|
|
Post by swindonlad on Sept 15, 2015 5:38:27 GMT
If he keeps not answering questions from journalists then that will not play well. If for no other reason, every journalist will be the one who wants to get a reaction from him by keep asking him awkward questions.
Part of the problem for him is he's not used to being questioned by anyone who is challenging him as he's not been a cabinet / shadow cabinet member. Also, he's spent the last few months going around to events where he was a figure of adoration, and this questioning his point of view is a shock to him
My advice to Corbyn is, get used to it, you ain't seen nothing yet. Just assume everything you have ever said or done is being combed through for something newsworthy.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,891
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 15, 2015 10:28:56 GMT
There is nothing in that video of him "flagging down a police car", so why did johnr say he did? Yes, that is the bit that looks like spin. People should be aware of this. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 16, 2015 2:00:02 GMT
The irony is that he has since issued a statement which answers, in a perfectly reasonable way, the question about the balance of women in the shadow cabinet. The problem is that he was not quick-witted enough to be able to give that answer on the spot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 16, 2015 5:33:25 GMT
I think Burnham would have won but if he had tacked to the right as he did at the beginning of the camaigning a lot of people would not have voted. Membership would not have increased.
As for the press, no respect for them at all.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Sept 16, 2015 8:54:14 GMT
Heh may or have flagged the car down but he certainly attempted to get the police involved.
|
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944 
|
Post by johnr on Sept 16, 2015 9:47:47 GMT
There is nothing in that video of him "flagging down a police car", so why did johnr say he did? Because thats what Kay Burley of Sky News was reporting. Whether it is true or not, that was what was being reported, and being listened to by potential voters.... |
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944
|
Post by johnr on Sept 16, 2015 9:48:55 GMT
Do any of us want to be followed in the street by people a shouting stupid questions at us? Shoving cameras in our face and obstructing us, then publishing footage of us looking frustrated? If they tried doing that to the SNP, the entire Cybernat movement would descend upon the journalist, the cameraman, their employer, their wife at work, their kids at school and their neighbours. If you dont want to be followed in the street by people shouting questions at you, dont stand to be leader of a political party. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 7:32:00 GMT
Worth a bump I thought
Considering the current climate
So how would have things been under Burnham or Cooper?
Would they have done better in Scotland?
Would it have been a remain vote?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,891
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 5, 2016 10:16:17 GMT
Pretty sure the answer to the last two is no and no.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jul 5, 2016 10:25:34 GMT
Worth a bump I thought Considering the current climate So how would have things been under Burnham or Cooper? Would they have done better in Scotland? Would it have been a remain vote? if it had been Burnham we'd probably be out of the United Nations by now... |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 5, 2016 10:57:10 GMT
Do any of us want to be followed in the street by people a shouting stupid questions at us? Shoving cameras in our face and obstructing us, then publishing footage of us looking frustrated? If they tried doing that to the SNP, the entire Cybernat movement would descend upon the journalist, the cameraman, their employer, their wife at work, their kids at school and their neighbours. If you dont want to be followed in the street by people shouting questions at you, dont stand to be leader of a political party. I disagree with that view more strongly than I can express. I loath the British Media and the implicit entitlement they feel they have to intrude into personal privacy. To me personal privacy is sacrosanct. I abominate that crude mantra 'The public right to know...'