|
Jippa posted:He (forde) was saying stuff like "twitter isn't real life" in reference to boris being ill and "corbyn supporters weren't serious about politics" in reference to how great starmer was. I really like the Talking Politics podcast usually (even if it's definitely a Liberal perspective, especially Runciman), but I was pretty irritated by them having Fforde on as a guest. Any time I've seen him he's just come across as an aggressively bland and shallow """political""" comedian, where there's no real observation or reflection going into the jokes, and it's just obvious references and milquetoast takes (tories are a bit greedy, labour are a bit woolly). Given that the podcast can be very good at being informative and giving depth to opinions, it seemed a lovely choice to have a guest come on who's whole schitck is being a superficial summary of Guardian Op Eds [Edit: at the 1987 election Neil Kinnock's heavy defeat prompts the Labour Right to 2nd edit: Communist Thoughts posted:Tbf that just sounds like the mainstream opinion of someone who watches the news. Matt Fforde is pretty much this, which is why having him guest on a usually pretty detailed podcast is lovely and keeps up this weird media validation of him as a high brow comic when he's actually total poo poo Niric fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Jun 14, 2020 |
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
Tbf that just sounds like the mainstream opinion of someone who watches the news.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:47
|
|
|
Had a quick listen to the podcast and I wonder if it was recorded before the antisemitism report leak because Forde talks about antisemitism as if it's obviously Corbyn at fault.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
My cat has an abscess or something but the vet isn't open for examinations (emergency stuff only, i think), so all we can do is keep her on  anti-inflammatories at the moment.I learned a fact in the midst of this: vets can't get their hands on oxygen supplies because it's all being diverted to the NHS. Some vet operations just can't happen at the moment
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:52
|
|
|
bessantj posted:Had a quick listen to the podcast and I wonder if it was recorded before the antisemitism report leak because Forde talks about antisemitism as if it's obviously Corbyn at fault. I somehow doubt that a corbyn brain "comedian" is going to know or care about the report. He's not gonna let facts get in the way of having the opinion he wants.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
Matt Forde is such a passionate Labour supporter he chaired the Tory leadership caucus last June.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I somehow doubt that a corbyn brain "comedian" is going to know or care about the report. True, I nearly dislocated my eyes rolling them when he said that Change UK was brave and it felt like something revolutionary was happening in British politics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Niric posted:I really like the Talking Politics podcast usually (even if it's definitely a Liberal perspective, especially Runciman), but I was pretty irritated by them having Fforde on as a guest. Any time I've seen him he's just come across as an aggressively bland and shallow """political""" comedian, where there's no real observation or reflection going into the jokes, and it's just obvious references and milquetoast takes (tories are a bit greedy, labour are a bit woolly). Given that the podcast can be very good at being informative and giving depth to opinions, it seemed a lovely choice to have a guest come on who's whole schitck is being a superficial summary of Guardian Op Eds They said he was booked for the live show so that's probably why it wasn't treated like a normal episode.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:This whole thing seems very poorly thought through. People really need to stop giving Liz Truss jobs. Gonzo McFee posted:https://twitter.com/ComradeRedSon/status/1271939790682722304?s=19 Hahaha, this is amazing! Jose posted:the loving state of kier starmer Personally, I'm glad he's not throwing away his political capital by trying to argue for the removal of a Churchill statue. It would be a millstone around his neck for the rest of his days in politics, would cement everyone's view of Labour as being the party of the unpatriotic lefties, and would accomplish absolutely nothing because hell will freeze over before that statue gets removed. Sadly I can't find a poll yet, but I would bet good money that the number of people wanting this statue removed would be < 10% of the population. Most people are completely unaware of the controversies. I'm aware of them because of the chat ITT, and I still think the dude has earned the right to a statue and wouldn't support removing it. There are better hills to die on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 14:59
|
|
|
Nobody is calling for it to be removed
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
Far better to spend his political capital in the midst of tens of thousands of deaths from the tory handling of coronavirus and mass protests across the world agains the police state, passing legislation to put everyone who looks the wrong way at a statue in jail for 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
Prince John posted:People really need to stop giving Liz Truss jobs. He was a racist old shite. It's important people make this case. As a white bloke I'd not die on the hill but wouldn't blame someone else for wanting to at least start the debate that the hagiography of Churchill is loving gross.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:
