her son to a private school - she is a hypocrit -but she is one person - the tories have even worse! What I am seething about is May watering down terrorist laws designed to protect us, cutting police and then having the front to claim she is a better bet for our security than those who are planning to resource the police.
I'm speechless that Abbott is allowed on TV. I don't think many interviewers would try and test the person like that knowing full well that they would fail.
I feel sorry for her now. Can't believe the incompetence of the people running the Labour Party election campaign in continuing to let her be interviewed. Having said that I thought that was a really nasty slimey piece of 'gotcha' reporting.
She could be Home Secretary on Friday - do you not think she ought to know at least something about the report?
I agree, that is desperate stuff. Somebody needs to take her out of the firing line and it should have been done weeks ago. If we are being honest the Labour election campaign has been far more slick than the Tories apart from Dianne Abbott, what are they thinking.
For what it is worth I don't think there is a hope in hell that she will be the Home Secretary on Friday even in the unlikely event of a Labour win.
So @DamoNorthStand have I got this right, your current concern about Labour is that they may introduce something that is only referenced in their manifesto as "We will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax."
But you are prepared to believe an article in the Daily Express that says otherwise, an article that changes the name of LVT "hereafter called the garden tax" and suggests it will be at 3% of the value of the land. That is despite no numbers being mentioned for a policy that does not exist.
If that is the case I think it reflects badly on you. Previously you have used evidence based reasoning to back your claims but this is frankly bollocks.
Excuse me?!
I asked a question and stated I was after information as I didn't understand it. I was offered some links and was concerned it was a bit woolly and had potential to hit my family financially and some of the security and comfort I have fought to secure.
It is fair enough to have concern whilst I wait for clarity. I haven't even read a daily express article.
Whether I reflect badly on you has piss all impact on me. My main priority is looking after my family not your opinion of me.
And frankly up to now I am happy with how I have been able to look after my family.
I was thinking about kidnapping her and letting her go on Thursday, but I thought the party would have had it in hand. Not sure how much damage though, people know Abbott is not a shining star!
Labour won't win, even though they are closing the gap - no poll puts them ahead - but they can damage May and the country needs her to be damaged as having her in charge for the brexit negotiations would be a complete disaster. SHe has been a disaster as home secretary too - her record is a disgrace. The Tories on here ought to know that as well as me.
I was thinking about kidnapping her and letting her go on Thursday, but I thought the party would have had it in hand. Not sure how much damage though, people know Abbot is not a shining star!
Labour won't win, even though they are closing the gap - no poll puts them ahead - but they can damage May and the country needs her to be damaged as having her in charge for the brexit negotiations would be a complete disaster. SHe has been a disaster as home secretary too - her record is a disgrace. The Tories on here ought to know that as well as me.
Kidnap her? You're trying to vote her in as Home Sec mate
Many people just can't get it out of their heads that you cant spend what you don't have. But America has been in deficit since before the 1860s, 60m dollars in 1860 and around 440 bn today. Not having a deficit is intuitive and logical as it mainly applies to household finances. But it does not apply to government spending. America is far richer today then it was in 1860. The argument that you can't spend what you don't have says this can't be.
Firstly, thanks for your response - I think it is healthy to discuss this because it has been absent from the debate so far.
My example was to explain the principle -it was as simplistic as I could make it. Greece is not the UK and as an economics graduate I would expect you to know that. When you pay for services it has to come from taxation - borrowing has to feed areas that create growth. You have to admit when you looked at how taxation and borrowing would happen in the Labour manifesto - it had Keynes written all over it. You still have to do it properly -that is a given.
Our Corporate taxes would still be at lower levels than our european competitors - you ought to be aware of that too. We could have zero corporation tax by your argument!
And we are not in the great depression, we are still in the aftermath of a global banking crisis that this government has managed to shift the blame onto public services for. We are in a period of slow growth that everybody who understands the economics of austerity predicted, the 2015 pay it all off target was always ridiculous. Growth is the way to pay it off. That is Keynes' solution. By the way, the last growth figures were 0.2% - this is because the government followed Milliband's austerity light proposals rather than the ones they fought the last election on - it shows they don't even believe what they say - but we had a choice of austerity and austerity light at the last election, in this we don't. Austerity has never worked anywhere when everybody is doing it!
The manifesto doesn't have Keynes written all over it - where does Keynes advocate tax increases on the corporate sector as a means of stimulating the economy. It isn't in my battered old copy of the General Theory. Yes growth is unacceptably low but you will not improve business investment, which is shrinking sharply at present, by increasing corporate taxation. You also need to be very careful about corporate taxation - yes Germany and France may have higher headline rates but you also have to take into account investment allowances - last time I looked Duchatelet's company had an effective tax rate somewhere in the teens.
Yes I appreciate that we are not Greece - but if you give tax relief that goes into the private sector consumption and British business is not in a position to take up the slack due to lack of investment - then you can be pretty sure that the spending will go overseas and we will get a bit closer to where Greece is economically. It is worth examining what happened in Greece as the policies are not entirely dissimilar - run a budget deficit as a means of increasing consumption rather than investment. I think you also miss one of the key points about Keynes that there is no such thing as a natural equilibrium and the economies can quite easily find equilibrium at different levels - which is one reason why the static/zero sum models you seek to use are not of much relevance.
