Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Seb Corbyn to stand for Labour'
#21
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.
Reply
#22
God forbid the Tories would look after their rich friends.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...hares.html
Reply
#23
(04-28-2017, 07:50 AM)Montserratbaggie Wrote: God forbid the Tories would look after their rich friends.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...hares.html

I did like Corbyn's, 'The Tories are strong against the weak and weak against the strong'.
Reply
#24
I think the point here is that Labour position themselves as against this sort of thing, against the rigged system, for the people not the elite and then hypocritically get their spouses and kids jobs as MPs etc.
If the Tories were playing the class warrior card that Jeremy "minutes silence for IRA terrorists" Corbyn did, then they would also be liable to a charge of hypocrisy

Reply
#25
(04-30-2017, 07:37 PM)King Astle Wrote: I think the point here is that Labour position themselves as against this sort of thing, against the rigged system, for the people not the elite and then hypocritically get their spouses and kids jobs as MPs etc.
If the Tories were playing the class warrior card that Jeremy "minutes silence for IRA terrorists" Corbyn did, then they would also be liable to a charge of hypocrisy

The point is that labour say they are against the elite but spent 13 years in power changing absolutely nothing. They didn't build houses for people, they didn't create long term sustainable jobs, the rich get richer in those 13 years. They are part of the problem.
Reply
#26
(04-28-2017, 07:11 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.

Derek, either moronically or dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, again. 

I go for the former; he's not too bright.

(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

I would imagine it does. The difference is that they aren't the ones posturing as the champons of meritocracy and social mobility.

You see the difference, now?
Reply
#27
(05-01-2017, 11:40 AM)Hi Mandown_Pilt Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:11 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.

Derek, either moronically or dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, again. 

I go for the former; he's not too bright.

(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

I would imagine it does. The difference is that they aren't the ones posturing as the champons of meritocracy and social mobility.

You see the difference, now?


Is it time to pop your CV up again?
Reply
#28
(05-01-2017, 11:40 AM)Mandown_Pilt Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:11 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.

Derek, either moronically or dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, again. 

I go for the former; he's not too bright.

(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

I would imagine it does. The difference is that they aren't the ones posturing as the champons of meritocracy and social mobility.

You see the difference, now?

If you look back I only mentioned meritocracy as a segue to talk about Boris. I reckon someone in Tory head office is sitting on him again and we'll only see him pop-up now and again. Hardly an exemplar of stability is he.

What about Goldsmith resigning from his seat over Heathrow, running as an independent, losing and now standing as a Tory again? More stability there.
Reply
#29
(05-01-2017, 06:32 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(05-01-2017, 11:40 AM)Hi Mandown_Pilt Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:11 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.

Derek, either moronically or dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, again. 

I go for the former; he's not too bright.

(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

I would imagine it does. The difference is that they aren't the ones posturing as the champons of meritocracy and social mobility.

You see the difference, now?


Is it time to pop your CV up again?

Is it time for you to actually posit a reasoned argument that has any weight?

(05-02-2017, 07:28 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-01-2017, 11:40 AM)Mandown_Pilt Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 07:11 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

MDP defending one elite and criticising another. One is the right sort of elite though so that's ok.

Derek, either moronically or dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, again. 

I go for the former; he's not too bright.

(04-28-2017, 06:58 AM)Zoltanger Wrote: As I've said on here before I've no allegiance to any political party so have no compulsion to divert attention away from any nepotism within the Labour party.

Do you think the old boy network doesn't have any influence in the Tory Party anymore?

I would imagine it does. The difference is that they aren't the ones posturing as the champons of meritocracy and social mobility.

You see the difference, now?

If you look back I only mentioned meritocracy as a segue to talk about Boris. I reckon someone in Tory head office is sitting on him again and we'll only see him pop-up now and again. Hardly an exemplar of stability is he.

What about Goldsmith resigning from his seat over Heathrow, running as an independent, losing and now standing as a Tory again? More stability there.

Goldsmith looks a bit silly but this is nothing to do with equality of opportunity and social mobility, per se.
Reply
#30
(05-02-2017, 08:32 AM)Mandown_Pilt Wrote: Goldsmith looks a bit silly but this is nothing to do with equality of opportunity and social mobility, per se.

No. I was moving the conversation on to talk about stability instead of going round and round in circles talking about the same thing. I'm sorry if that frustrates you.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)