It’s pretty shameful the way the media have managed this - dare I say manipulated public opinion, when politics for the voter should always be about having factual information on which to make an informed decision. Instead we have ad nothing but spin, propoganda, lies, and general undermining of any serious debate.
What most people fail to see is the obvious bias in the question design… questions intended to ‘lead’ the repsondent towards a particular answer - eg ‘’ the Labour party cares more about down and outs than hard working families…’’. An unbiassed question looking to assess opinion/perception of where the Labour Party is most focussed would be something along the lines of: ‘’ what do you believe to the Labour Party’s current priorities? with or without a list of possibles… it shows how easy it is to generate ‘data’ that supports a particular opinion… ‘confirmation bias’ is sadly evident in most media generated market reserarch.
The only small element of positivity is that the constant attempts to undermine Corbyn, seem to suggest an element of concern on behalf of his opponents.
What is sadest though, is that whatever ones political view, our antiquated confrontational/adversorial lower house debating style from the chamber design to the infantile baying, does little to demonstrate that respect for all opinions and debate is fundemental to a ‘grown up’ politic. … it’s easy to assume that our governments seem comfortbale with treating the electorate as idiots…
I love how you will bend over backwards to defend him, anything negative said about Corbyn etc. The dismissive way you deal with anything that doesn’t got with your sycophantic rhetoric means that people become stifled (see Verbal/Lou) and then don’t bother.
Cherts, TBH, I am still pretty green on all things Corbyn, so cant really comment on whether he is is good, bad, utter shiete etc. However, I have see enough of the media portrayal to see obvious agenda driven rubbish… my point above was about the way the media so easily manipulates even creates the ‘evidence’ to support their headlines… yets too frequently we all lap it up if it supports our own view.
I love how you will bend over backwards to defend him, anything negative said about Corbyn etc. The dismissive way you deal with anything that doesn’t got with your sycophantic rhetoric means that people become stifled (see Verbal/Lou) and then don’t bother.
I wish you well with this thread, Cherts. However, all I did was point out the big assumptions you’re making, produced polling evidence from MORI to the contrary, and signed off with a sarcastic point about the validity of your assumptions.
Now, having started this thread, one would think you armed to deal with a few counterpoints.
If you can, do. If you can’t, that’s fine - but stop blaming others for your deficiency, ta.
So I am an Independent reader. I do so because I like to read from both sides of the spectrum. Since Corbyn came to power, this is the first negative story I have read about him…hence why I was surprised and I posted it. They’ve been suckling his teet more than Pap.
So I am an Independent reader. I do so because I like to read from both sides of the spectrum. Since Corbyn came to power, this is the first negative story I have read about him…hence why I was surprised and I posted it. They’ve been suckling his teet more than Pap.
So, you read the Independent because it shows both sides of the spectrum, but you’re surprised because even though it provides both sides, it has been virulently pro-Corbyn?
There’s just no internal consistency to this logic.
I read it because it used to do that. It doesn’t anymore, that’s for sure, it’s probably more left than the Guardian now.
Is that present tense or past tense? Think carefully, Chertsey. Remember, you’ve got form both here and other there for not being as clever as you think you are.
I can’t see Lou’s debating being stifled by anyone on here Cherts. If she wants to take part she will. Verbal stropped off (again) but I very much doubt that ‘sycophantic rhetoric’ was the reason. Maybe he just wanted an easier audience?
Not at all, all I was doing was linking to an Independent article…I dont care if you don’t think it’s a valid poll, it’s a poll done in the paper that has been most complimentary about the new guard. That’s my only point. I’d like to know what assumptions you think I’m making…
If I decided to go on some mass diatribe about how this is proof that Corbyn is going to poll lower than any post war Labour politician then fair enough, but all I said was from people I know this is pretty accurate.
Fair enough, although haven’t seen Lou debating Politics on here for a while, and I think (although can’t be arsed to go search) that she had a problem with the dismissive nature of the way Pap expresses himself on these threads. Lou, apologies if I’m misrepresenting you.