I am a dyed in the blood Keynesian and if you read the great man in more detail you will see that he doesn't believe that management of effective demand is the only tool in the tool box. One of the great weaknesses of current economic management has been the over reliance on monetary policy as the main way of stimulating the economy ( it is a little unfair to say that this is what David Miliband was proposing - although he did have plenty of other stupid ideas of which Corbyn/McDonnell are living proof). Don't replace one set of narrow thinking with another based on a quasi Marxist dogma from the quasi Marxist McDonnell - Corbyn has little clue about economic and is just the voicebox for McDonnell who quite sensibly being kept hidden away.
She wont do a worse job than May did in that role. But I would expect her not to get a job - there will be loads more able people willing to put their diffrences with Corbin behind them if Labour win. But Labour won't win - a lower majority would be the best we can hope for. My point is Tories should be hoping for thi stoo - the way she was showboating in relation to the Brexit negotiations before the election shows the damage this woman can do. Surely the Conservatives can find somebody better and if she does badly, they surely will!
She wont do a worse job than May did in that role. But I would expect her not to get a job - there will be loads more able people willing to put their diffrences with Corbin behind them if Labour win. But Labour won't win - a lower majority would be the best we can hope for. My point is Tories should be hoping for thi stoo - the way she was showboating in relation to the Brexit negotiations before the election shows the damage this woman can do. Surely the Conservatives can find somebody better and if she does badly, they surely will!
Sadly, almost pathetically, I do not believe the tories have anyone better than May.
Corbyn has never chummed up with the IRA - he is a pacifist and the IRA was an organisation which was all about death and violence. The peace process - the reason we don't have regular IRA terrorist attacks on our land anymore, was brought about because politicians were willing to hold their noses and talk. If you want to argue against that stance, you are arguing against history.
So I would now expect there to be plenty of evidence of Corbyn talking to the IRA and trying to persuade them in private away from terrorism in the 15 years between coming an MP in 1983 and the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. We know that there is plenty of evidence that his public stance was to support the IRA/Sinn Fein position down the line with no public opposition or repudiation.
Could you now produce the evidence - otherwise I think we can take the position that what is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
No I can't and nor should I have to because my point was to counter outrage about talking to terrorists when that is how you open a path to resolve the problem. If you check my posts it is about the principle rather than the content - I don't have transcripts of the conversations and nor would you expect me to. Whilst talking worked with the IRA - I accept that wouldn't work with ISIS.
There is talking to terrorists and talking to terrorists I'm afraid. One can say jolly good show old chaps carry on - and allow me to rubbish valid arguments against you. Or there can be quiet persuasion to make them change their ways and point out what they are doing is likely to be counter productive. I am glad you agree that there is precious little evidence of the latter with Jeremy Corbyn and the IRA. I have never expressed outrage at anyone trying to persuade terrorists of the error of their ways - so there are obviously times and places when to do so is futile and others when it is not - yet again I see little evidence of Corbyn having the necessary judgement to make this distinction, unlike Major and Blair.
Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
Err. Why? Corbyn came out about equal with May last time they were on the same program, but all the right wing press claimed he was humiliated. So now Abbott says something daft (I'll take your word it's so) and they run the same headlines. But here's a laugh, if she'd been great they'd do it anyway. Thats what happens when the press are so biased.
Trust me. She was cringeworthingly shocking!! Murnaghan ran rings around her. Does she actually have anyone stand against her in her constituency?
(PS: I have no political allegiance and have never voted - despite being eligible for 30+ years!).
She wont do a worse job than May did in that role. But I would expect her not to get a job - there will be loads more able people willing to put their diffrences with Corbin behind them if Labour win. But Labour won't win - a lower majority would be the best we can hope for. My point is Tories should be hoping for thi stoo - the way she was showboating in relation to the Brexit negotiations before the election shows the damage this woman can do. Surely the Conservatives can find somebody better and if she does badly, they surely will!
Come on - I'm a Labour voter but I know that isn't true, Labour win then she's Home Secretary.
I would have thought the Labour Party would have given Dianne Abbot a minder at the start of this campaign. When she got into a cab to go back to Labour HQ after that interview I imagine it went something like this.
Comments
I am reminded though of this:
And factor that in too.
But at least she didn't go to the media today and claim stopping 5 out of 8 terror attacks was an acceptable record.
Unlike the Prime Minister.
We all share different views and opinions. That's so ridiculous it transcends politics. That's just an absolute joke of a person making a twat of themselves on TV. The fact that she is such a prominent person in the main opposing party to the government - and we have to be honest a party with a real chance of power....... I can't believe it.
Why the hell has Corbyn not fired her on the spot for basically not performing to the standards required. Just get her out the way so she can't do any damage.....
I can't believe people are so blind to this. If we had a cabinet with her and Jeremy Corbyn then it will be a global embarrassment.
She could be Home Secretary on Friday - do you not think she ought to know at least something about the report?
Yes.
*some will be pleased to hear
I agree, that is desperate stuff. Somebody needs to take her out of the firing line and it should have been done weeks ago. If we are being honest the Labour election campaign has been far more slick than the Tories apart from Dianne Abbott, what are they thinking.
For what it is worth I don't think there is a hope in hell that she will be the Home Secretary on Friday even in the unlikely event of a Labour win.
Glad we cleared that up then.
Labour won't win, even though they are closing the gap - no poll puts them ahead - but they can damage May and the country needs her to be damaged as having her in charge for the brexit negotiations would be a complete disaster. SHe has been a disaster as home secretary too - her record is a disgrace. The Tories on here ought to know that as well as me.
(PS: I have no political allegiance and have never voted - despite being eligible for 30+ years!).