. There is absolutely no public right to know anything about me or anyone else except when we willingly consent or the law has just cause to intervene. I may be old fashioned about this but it is quite fundamental to my view of personal freedom and the good life. I would ask those of you who gave a like to that post to comment on having the family home surrounded by reptiles trying to photograph members of the family through the curtains, interview the children returning from school, bribing the departing cleaner/gardener, jostling you and/or your wife all the way down the road....and all repeatedly and for years and years? And are they dong it in the interests of truth, accuracy, transparency, sweetness and light? No they are trying to make things happen, to get an unguarded comment, a testy response, an incident, to write up and gloat over and traduce you with. These people are utter filth of the most repellent type. They take long-range shots of topless royals on holiday or people on honeymoon to try and titillate the dregs of society for base profit. They doorstep grieving families who have lost a child in tragic circumstances, or where there has been a murder or a member of the family was a murderer. They are like a pack of rabid dogs and even more offensive and dangerous. Just because one wishes to spend part of one's life in public service does not make one public property and certainly not the rest of the family. It does not require one to divulge one's whole life and all it's secrets nor to publish lists of assets or tax returns. Service is service it is not servitude nor serfdom. The public have an expectancy of hard work, honesty, probity and decency. They have a right to nothing and certainly not to privacy and a personal life. We must stop all that nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 5, 2016 11:09:22 GMT
If he keeps not answering questions from journalists then that will not play well. If for no other reason, every journalist will be the one who wants to get a reaction from him by keep asking him awkward questions. Part of the problem for him is he's not used to being questioned by anyone who is challenging him as he's not been a cabinet / shadow cabinet member. Also, he's spent the last few months going around to events where he was a figure of adoration, and this questioning his point of view is a shock to him My advice to Corbyn is, get used to it, you ain't seen nothing yet. Just assume everything you have ever said or done is being combed through for something newsworthy. I am entirely with Corbyn over this and hope he continues to play unresponsive and difficult. Who do these people think they are. Where does this entitlement come from. In my youth the reptiles knew their place and if they overstepped it a policeman gave them a god shove out of the way. Many of you are treating this as a given and perfectly reasonable. It isn't alright and it should not be a given, because they serve no purpose at all. They are in all senses parasites living off the annoyance and distress of others and purely and only to sell copy and to stir trouble. They are entirely negative and to be resisted with every fibre of one's being. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jul 6, 2016 21:17:41 GMT
In the still fairly unlikely event that Corbyn actually looks like taking Labour to a repeat of 1931, he has said himself he would step aside were he a genuine liability. But now he's taking a different view? |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jul 6, 2016 21:25:21 GMT
In the still fairly unlikely event that Corbyn actually looks like taking Labour to a repeat of 1931, he has said himself he would step aside were he a genuine liability. But now he's taking a different view? If anybody's a genuine liability to the Labour Party it's the rebels in the PLP, not Jeremy Corbyn. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,891
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 6, 2016 21:43:28 GMT
In the still fairly unlikely event that Corbyn actually looks like taking Labour to a repeat of 1931, he has said himself he would step aside were he a genuine liability. But now he's taking a different view? I think there is still a strong likelihood he will step aside before there is a GE. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 6, 2016 21:46:03 GMT
But now he's taking a different view? I think there is still a strong likelihood he will step aside before there is a GE. I don't even want to imagine what would happen if Labour went into a general election led by Jeremy Corbyn. Owen Jones's article last week said that when the Corbyn team realised they might win, they came up with a plan whereby Jeremy would take the leadership for three years before handing over to someone younger, more assured, but of the same general politics. |
|
Rural Radical
Labour
Now living in a Labour held ward at Borough level for the first time in many years
Posts: 1,627
|
Post by Rural Radical on Jul 13, 2016 21:18:48 GMT
Worth a bump I thought Considering the current climate So how would have things been under Burnham or Cooper? Would they have done better in Scotland? Would it have been a remain vote? Better, a full shadow cabinet for starters No No |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Aug 7, 2016 18:21:58 GMT
But now he's taking a different view? If anybody's a genuine liability to the Labour Party it's the rebels in the PLP, not Jeremy Corbyn. It's entirely plausible that both could be liabilities. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 25, 2018 11:37:23 GMT
Really fascinating reading this again....
|
|
|
|
Post by beastofbedfordshire on Jan 25, 2018 12:03:13 GMT
Burnam wins.
No leadership challenge
labour still behind us in the polls but not enough to convince Theresa to call an election
Tories govern with a small majority with a bit more breathing room
|
|