I guess the question is are they preparing for a US style 'just let it infect everyone' plan or just being sensible? Even without a malicious government you would be stockpiling oxygen so ehhh. I know the Tories are loving this, but i'd like to know what the end game is. Do they know how bad it could get or are they really just very very stupid. And yes, I know it's both.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
It's one of those things I feel odd about. If someone tore it down I would cheer for them, but I honestly think we have better things to spend time and money on than bothering with it. If we're in the area and tearing poo poo down there are better targets than a statue of an old racist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
bessantj posted:True, I nearly dislocated my eyes rolling them when he said that Change UK was brave and it felt like something revolutionary was happening in British politics. Keeping that beige flag flying for the likes of...Mike Gapes, Chris Leslie, Anna Soubry, Chuka Umuna...and...and...who the gently caress else were the rest? Such a indeliable skidmark they left on the underpants of British politics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:04
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:It's one of those things I feel odd about. If someone tore it down I would cheer for them, but I honestly think we have better things to spend time and money on than bothering with it. If we're in the area and tearing poo poo down there are better targets than a statue of an old racist. Yeah it seems just pragmatic to stay out of it tbh. Problem is he then decided to actively join the Tory side by demanding ridiculous criminal charges. So I don't know if we can put this down to realpolitik.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:05
|
|
|
In the spirit of dastardly clever New Labour Tonty Bliars style triangulation I propose we keep the statue where it is but at all times it wears a traffic cone on its head and a big pair of those old joke shop fake tits about the chest
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:06
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:Keeping that beige flag flying for the likes of...Mike Gapes, Chris Leslie, Anna Soubry, Chuka Umuna...and...and...who the gently caress else were the rest? Such a indeliable skidmark they left on the underpants of British politics. I really can't remember who was in there beyond milkman, funny tinge lady and Chuka. He also said he thought Jo Swinson was politically savvy and astute and gave great answers during the debates and question time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:08
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind him staying out of it, I do mind him actively joining the Hail and calling for tougher sentences for 'desecration'. Didn't he say himself certainty in getting caught is more effective than tough sentences a few years back as DPP?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
Isomermaid posted:I read a good summary of it from Shon Faye her summary is questionable - consider the SNP, not notably known for being culturally reactionary and in any case having had a 5 year Holyrood mandate from 2016 to 2021, won in 2016 with a manifesto mandate to pass gender recognition reform nonetheless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48702946 - that was in mid-2019, after a first wave of consultation was already over quote:She [Social Security Secretary Shirley Anne Somerville] told MSPs that the government remains committed to reforming the rules so that trans people can get a gender recognition certificate without "unnecessary stress". Sufficiently loud counter-lobbying can halt or sink campaigns - it did not need a particularly reactionary cabinet to do so. Faye does put a finger on the underlying cause, but misreads the dynamic, I think. It's true that a few years ago there was no real public knowledge of the implications. But that would have been exactly the right conditions in which to push for rapid reform. Brexit and the unexpected interruption of Cameron's 2020 Group conservatism then imposed delays but any protracted delay would (and has been) fatal to the campaign. We are already at a point where activists are defining self ID downward in order to claim any successes at all. The (then-CON-controlled) Equalities committee didn't anticipate a contentious fight - they wanted a shoo-in like marriage equality, as occurred in Ireland when the Irish Gender Recognition Act sped through on the coattails of the much-more-well-known gay marriage campaign. Irish people are not markedly more trans-friendly than British people in social attitudes surveys - the differences came down to, more or less, a failed campaign strategy From a ThomsonReuters/IGLYO analysis:   There has in retrospect been no obvious reason to bring the toughest cases of refuges and prisons and bathrooms before the public eye, all the more so as delays accumulated under the weight of unanticipated legislative distractions. When we look at e.g. the draft Scottish legislation that emerged at the end of 2019 - that has the backing of Stonewall and company in the Equal Recognition Scotland campaign - we see for example the unequivocal clarifications that quote:5.17. This provision would, for example, allow the operator of a domestic abuse refuge designed for women only to exclude a trans woman from the service if the operator judges that this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This is likely to involve carrying out a risk assessment. quote:5.23. In the Explanatory Notes for the 2010 Act an example given is that “ a counsellor working with victims of rape might have to be a woman and not a transsexual person, even if she has a Gender Recognition Certificate, in order to avoid causing them further distress”. quote:5.40. Therefore, trans persons can be excluded from communal accommodation when this is required for reasons of privacy, and this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. If these retentions of Equality Act 2010 carve-outs constitute the standards of reform success - and they do seem to be, given that the Irish model of expansive exceptions seems to be the target - then a great deal of the public campaigning has been far in excess of the policy goals. Unisex toilets and NHS wards that stormed the headlines in 2017 (perversely aided by the cost savings they would generate under local services austerity, it has to be said) was entirely the wrong framing for speedily pushing through an unpopular civil rights reform. All the parties have dropped mixed-sex wards like a hot stone by now already.