tinfoilhat Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 The fundamental difference is that that which is levelled at the Former Home Secretary is well deserved, for conduct that she has done, whereas most of that levelled at the elected leader of the Labour Party is in case of what he might do... I'm not sure I'd go that far on either. Whilst May, quite deservedly, needs her record at the home office criticised, and her awful election campaign, deal with the DUP (I really could go on and on) a lot of it got personal. Ditto, albeit different reasons for corbyn, uncosted policies, steadfastly sticking with Diane Abbott. Both are easy targets without getting personal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairyloon Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Both are easy targets without getting personal. I would trust that both take heart from Mrs Thatcher's famous wisdom on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I'm not sure I'd go that far on either. Whilst May, quite deservedly, needs her record at the home office criticised, and her awful election campaign, deal with the DUP (I really could go on and on) a lot of it got personal. Ditto, albeit different reasons for corbyn, uncosted policies, steadfastly sticking with Diane Abbott. Both are easy targets without getting personal. Hold on, it was the Tories with an uncosted manifesto. At least Labour did produce costings, the real question was whether they were correct and realistic. Some policies were properly costed, others costed on questionable assumptions but it was all costed. Again, just to be clear it was the Tories that didn't even attempt to cost their manifesto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Hold on, it was the Tories with an uncosted manifesto. At least Labour did produce costings, the real question was whether they were correct and realistic. Some policies were properly costed, others costed on questionable assumptions but it was all costed. Again, just to be clear it was the Tories that didn't even attempt to cost their manifesto. It was based on very big assumptions, but the Tories was worse. As I said, both aren't brilliant and have made questionable decisions. I don't need to mock corbyn on how he dresses but I can call him an idiot for agreeing to fork out for trident but saying he wouldn't use it. I've warmed to him a bit, but it's sad state when they're the best available. Where's our Macron or Trudeau? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 It was based on very big assumptions, but the Tories was worse. As I said, both aren't brilliant and have made questionable decisions. I don't need to mock corbyn on how he dresses but I can call him an idiot for agreeing to fork out for trident but saying he wouldn't use it. I've warmed to him a bit, but it's sad state when they're the best available. Where's our Macron or Trudeau? Don't dodge what I put in my post. You can't casually get away with the mistruth that it was Labour that had the uncosted manifesto. It simply isn't true. It was theTories who did not cost their manifesto. Just admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JNewton69 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I would trust that both take heart from Mrs Thatcher's famous wisdom on the subject. Which is?..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Don't dodge what I put in my post. You can't casually get away with the mistruth that it was Labour that had the uncosted manifesto. It simply isn't true. It was theTories who did not cost their manifesto. Just admit it. I don't answer to you. **** off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I don't answer to you. **** off. No of course you don't but at least be big enough to admit to mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairyloon Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 At least Labour did produce costings, the real question was whether they were correct and realistic. Some policies were properly costed, others costed on questionable assumptions but it was all costed... Was there not an investigation done on TV to analyse which and what? These are facts and figures, not opinions. You cannot argue with facts you can only analyse them and argue over the analysis. We should have had an independent analysis with experts from each side arguing their case on that analysis: properly arguing, with time to consider their argument, not off the cuff answers to surprise questions. ---------- Post added 15-07-2017 at 23:57 ---------- Which is?..... "I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 No of course you don't but at least be big enough to admit to mistakes. Labours was optimistic at best, tories was pie and sky but mainly lacking any kind of substance, as far as I can recall. If you want to go back and go over the details of each, knock yourself out, it's my first night off in 3 weeks so I'm past caring. As it goes, because of the result neither are going to be put in to place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now