Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that it's impossible to vote for Jeremy Corbyn after last night's interview?

771 replies

PleaseDontLaugh · 27/11/2019 05:56

To be upfront : I would never vote for Labour or Corbyn anyway, for various reasons.. But that was not a good interview and had I been considering it I would be very concerned now.

OP posts:
Dodell27 · 27/11/2019 09:30

Our NHS is collapsing.
Our Schools are crumbling.
There is a climate crisis caused by us, caused by capitalism.
There is homeless crisis and it's getting worse.

Don't believe what the papers tell you...
Ask the people working in those professions about their fields. The UK Press is overwhelmingly right wing. They push their own agenda because they profit from it and they push it in such an alarmist way it frightens you into not thinking rationally. There is no composure of tone and there is no nuance or balance to the headlines you see in the mail, the sun or the express.

I believe doctors and nurses know the NHS.
I believe teachers know the education system.
I believe scientists and compiling data to learn new things.
I see tents in the streets of the suburb where I live.

Clavinova · 27/11/2019 09:30

An example of John McDonnell's calculations:

19 Nov Channel 4 - Labour’s misleading £100bn tax cut claim.

“£100bn has been given away in tax cuts”

"That was the claim from John McDonnell this morning."

"The shadow chancellor said “over £85bn” of that came from cuts to corporation tax, with the rest from changes to capital gains, inheritance and top-rate income taxes.That, he says “has benefited corporations and the wealthy”.

"But the “£100bn” figure is misleading. It fails to account for the tax rises the government has levied on businesses and top earners."

FactCheck verdict:

"He’s referring to Labour research on the combined effect of cuts to corporation, inheritance, capital gains and top-rate income taxes over the period 2010-11 to 2023-24."

"This figure is misleading because it fails to take account of the tax rises that have hit businesses and top earners in that time."

"For example, Labour say £86bn of the £100bn total comes from corporation tax cuts. But using what we understand Labour’s methodology to be, the net giveaway to businesses is substantially less: around £7bn."

"Similarly, research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies published last week found that top earners are now paying more of the national tax bill as a direct result of government policies since 2010."

www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labours-misleading-100bn-tax-cut-claim

Saddler · 27/11/2019 09:31

I think it was impossible anyway, but last night's interview was comedy gold

StarbucksSmarterSister · 27/11/2019 09:32

Wait until Neil grills Johnson. Assuming he doesn't chicken out of course.

ManOfPeeves · 27/11/2019 09:33

I agree with WorldEndingFire. The poster declared their bias from the start. Silly.

Why not mellow out, get a job, learn basic Marxist philosophy, have an affair and don't have any more kids, people? The planet has rather a lot of us, or haven't you noticed?

Trewser · 27/11/2019 09:35

Well I think we can assume if BJ copes better with AN then the JC fans will be decrying BBC BIAS

Newbie1999 · 27/11/2019 09:35

Totally agree with @HeresMe and @Bluntness100

AlternativePerspective · 27/11/2019 09:36

But it’s possible to not vote for either Corbin or Johnson. The scary thing is that actually, there is not a leader amongst them.

MrsMaiselsMuff · 27/11/2019 09:36

@Moonmelodies That is nonsensical. The EU has already signalled they would be open to a new deal negotation and referendum. The only possibility of a no deal Brexit now is if Johnson fails to get his deal through parliament, or if he fails to negotiate a trade deal with the EU by the end of 2020. It is Johnson's plan that still has risks attached, and that will take longer to resolve.

hamstersarse · 27/11/2019 09:40

The NHS debate from all sides is infuriating.

Pouring more money into it is just ridiculous. And absolutely unsustainable.

We are the sickest we have ever been - cancer rates, diabetes rates etc.

These are lifestyle diseases that need resolving at source not by pouring more tax payers money into treatment

Diabetes T2 costs the NHS £1.5m an hour or 10% of the total budget. And it is increasing rapidly....out of control.

Are we saying that budgets should be limitless?

The NHS was designed at a certain point in time but god help any politician who dares to say that budgets can’t be limitless for the nhs and lifestyle factors need to be part of the equation.

ALL parties tow the line and it’s cowardly

feelingsinister · 27/11/2019 09:41

@joggingon
Good, better do it soon before Brexit makes it harder for you to fuck off and be selfish elsewhere.

ManOfPeeves · 27/11/2019 09:45

Johnson will likely get his crappy deal through because he's likely to win the election next month. This makes Corbyn, and this biased poster's question, irrelevant. Another Tory term will finish the wrecking of this country. Such as:

  1. Possible loss of Scotland
  2. Further plummeting of the pound versus the dollar and euro
  3. More "austerity", ie victimisation of the most vulnerable in society
  4. Continued privatisation of the NHS by stealth

Grief.

bellabasset · 27/11/2019 09:47

My dsis says the best we can hope for is that neither party leader retain their seats!. She's voting Labour as her MP, elected in 2017, is better than the Conservative. The MP, in a remain constituency, is promising to try to promote remain. I am in a leave constituency with a Conservative MP. Both the Libdem and Labour PPC's would be a better choice so I will vote for the person.

TitusOatesLivesNextDoor · 27/11/2019 09:53

I think a lot of people who voted Labour under Blair will not vote for Labour under Corbyn.

That is because Labour is now a completely different party. After all, you only have to ask yourself would Blair or Brown or even Milliband have given even a minor role to Corbyn.