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
Unless you're a benefit scrounger, of course, then you also need to go to jail for a decade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
bessantj posted:I really can't remember who was in there beyond milkman, funny tinge lady and Chuka. It was mostly a bunch of loving nobodies; either poo poo Labour wreckers, or nobody Tories for whom Brexit was the sole thing that mattered. The only connecting factor was that they were all pretty poo poo once you started looking at any of the stuff they said or done (the Privatise Water poo poo, Gay Conversion, two clones of Anna Soubry, etc, etc). Holy loving christ.  Are you shure he wasn't doing a bit? How the gently caress anyone could look at any of her loving trainwrecks and say "Yes. She did good", and not be taking the piss (or a dyed-in-the-wool Lib dem).
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:18
|
|
|
Start at "I like fairly poo poo politics" and extrapolate outward into "everyone who is very performative about fairly poo poo politics is a brave political genius who was hosed over by the hard left lunatics"
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
Ronya, I know your analysis is trying to be unbiased, but please just stop. Your analysis seems mired in the idea that "you pushed too hard and then all the transphobes came out of the wood work so now you get nothing. It's a failure of your tactics" which doesn't actually seem like it matches up with reality. It seems to ignore the work that trans people tried to put in, whilst pushing the blame on to them. Like, the only way you seem to think change happens is via governmental initiatives, and that does not seem to be matching up to real life at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:It was mostly a bunch of loving nobodies; either poo poo Labour wreckers, or nobody Tories for whom Brexit was the sole thing that mattered. The only connecting factor was that they were all pretty poo poo once you started looking at any of the stuff they said or done (the Privatise Water poo poo, Gay Conversion, two clones of Anna Soubry, etc, etc). I think he cries himself to sleep at night into a Tony Blair pillow. Also I'm on the racists side now https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson_MP/status/1272068051505156096
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:I wouldn't mind him staying out of it, I do mind him actively joining the Hail and calling for tougher sentences for 'desecration'. Didn't he say himself certainty in getting caught is more effective than tough sentences a few years back as DPP? Technically, Starmer did the non-committal politician thing of calling for not moving Churchill and then letting the press read into it what they want (and deliberately not reaching out to make a clarifying statement). Make no mistake, that's a kind of deliberate choice. But it's also a deliberate choice to not commit to LOCK THE THUGS UP messaging as Patel is doing It is definitely a culture war fight Corbyn would have taken, for good or ill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:26
|
|
|
bessantj posted:Had a quick listen to the podcast and I wonder if it was recorded before the antisemitism report leak because Forde talks about antisemitism as if it's obviously Corbyn at fault. lol Matt Forde is the one who blocks you if you call Tony Blair a war criminal, aye? Change UK did what it was supposed to. Labour never recovered from the split when a bunch of people publicly said they were leaving Labour, left, realised it was cold outside but were too proud to ask to come back in. They all trickled into the Lib Dems or just dropped the act and voted tory. Gonzo McFee fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Jun 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:35
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Ronya, I know your analysis is trying to be unbiased, but please just stop. Corollary: I really really needed a wee
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
ronya posted:Technically, Starmer did the non-committal politician thing of calling for not moving Churchill and then letting the press read into it what they want (and deliberately not reaching out to make a clarifying statement). Make no mistake, that's a kind of deliberate choice. But it's also a deliberate choice to not commit to LOCK THE THUGS UP messaging as Patel is doing But Starmer did commit, via his shad home sec, to increasing the sentencing guidelines for criminal damage not in excess of £5,000, (ie. graffiti on a statue) from a max of 3 months custody to 10 years; which as a former DPP he will be well placed to understand the consequences of. That's not staying out of the culture war, it's a very clear sop to people whose only understanding of criminal justice reform is harsher sentencing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:lol Matt Forde is the one who blocks you if you call Tony Blair a war criminal, aye? He probably has a picture of Blair in his wallet so he probably does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
A bunch of kids with spray paints being sent down for ten years will all be worth it if he can just win that election and enact the vital reforms we desperately need like letting them all out of prison again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:01
|
|
|
Just went to Waitrose  (2nd nearest shop to me and I needed something Home Bargains doesn't sell) - the 'only 2 packs of bogroll' signs are back up today - not seen those for a couple of months.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
Lol as if starmer would ever want fewer people in prison. E: Unless they're cops who kill people, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
Rustybear posted:A bunch of kids with spray paints being sent down for ten years will all be worth it if he can just win that election and enact the vital reforms we desperately need like letting them all out of prison again. This made me chuckle. Also we should not confuse Matt Forde (a terrible liberal) with Jasper Fforde note spelling, who may or may not be a terrible liberal, but writes funny books.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
Rustybear posted:But Starmer did commit, via his shad home sec, to increasing the sentencing guidelines for criminal damage not in excess of £5,000, (ie. graffiti on a statue) from a max of 3 months custody to 10 years; which as a former DPP he will be well placed to understand the consequences of. The Government would need to amend legislation to do this, whether they realise it or not; criminal damage of less than £5,000 is currently treated as a summary-only offence (s22 Magistrates Court Act 1980), and therefore cannot possibly be kicked up to Crown for sentencing. Once they realise it's going to require actual parliamentary time, I wouldn't be surprised if it just quietly disappears under the weight of Brexit and Covid issues; they've already achieved their main purpose of grandstanding and Looking Tough On Crime.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Lol as if starmer would ever want fewer people in prison. But isn't the actual prison system badly overstretched as is? Or is my memory completely out of date/based off somewhere else?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
Rustybear posted:But Starmer did commit, via his shad home sec, to increasing the sentencing guidelines for criminal damage not in excess of £5,000, (ie. graffiti on a statue) from a max of 3 months custody to 10 years; which as a former DPP he will be well placed to understand the consequences of. He didn't - he said quote:I would support the government in creating a specific offence of protecting war memorials and I would be willing to work with the government on that... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzHov5aI040 (around 1:15) That was actually the sum of what he said - the rest of the coverage is extrapolation. It isn't any differently non-committal, IMO. This doesn't mean that the extrapolation is not meaningful - I would actually agree that Starmer is not staying neutral in the culture war: silence being tacit support and all that. After all, he doesn't then clarify what 'working with' will entail and that alone is meaningful. Corbyn/McDonnell also pulled this trick a lot, fwiw - not really committing to something and letting the leftie press boost its most favourable-to-the-left reading to the base (and risking the mainstream press take the most hostile possible reading). Here Thomas-Symonds is getting the opposite effect - having the mainstream press spin it in a favourable way for the mainstream whilst being torn apart by the base. The meaningful element is not what he actually said but the off-the-record clarification of the message, so it's still meaningfully true that the shad home sec is not opposing the government proposals already floating around. Maybe Labour doesn't have specific plans. Maybe Labour will support it+support an amendment that predictably fails. Maybe Labour will withdraw its support. Maybe Labour is gambling on the government quietly shelving the proposal because it'd prefer austerising on HM Prisons and custody costs money. Maybe Labour fully intends to return to twatting the govt with the POLICE CUTS bat by this time next year. Whatever it is, Labour is content for the Indy to headline that it will support the government, whilst at the same time not actually committing to do so. ronya fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jun 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:24
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:But isn't the actual prison system badly overstretched as is? Or is my memory completely out of date/based off somewhere else? Yes, but I see no reason why that would bother big shot prosecutor keir starmer in his quest to put everyone in prison for everything. Except, and I cannot stress this enough, cops, for murder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
justcola posted:I've been in a bit of a flap about my cat recently Prince John posted:People really need to stop giving Liz Truss jobs. .....I'll go now 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
Apart from the Colston statue, has anyone anywhere either on the left or BLM tried to take out a statue or called for the removal of a statue? I can't find anything to suggest that they have, just over-anxious local councils covering up statues, hysteria about the possibility in the usual suspect 'news' papers, and representatives of the tories and fash, and that tory MP wanting to desecrate Karl Marx' grave.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 16:40
|
|