No, of course not.

But now he leads because it is a different party and he wouldn't give Blair or Brown a job either!

That is why many people who voted for the old Labour party of Blair, etc will never vote for a completely different party, which is what the Corbyn one is.

The only thing they have in common is the fact that they are both called Labour.

That is why many who voted for Blair's Labour will now vote Conservative because this Conservative party is closer to Blair than Corbyn could ever be.

Motoko · 27/11/2019 09:57

Turkeys voting for xmas, all the people who said they used to vote labour, but are now voting Tory.

I don't know how anyone with a shred of decency can vote for the Tories, especially this bunch. After almost a decade of Tory policy, the country is a shit show. All the cuts have decimated services, and by the time this lot have had another term, we'll be lucky if there are any services left.

We're fucked if the Tories get in again.

joggingon · 27/11/2019 09:59

Feelingsinister sorry you miss my point. I was making a political point about myself. Simply pointing out a flaw in Corbyn'a policy which he refuses to acknowledge.

Dodell27 · 27/11/2019 09:59

Amen @motoko

TitusOatesLivesNextDoor · 27/11/2019 10:00

You can call them Turkeys as much as you like but it doesn't change the fact that many people who voted for Blair don't like Labour under Corbyn.

Some prefer it, of course, but not enough I think to allow him to win an election.

Anyway, time is the best fortune teller and so we shall have to wait to see/

Motoko · 27/11/2019 10:04

No, the old Tories were closer to Blair. Blair was Tory-light. This lot are far more right wing than Cameron.

Devereux1 · 27/11/2019 10:05

@feelingsinister

Do you have any evidence of what you wrote earlier? That "People don't trust him because he's different. They want sound bites and shiny suits and he doesn't have that."

hamstersarse · 27/11/2019 10:06

The accusations of BJ being racist seem to come from the 'letterbox' comments. The article in which this appeared is here: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/05/denmark-has-got-wrong-yes-burka-oppressive-ridiculous-still/

The relevant parts are this:

"If you tell me that the burka is oppressive, then I am with you. If you say that it is weird and bullying to expect women to cover their faces, then I totally agree – and I would add that I can find no scriptural authority for the practice in the Koran. I would go further and say that it is absolutely ridiculous that people should choose to go around looking like letter boxes; and I thoroughly dislike any attempt by any – invariably male – government to encourage such demonstrations of “modesty”, notably the extraordinary exhortations of President Ramzan Kadyrov of Chechnya, who has told the men of his country to splat their women with paintballs if they fail to cover their heads.

I am against a total ban because it is inevitably construed – rightly or wrongly – as being intended to make some point about Islam
If a constituent came to my MP’s surgery with her face obscured, I should feel fully entitled – like Jack Straw – to ask her to remove it so that I could talk to her properly. If a female student turned up at school or at a university lecture looking like a bank robber then ditto: those in authority should be allowed to converse openly with those that they are being asked to instruct. As for individual businesses or branches of government – they should of course be able to enforce a dress code that enables their employees to interact with customers; and that means human beings must be able to see each other’s faces and read their expressions. It’s how we work.

All that seems to me to be sensible. But such restrictions are not quite the same as telling a free-born adult woman what she may or may not wear, in a public place, when she is simply minding her own business.

I am against a total ban because it is inevitably construed – rightly or wrongly – as being intended to make some point about Islam. If you go for a total ban, you play into the hands of those who want to politicise and dramatise the so-called clash of civilisations; and you fan the flames of grievance. You risk turning people into martyrs, and you risk a general crackdown on any public symbols of religious affiliation, and you may simply make the problem worse. Like a parent confronted by a rebellious teenager determined to wear a spike through her tongue, or a bolt through her nose, you run the risk that by your heavy-handed attempt to ban what you see as a bizarre and unattractive adornment you simply stiffen resistance.

The burka and the niqab were certainly not always part of Islam. In Britain today there is only a tiny, tiny minority of women who wear these odd bits of headgear. One day, I am sure, they will go."

I don't see racism there, I see a discussion about women's dress and oppression under Islam.

Can someone explain how it is racist?

TitusOatesLivesNextDoor · 27/11/2019 10:09

@mokoto.

That may, or may not, be right.

However, Labour under Corbyn are much more left wing than Labour under Blair and many voters-especially those who voted for Labour for the first time under Blair and swept him to victory-are unlikely to vote for what is presented as a much more left wing party under Corbyn.

I think I'm right. I might not be but as I say, Time is the Best Fortune Teller and we shall know for sure on the 12th!

ShatnersWig · 27/11/2019 10:15

Clavinova You keep trashing Labour costings. I've challenged you twice on just one Tory pledge that they keep on about that isn't costed whatsoever (even badly, which Labour's might be). It's all very well to keep bashing one side but when you ignore any questions about the other, it looks and smells fishy.

MatildeHidalgo · 27/11/2019 10:16

Andrew Neil is a woefully bad interviewer. He's desperately trying to get a soundbite for the right wing press. I was glad Corbyn didn't rise to the bait.

Devereux1 · 27/11/2019 10:19

@MatildeHidalgo
Could you explain? I don't understand about the soundbite part, and which right-wing press are you referring to?

What's your definition of a soundbite? What do you think an interviewer should do when the interviewee doesn't answer the question from the very outset of their reply?